U.S. Can Bring to Bear Significant Tactical Airpower in Event of Korean Hostilities

[F-22Raptor]

ARLINGTON, Va. — The increased tension in northwest Asia associated with recent North Korean threats and U.S. counter moves is drawing attention to the U.S. forces stationed in the region and which ones might be brought to bear in event of a conflict. Most of the U.S. combat air power in Asia is within easy reach of the Korean peninsula.

The carrier USS Carl Vinson and its strike group have been moved to the region, with Carrier Air Wing (CVW) Two embarked, according to press reports. The air wing includes four squadrons of F/A-18/E/F strike fighters — usually equipped with a total of 44 aircraft — and a squadron of five EA-18G electronic attack aircraft, plus squadrons of E-2C radar warning aircraft and MH-60R and MH-60S helicopters.

CVW-5, similarly equipped, which embarks onboard USS Ronald Reagan, is ashore in two bases in Japan while the carrier is in maintenance availability, according to a source who declined to be named. CVW-5’s strike fighter squadrons all are equipped with Super Hornets, and its E-2 squadron is equipped with the new D model. Presumably, CVW-5’s aircraft could stage combat missions from shore bases in the area.

Independently deployed to Naval Air Facility Misawa, Japan, is an expeditionary electronic attack squadron with five EA-18Gs.

Marine Aircraft Group 11 at Marine Corps Iwakuni, Japan, is equipped with the Marine Corps’ first operational squadron of F-35B strike fighters, with 10 on strength. Also on strength are two F/A-18 Hornet fighter- attack squadrons, one with F/A-18Cs and one with F/A-18Ds. At Kadena Air Base in Okinawa is a detachment of AV-8Bs that deploy on the amphibious assault ship USS Bonhomme Richard.

Pacific Air Forces has four fighter wings in the region: one with F-15Cs in Kadena, Japan; two with F-16Cs in South Korea — one of which also has some A-10s assigned — and one with electronic attack F-16Cs at Misawa. A wing of f-22s is available in Alaska, plus a Hawaii Air National Guard F-22A unit in Hawaii.

The Air Force also rotates detachments of B-52 bombers to Guam. KC-135 tankers and E-3 radar warning aircraft also are deployed to Kadena.

The U.S. Navy also has considerable strike power available in the form of Tomahawk land-attack cruise missiles on cruisers and destroyers in the carrier strike groups (one cruiser and two destroyers) or as part of the surface force based in Japan, including two cruisers and eight destroyers. Possibly deployed in the region is an Ohio-class guided-missile submarine, armed with Tomahawks.

http://seapowermagazine.org/stories/20170417-korea.html

 

[Aasimkhan]

N.Korea will not be able to counter US Air power, their only punch lies in nuclear counter attack, this will decimate S. Korea and possibly Japan. US counter nuclear strike will finish N. Korea. Entire region will be poisoned by radiation for thousands of years.

 

[patero]

N.Korea will not be able to counter US Air power, their only punch lies in nuclear counter attack, this will decimate S. Korea and possibly Japan. US counter nuclear strike will finish N. Korea. Entire region will be poisoned by radiation for thousands of years.

Does North Korea have the capability to actually deliver a nuclear strike yet? If they haven't managed to miniaturize their nuclear warheads and successfully mount them on a ballistic missile, what other options would they have? They don't have any heavy bombers, not that they would make it far enough to drop a bomb before being shot down.

A suicidal run by a surface vessel or submarine might be effective against coastal targets in South Korea, reaching Japan would be more difficult.

 

[Fledgingwings]

It would be the first time ever if happens.

 

[Incog_nito]

I think US will go for a war with North Korea. It's now in this world's fate.

 

[Penguin]

Does North Korea have the capability to actually deliver a nuclear strike yet? If they haven't managed to miniaturize their nuclear warheads and successfully mount them on a ballistic missile, what other options would they have? They don't have any heavy bombers, not that they would make it far enough to drop a bomb before being shot down.

A suicidal run by a surface vessel or submarine might be effective against coastal targets in South Korea, reaching Japan would be more difficult.

There is evidence that North Korea has been able to miniaturize a nuclear warhead for use on a ballistic missile. Re-entry technology to protect the warheads en route to their targets is lacking.
North Korea appeared to launch a missile test from a submarine on 23 April 2016; while the missile only traveled 30 km, one U.S. analyst noted that "North Korea's sub launch capability has gone from a joke to something very serious". An August 2016 North Korean missile test of a Rodong missile that flew 1,000 kilometres (620 mi) landed about 250 kilometres (160 mi) west of Japan's Oga Peninsula, in international waters but inside Japan's exclusive economic zone, prompting Japan to condemn the "unforgivable act of violence toward Japan's security". As of 2016, North Korea is known to have approximately 300 Rodong missiles whose maximum range is 800 miles
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/North...mass_destruction#Operational_delivery_systems

 

[Sharpshooter12]

N.Korea will not be able to counter US Air power, their only punch lies in nuclear counter attack, this will decimate S. Korea and possibly Japan. US counter nuclear strike will finish N. Korea. Entire region will be poisoned by radiation for thousands of years.

