"Why the Korean War Was One of the Deadliest Wars " Topic

…in Modern History

"It's difficult to try to keep up with developments in the latest round of saber rattling between the United States and North Korea. U.S. President Donald Trump and Korean "supreme leader" Kim Jong-un have repeatedly traded verbal barbs via Twitter and more formal avenues amid news of naval redeployments , massive live-fire artillery exercises , United Nations condemnations and rumors of troop movements by regional powers.

The United States would have an obvious and distinct advantage over North Korea in a direct military engagement. That doesn't mean that a war wouldn't be a grueling and costly endeavor. North Korea's military is dilapidated and antiquated , but it's still one of the largest militaries in the world. When the two countries clashed before, from 1950 to 1953, the conflict ended in a virtual draw along the 38th parallel…."
Main page
link

Amicalement
Armand

Let there be no doubt, in Korean War, between the unpreparedness of the US and many UN Forces, the weather, and both the NoKos and PRC willingness to take heavy losses, along with their hatred for the West. The war was very bloody. Reminding some of WWI, with frequent losses & gains on both sides. And the terrain made modern mobile warfare very difficult.

And no doubt if the War went hot again in Korea. The US, ROKs and maybe other UN members would defeat the North. But it would still cost the US and ROKs[UN ?). For similar reasons in the first war. However, the US and ROKs are much more prepared and generally have higher techs than the North.

When I was with a Mech Bn of the 2ID in the ROK, '84-'85. We were told if the war went hot again. We would push on to the North's Capital, Pyong Yang, and beyond. Not just reestablish the '53 truce line. Roughly along the 38th Parallel.

The Wild Card/X-Factor would be the PRC's reaction. Would they intervene like in '50 ? Had they not crossed the Yalu into North Korea in massive numbers, at that time, which is a "hallmark" of the PRC. The US/UN had soundly eventually defeated the North. And we would have had a unified Korea under the democratic Capitalist South.

As opposed to the US/NATO mission to only reestablish the IGB. Between the two Germanys. No drive on to Berlin, etc. and beyond. And hope there is not a Nuclear exchange.

Right now, China's stance on 'reinforcing their Communist Brother' seems to be limited to only in case of an attack from the South.

But if the Norks start the fight, China has publicly said they're staying out of it.

China isn't too keen on having a unified democratic Korea on its border. More so if said Korea and Japan formed closer ties. Might make China feel boxed in.

Yes China said if the Norks attacked and the US/ROK/UN(?) would counter attack they'd not get involved. But … the closer the US/ROKs got to Pyong Yang or the Yalu they could change their mind. Don't trust the Chinese or Russians … was true in the past and appears to still hold true today. For better or worse.

If the Norks attacked the ROK, Japan may get involved too. As this area is in their sphere of "concern". With the locations of both Korea and China. However the PRC's ability to project force is limited. They have few forces deployable. Beyond crossing a border, e.g. the Yalu into Korea. As had happened in the past.

Something else that could enter the equation … The US is the only player in the area that has had very recent combat experience. Lots of it. Compared to the ROKs, Norks, Japan, or China. Plus not sure if the "ANZACs" would get involved? Even if it is in close to Korea, China, etc. Or if so may be limited to Air/Naval support? Which would be Not unwelcomed to the US/ROKs.