Second Korean War 1994

Having said all that, here's my timeline for a possible DPRK-ROK war (in the event that the DPRK leadership, feeling threatened internally by their apparent irrelevance, decide to flex their muscles for the home crowd a bit, and it's optimistic, though it does show the possibilities of yet another world war):

Setting: Korean Peninsula, Sea of Japan, East China Sea, and the Yellow Sea
Time: 2003 June

2003.06.11: After an impassioned plea by the new and embattled ROK president Roh Moo-hyun at an emergency meeting of the UN (he was flown to Busan two days earlier, and left the country for New York on the 10th), the UK, Germany, France, Italy, Turkey, Poland, Spain, Mexico, Brazil, South Africa, and Norway commit troops.



2003.06.16: Fierce fighting on sea continues between the USN/ROKN and the DPRK navy, which is expected to tilt overwhelmingly in the allies' favor once the US aircraft carriers arrive in the area. Hu Jintao meets the DPRK envoy and, reminded of the long history between China and Korea, as well as some recent (clandestine) agreements, reluctantly agrees to aid the DPRK (but not initially militarily), much to the chagrin of the rest of the world. Enthusiasm around the world for a quick end to the new Korean conflict fades even faster as an increasingly senile Fidel Castro also meets the DPRK envoy to Cuba and pledges support. Vietnam commits troops to the DPRK, which causes the Philippines and Indonesia to mobilize their fleets and air wings in order to intercept any Vietnamese troop transports.

To be continued...

The Germans aren't going to commit troops to a real war zone like that. At least not without a huge fight in bundestag over it, and likely not even then.

What's in it for the Chinese? That would cause them huge economic problems. And the Vietnamese? Why?
 
In the event of invasion, by a communist country no less, the Germans might be a bit more amenable to at least sending a token force. As for the Chinese, it would be reluctant, and I note that most of their incentive deals with clandestine agreements (the nature of which I have yet to decide) made with the DPRK recently. They could also send troops into Korea under the excuse that "instability in the region requires a military response" - note that the meetings between the DPRK envoys and various heads of state are not actually made public.

As for Vietnam, I only included them due to political ideology and the need to draw the Philippines and Indonesia into this timeline. In reality, Vietnam would probably only agree if the PRC did wholeheartedly - despite recently courting international investment and businesses, Vietnam has actually fared pretty well on its own since after the Vietnam War and thus does not see a major disadvantage to losing whatever minimal financial incentives the world currently gives it. On top of this, given what happened in the Vietnam War, the current government of the Republic of Vietnam does not fear international military invasion, and thus is somewhat less restricted by this non-threat. As we shall see, however, internal pressures (i.e. the proletariat) within Vietnam will force the government to rescind its offer of troops once the DPRK envoy has left...
 
Last edited:
An allied presence would be helpful, but not essential. The South Korean military is more than capable of defeating the North on its own. Of course, whatever units they can spare, the US will spare.

Seoul will probably be hit quite hard, but the ROK has evacuation plans for the city in result of war, and, as was mentioned, all the subways double as bomb-shelters.

I would disagree. The United States has nearly a dozen bases, two of which are combat capable air bases. With an attack on the ROK would also include an attack on these bases. Soon as that happen, the DPRK would have just opened the gates of hell. Strategic bombers from CONUS would be launched and aircraft from Misawa, Yokota and Kadena would be used.

The first day or so would be continuous strikes from the DPRK, after that USFK would have hammered and destroyed most if not all NK offensive capabilities. After that, USFK and UN forces would drive an invasion into the North.

But the reason NK would never attack is not the United States, but China. Kim Jong Il is of course afraid of the US but terrified of China. Kim Jong Il knows that USFK and UN troops would try to end a war as peacefully as possible. But Kim Jong Il knows that China won't. China would get involved either by their own accord or out of request from the UN.

Bottom line is after the war is over, China will be the new undisputed Asian superpower and the United States would have new problems to contend with.
 

HJ Tulp

Donor
I think that a Dutch expeditionary force would be much more likely then a German one. Almost assured actually. A large part (if not all) of the Airmobile Brigade and maybe the UK/NL Marine Unit.
 
I would like to note that any conflict occurring close to Desert Storm is unfeasible, as both the PRC and the DPRK had military structures similar to those of Iraq, and therefore had definite proof that their military machines needed serious restructuring if they were going to face anyone. The PRC was in a better position and has fixed most of these problems. The DPRK, however, has not, and has gotten more obsolete.

