How many wars has North Korea won in the last, say, 50 years?

Quote form the article: "North Korea's main battle tanks - T-62s - have 155 mm guns"... LMOA! T-62s actually have rather old 115mm guns that can't penetrate US M1A1/2 armor at point blank range. Thats only one of the myraid of factual mistakes the article in question makes. That entire site is riddled with articles that are, frankly, wisps of pure fantasy. I can only assume it is run by lunatics or is a joke. NewGuy

This is great. I'm bored: let's fisk. "North Korea, which can and is willing to face up to the sole military superpower of the world, cannot be called a weak nation. Nevertheless, Western press and analysts distort the truth and depict North Korea as an "impoverished" nation, starving and on the brink of imminent collapse." Kim's PR team must be doing one hell of a job. Thousands of NK refugees fleeing into Manchuria looking for food must be agents provacateur trying to make us think that NK is weak and starving. They must also purposely assign short guards to Panmunjom to make us believe that malnutrition is taking its toll. "Today few nations have military assets strong enough to challenge the US military. Russia, though weakened by the collapse of the Soviet Union, has enough assets to face up to the US. China, somewhat weaker than Russia, too, has strong military that can challenge the US. However, both Russia and China lack the political will to face down the US." Why do I get a vision of a little Chihuhua and a big bulldog hunting down Sylvester, with the little dog going, "C'mon, let's you and me fight the cat, c'mon, c'mon!" "In contrast, North Korea has not only the military power but also the political will to wage total war against the United States. North Korea has made it clear that it will strike all US targets with all means, if the US mounted military attacks on North Korea. That North Korea's threat is no bluff can be seen from the aggressive actions taken by North Korea since the Korean War armistice, most recent of which is North Korea's attempt to capture an American spy plane." Apparently the author is envious of China. Cue the Chihuahua again. "In the morning of March 1, 2003, an American RC-132S spy plane," The correct designation is RC-135S, which the USAF's official website would tell you. "Cobra Ball, took off from a US airbase in Okinawa, and cruised along the East coast of North Korea collecting electronic signals. The US intelligence suspected that North Korea was about to test a long-range missile and the plane was there to monitor the suspected missile launch." Correct so far; this is Cobra Ball's mission. "When the US plane reached a point about 193 km from the coast of North Korea, two MiG-29 and two MiG-21 fighter planes showed up unexpectedly. The North Korean planes approached within 16 m and signaled the US plane to follow them. The US pilot refused to follow the command and left the scene posthaste. The US plane was tailed by the hostiles for about 22 min but let the US spy plane go. There are two key points to be observed here." Yes, indeed. One, the North Koreans weren't trying very hard. (I wonder why.) Two, the USAF pilot acted appropriately. "First, the hostile planes waited for the US plane at the Uhrang airbase, located about 200 km from the point of air encounter. They knew that the US plane was coming. The North Korean planes flew 200 km to intercept the US plane. Did the US plane see them coming? If it did, why no evasive action?" Uh, because it was in international airspace? "After intercepting the US plane, the hostile planes dogged it for 22 min. Why no American planes for the rescue? The US crew must have informed the base of the danger they were in, but no action was taken by the base. If Kim Jong Il had given the command, the MiGs would have shot down the US plane and returned to their base before the US could have scrambled war planes." I agree. Next time the RC-135 should be escorted by four F-15s. "Second, North Korea intercepted an American spy plane flying 200 km from its coast. According to the international norm, a nation's territorial air space extends 19 km from its coast line. The US is the exception and claims air space of 370 km from its coast line; any foreign airplane violating this extended air space is challenged or shot down by the US military." China apparently does as well: the EP-3E forced down in Hainan was in international airspace. Note also that, in 50 years of the Cold War, no Soviet aircraft was ever fired upon or shot down within this claimed airspace. In five years of Operation Noble Eagle sorties to prevent a recurrence of 9/11, no aircraft has been shot down. Sadly, the same cannot be said of American aircraft flying close to Soviet or Chinese, or North Korean, territory. "North Korea's war plan in case of an US attack is total war, not the 'low-intensity limited warfare' or 'regional conflict' talked about among the Western analysts. North Korea will mount a total war if attacked by the US." This should be interesting. "There are three aspects to this war plan. First, total war is North Korea's avowed strategy in case of US preemptive attacks. The US war on Iraq shows that the US can and will mount preemptive strikes in clear violation of international laws, and the United Nations is powerless to stop the US." Note that the author makes no

Sentinel, I'm impressed you took such time and effort to give a serious answer to such a loony Nork jack-off session. Bravo! :)

Reading that almost makes me wish for the war, just to laugh at how badly they get their asses kicked.

Ok US Navy attacks from the west, east and south, I say let the Russian pacific fleet get a few pot shots in from the north, now I'd like to see what the NK Navy could do :P.

NK is not in good shape. It can make a mess - mainly because of nerve gas, 170 mm guns, and numbers - but it won't win. But a 115 mm gun WILL penetrate the armor of an M-60 at appropriate ranges (depending on which armor you hit from that aspect). 115 mm was designed to be better than 105mm, and it certainly is in the same league. The world standard is the 105mm NATO tank rifle, and the majority of MBT today use either that or a 125 mm weapon. 115mm and 120mm are fairly common alternatives, and there is even a ex-Soviet 140mm entering service on the Type 99 MBT of PLA. You don't want to be shot at by any of these if you are riding in an M60A anything.

about elcid's comments on KPA(Korean People's Army = NK Army) 115mm tank guns and M-60 tanks: The 115mm will indeed be bad for anyone riding a M-60 (or M-48). The ROK army (=South Korean Army) has been replacing its tank forces with Type 88 K-1 tanks that have chobham armor and fire control systems similar to the German Leo's. It will not be long before the ROK military will completely outclass the KPA in most conventional warfare systems given that the South outspends the North many times. However, the ROK military seems to be suffering from severe growing pains and the South's defense spending seems to lack priorities and creativity. The North will continue to be able to make a big mess for a long time.

Propaganda and only propaganda. ok that north can defeat US but if it is the case why they did not annex the South? Annexing the south is the goal of the NOrth korean policy since the end of the Korean war . Now then they have the means of their policy to defeat US ,why so they are not able to annex the south? In my opinion if a new war take place North will collapse rapidly and easly , in the recent past the technic of human waves in war had not let any army through the world to win a war. the million of troops of the north is not an advanatge but an handicap

I thought the original story was funny, but they way you ripped it to shreds had me laughing so hard I was in tears. Thank you!