Is North Korea's Leader losing it?

[Montmorency]

The South, having suffered so much would at the very least want to push the DMZ 100 miles further North to protect themselves - and as before why stop there? Would China just hope that they establish a smaller North Korea under UN oversight or would they preemptively secure this themselves just as the Russians did?

It comes down to who reaches Pyongyang first. China can't get infantry to the DMZ within a day obviously, and the South Koreans will be crossing in force with their American allies. The circumstances of the outbreak of war, and who occupies what by the cessation of Northern resistance, will determine the terms of reunification or joint governance.

China can't really hope to grab the whole thing for itself, which is why kicking the can continues to be the best option. The best case for China is Chinese-militarized Changbai Mts, and US troops leaving the peninsula within 5/10 years.

[Sarmatian]

I think you are all underestimating North Korean army and resilience of the civilian population.

The civilian population of North Korea is used to food shortages and the primary purpose of civilian society is to support the army. Even though eventual winner is not in doubt (bar direct Chinese intervention), it wouldn't be easy or fast, and I wouldn't be so certain that NK wouldn't be pushing over DMZ first.

China's primary concern is keeping the buffer zone between China and American bases in Korea. They did try to push for a deal with USA, in which North Korea stops developing nukes and ICBM's in return for a gradual withdrawal of US troops from South Korea but Americans refused.

[Montmorency]

The civilian population of North Korea is used to food shortages and the primary purpose of civilian society is to support the army. Even though eventual winner is not in doubt (bar direct Chinese intervention), it wouldn't be easy or fast, and I wouldn't be so certain that NK wouldn't be pushing over DMZ first.

Well, unless the North Korean leadership decides to roll over before the fighting starts then strategically they would have to begin by storming the border with ground forces. I'm not sure there is reason to believe the offensive wouldn't collapse quickly, in which case there would be relatively-little resistance for Allied troops in enemy country other than the fastnesses.

In fact, one approach in Chinese interests would be to have North Korea attack pre-emptively and with little warning (i.e. prior to publicized American buildup) , which would be the most disruptive to the Allied efforts before the machine can get going, and would allow China the most time to occupy the North. On the other hand, such naked aggression from the North would put the Allies in the best diplomatic, though not military, position to take a maximalist stance on Korean sovereignty, and it would lead to US-Chinese tensions beating anything since the 1950s. Also, it would bring the worst favor for North Korean government officials should they ever be caught for international trial.

Civilian resistance - maybe, but to what extent? These aren't fanatics, even if they haven't been bombed to dust before the enemy appears.

[Sarmatian]

I'm having trouble believing that a state that has a military first policy, to an extent of starving its own citizens if need be, a state that is 100% focused on the conflict we're talking about is just going to roll over and die quickly in the even of that conflict.

They've spent more than half a century preparing for it. They will put up a huge fight.

[Montmorency]

The people will before the state.

Why do you think they will resist? If you think of touted Japanese civilian readiness, that (sentiment at least) was borne on the back of a healthy imperial economy and largely successful military ventures abroad, over two generations. North Korea doesn't have that experience. The fear and hatred without the success and power. More likely that once the armed forces are in rout, not causing anyone any trouble will be a more common priority than Operation Werewolf.

[Seamus Fermanagh]

I agree that the populace probably has a very limited "will to combat," though the long propaganda preparation and limited foodstuffs -- which is a classic way to cow the populace -- probably means that the NK populace would do little or nothing to aid an aggressor against their own government. They would all emulate the turtle and hunker down and wait it out.

Nor is it likely that the NK army would collapse quickly. The terrain of NK in general features lots of mountains/hilly areas that they have had a half century to stock with defensive positions, emergency magazines etc. Projecting a quick collapse is overly optimistic at best barring a profligate use of tactical nuclear weapons. NK favors defense in terms of terrain.

Add in the fact that China has a propensity to counterpunch armed forces that are trending towards its border and you are upping the difficulty further. Heck, even if you beat the odds and GOT China to agree to temporarily ignore events south of the Yalu while NK was clobbered they would NOT cope with the use of nuclear devices that close to their border -- so there is no quick option to toppling NK.

[Montmorency]

When we say quick victory, we mean in the field. Holdouts in bunkers have limited ability, decreasing over time, to project over surrounding territory. This only works in the advantage of the Allies, since it justifies and permits a solidified military occupation in the face of the Chinese response. When time is on our side, there is no need to resort to nuclear weapons - or, as the alternative may be, fuel-air bombs.