Political considerations aside (the bombing of Seoul, particularly) the South Korean forces would have an easy time of brushing aside the DPRK, at more than a 2:1 casualty ratio, especially now. After a short time of open fighting, it is likely that the Northeners will be quick to demoralize and desert, they are, after all, poorly trained, equipped, and even fed. The addition of US/Japanese/Ect. forces is unneeded at the present, and I doubt they're that critical to victory in the 90s, however, they would just speed the slaughter.

The push into North Korea itself and the occupation thereof, is another matter I can give no credible opion on. They do have more bunkers and tunnels than anything, as has been previously stated, but the Northen will to fight is to be questioned, brainwashing will get you so far, especially against those who are, after all, your countrymen. PRC and Russia would not be able to do anything to prevent a takeover, helping the DPRK would be suicide.
 

Neroon

Banned
If before the Chinese can move to stop them, the Coalition forces seize a large enought part of North Korea to aquire undeniable and massive evidence that the DPRK is not some brave socialist David standing up to the the American Imperialist Goliath, but indeed the largest prison camp on the planet, then the PRC wont intervene. The PR price would be too high. What i would expect instead is some agreement with Seoul about limiting the numbers of U.S. troops stationed in the reunited Peninsula. Perheps even restricting their presence to south of the 48th altogether.
 
One or two at most and with no way to deliver them. They are not the problem. The North's ability to hammer Seoul flat with heavy artillery is.

We always over-estimate the DPRK’s conventional ability and under-rate the DPRK's terrorist ability, they could deliver a nuke though subterfuge not misslies.

The DPRK’s agents are very skilled and are fanatics, you know how agents are given suicide pill? Well the DPRK’s actually take theirs when caught.
 
Last edited:
But China even at that point was trying to become an industrial power, and needed Western (especially American) markets. Alienating the US over North Korea has no positive result for the PRC. They'd stay out of it, unless the allies attack China - which they would not do. Loss of face is a lot better than loss of wealth. Heck, if the DPRK is dumb enough to use nukes, the Chinese would probably help the allied forces.

Agreed, their major worry would be that the US would think they were behind it.
 
Well, let's do a tale of the tape

Iraq

Tanks: 1,000 T-72, 1,500 T-62, 1,500 T-54/55, around 1,400 Chinese knock-offs of the T-55 & T-62 and a smattering of other, mostly 1960s Western designs for a total of 1,000 really front line platforms and a couple thousand T-62/Type 69 (category B) and a couple thousand T-54/55.Type 59 (Category C)

AFV: 1,400 -1,500 BMP, similar number of BRDM, mostly Mod-2, 900 or so Brazilian APC of a pretty decent 1980's design.

APC: Around 4,000; a mix of the old BTR-60, the Brazilian EE-11, MT-LB and againn a samttering of western designs, mostly the ever present M-113

Tons of artillery in 152mm & 155mm caliber, mostly towed. A lot of the 155mm were the "Bull" type, coming from the Gerald Bull school of design with enhanced range due to extra barel length and chamber design.

Anti-tank: a mixture of the AT-3, AT-4 and a decent number of western designs, cheifly the French SS 11, along with some Milans.

Aircraft: Around 150 modern, operational designs, all Soviet, with MiG-29 & Su-24 being the main types.

North Korea

Tanks: T-72 0, T-62/Type 60 2,000 (Catergory B), 800 T-54/55 (Category C), 200-300 T-34 :eek:, around 1200 light tanks, mostly PT-76 and offshoots

AVF/APC - Around 2,000 in a mix of Soviet and Chinese designs dating from the mid 50s to the early 70s

Anti Tank AT-3, AT-4 and LOTS of RPG

Artillery: The one real strength of the DPRK. No one, AFAIK, has ever come up with a real usable figure, beyond 7000+ 152/mm155mm. I doubt even the DPRK ground forces have a reliable total for operational tubes.

Aircraft: Around 200 modern airframes are available, somewhere around a third are operational at any one time. About 1,200 other aircraft, going all the way back to MiG-15s.

As you can see, the DPRK is a force caught in about 1965, with neither the money or friends to moderize. Their ground force is very large, very indifferently trained, poorly equipped, but with masses of artillery with enough range to hit the suburbs of Seoul. Just for that fact, plus the minor matter that the country is run by a lunatic, they need to be watched. The 1990 Iraqi Army was far better equipped, especially the Republican Guard, and would in the hypothetical battlefield, have defeated the DPRK military of the same era. In many ways the Iraqi Army of 1990 had the same sort of technology advantage over the DPRK as the Coalition had over the Iraqis.

You’re one of those folks who think war is won with gadgets not people, the Iraqi advantage in tech really isn’t all that great, plus their solders are unwilling conscripts from an oppressed Shia majority with Sunni officers, and a few ''elite'' formations.

The biggest most important difference between the two isn’t armaments quantity/quality it’s the fact DPRK troops would fight the Iraqi’s wouldn’t.

Plus the DPRK has a huge pool of reserves, and 100,000 strong Spec-Ops force


both the PRC and the DPRK had military structures similar to those of Iraq, and therefore had definite proof that their military machines needed serious restructuring if they were going to face anyone. The PRC was in a better position and has fixed most of these problems. The DPRK, however, has not, and has gotten more obsolete.
Based on the Soviet model though without first-rate Soviet tech, numbers, skill at combined arms ops etc. Thats why copying the Soviet model usually ends badly. A third-world nation trying the US model would fare no better, small-fry trying to play like the big-boys tend to get beaten badly.

Also Soviet armaments gets a bad rep due to the Arab-Israeli wars most due to Arab incompetence and the fact they were using export or ‘’monkey models’’ as the reds called em inferior mass produced versions of the real stuff they kept for themselves.
 
Last edited:
The biggest most important difference between the two isn’t armaments quantity/quality it’s the fact DPRK troops would fight the Iraqi’s wouldn’t.

Plus the DPRK has a huge pool of reserves, and 100,000 strong Spec-Ops force
No they would not, they'd be just as motivated as their Iraqi companions. Its clear that the North Koreans are better brainwashed than the Iraqis, but then we have to consider other things. The Iraqis were better clothed and fed.


Based on the Soviet model though without first-rate Soviet tech, numbers, skill at combined arms ops etc. Thats why copying the Soviet model usually ends badly. A third-world nation trying the US model would fare no better, small-fry trying to play like the big-boys tend to get beaten badly.

Also Soviet armaments gets a bad rep due to the Arab-Israeli wars most due to Arab incompetence and the fact they were using export or ‘’monkey models’’ as the reds called em inferior mass produced versions of the real stuff they kept for themselves.
A very valid point. Fighting Soviet troops and Iraqi troops is not the same. The same thing applies with North Koreans. North Korea has a poorly maintained military which is floating at around 1970 level. Werther they're monkey models or not (I believe most were), is irrelevant 30 to 40 years later.
 
No they would not, they'd be just as motivated as their Iraqi companions. Its clear that the North Koreans are better brainwashed than the Iraqis, but then we have to consider other things. The Iraqis were better clothed and fed.

Iraqis better fed in the 90's? I dont think so both were in bad shape. I stand by my statement the NK Troops would fight the Iraqis wouldnt NK Troops may be in a sorry state but Koreans...Well they're crazy people.:D

Plus NK forces are all homogeneous, Iraqi troops are most Shia the officers Sunni both side would sooner kill each other than anyone else. Also Iraqis suck at tank warfare they dig-in their tanks and use them as artillery which robs them of their mobility.

A very valid point. Fighting Soviet troops and Iraqi troops is not the same. The same thing applies with North Koreans. North Korea has a poorly maintained military which is floating at around 1970 level. Werther they're monkey models or not (I believe most were), is irrelevant 30 to 40 years later.

NK forces are more tailored to a type of warfare that suits them, they have around 100,000 SpecOp troops who are pretty fierce. They are good at digging tunnels and have lots of RPG’s those old tanks may not work against the US but against Iraq they would.

It also depends who's doing the attacking during the Iran-Iraq war Iraq was always better at defence.
 
Still, NK military has 0 offensive capability apart from bombing Seoul. They hardly have fuel to run their military, which 40 years ago was already begging to show its age.
 
Still, NK military has 0 offensive capability apart from bombing Seoul. They hardly have fuel to run their military, which 40 years ago was already begging to show its age.

40? Nah closer to 20 years Kim II Sung bought huge amounts of arms in the 80’s.
 
Top