I doubt North Korea has mastered miniaturizing warheads to fit on missiles and their air force lack any reasonable platforms to deliver nukes. Their H5s will not even get to DMZ if the hostilities break out and US will make sure that their Mig-29s can't penetrate even the South Korean airspace let alone the Japanese.

Does North Korea have the capability to actually deliver a nuclear strike yet? If they haven't managed to miniaturize their nuclear warheads and successfully mount them on a ballistic missile, what other options would they have? They don't have any heavy bombers, not that they would make it far enough to drop a bomb before being shot down.

A suicidal run by a surface vessel or submarine might be effective against coastal targets in South Korea, reaching Japan would be more difficult.

Completely agreed. The real threat is their artillery, especially their 170 mm artillery and their 240 mm rockets. Seoul metropolitan area is home to half of the South Korean population and is only 35 Km away from the 38th Parallel. So in case of an attack on N.Korea, Kim can unleash this force on this densely populated area. He also believe to have hundreds of ballistic missiles so he can cause quite a lot a damage to and fatalities in Seoul.

But what will be even more worrying is the notion of him using chemical or biological war heads on these missiles, as prime minister Abe of Japan recently mentioned about N.K's possible use of Sarin.

Perhaps that is the reason South Koreans are not that thrilled about attacking the north.

 

[jhungary]

Does North Korea have the capability to actually deliver a nuclear strike yet? If they haven't managed to miniaturize their nuclear warheads and successfully mount them on a ballistic missile, what other options would they have? They don't have any heavy bombers, not that they would make it far enough to drop a bomb before being shot down.

A suicidal run by a surface vessel or submarine might be effective against coastal targets in South Korea, reaching Japan would be more difficult.

There are quite a few way to kill missile, in the US, a full count does not just include missile site, but also communication centre and C&C structure.

In an authoritarian regime such as North Korea, once the order is removed from above, chances are the lowly soldiers and officers will not be launching these missile without Kim's order, because that is the basic problem of centralized military power.

The question is, how well can North Korea defending their C&C, from top to bottom, because even if one chain is broken, chances are nothing is going to happen without the supreme leader order.

Funny no one actually mention this.

 

[patero]

@Sharpshooter12 , yeah the threat of North Korean artillery and rockets is probably what will prevent the US from launching a sneak attack. They really would need to evacuate Seoul first which would be tricky (I remember somebody telling me though about extensive bomb shelters), that couldn't be done quickly and would probably prompt the North to attack anyway. And I think if the US did plan on attacking they would need to deploy more sea and air assets, as well as more ground forces. This would take more time and also risk prompting an attack from the north. Half measures will not work, either the US goes in with fully committed or not at all.

The threat of chemical or biological agents from the North is an interesting one, I seem to recall the US issuing a warning to Saddam Hussein prior to the first gulf war that if Iraq used them Baghdad would be nuked. I'd imagine the same warning would be issued to North Korea (probably via twitter).

@jhungary, interesting point. Can Trump lawfully order a targeted strike on Kim himself?

 

[The SC]

Does North Korea have the capability to actually deliver a nuclear strike yet? If they haven't managed to miniaturize their nuclear warheads and successfully mount them on a ballistic missile, what other options would they have? They don't have any heavy bombers, not that they would make it far enough to drop a bomb before being shot down.

A suicidal run by a surface vessel or submarine might be effective against coastal targets in South Korea, reaching Japan would be more difficult.

Kim Jong Un, with what North Korea claims is a miniaturized silver spherical nuclear bomb, at a missile factory in early 2016.

 

[jhungary]

@Sharpshooter12 , yeah the threat of North Korean artillery and rockets is probably what will prevent the US from launching a sneak attack. They really would need to evacuate Seoul first which would be tricky (I remember somebody telling me though about extensive bomb shelters), that couldn't be done quickly and would probably prompt the North to attack anyway. And I think if the US did plan on attacking they would need to deploy more sea and air assets, as well as more ground forces. This would take more time and also risk prompting an attack from the north. Half measures will not work, either the US goes in with fully committed or not at all.

The threat of chemical or biological agents from the North is an interesting one, I seem to recall the US issuing a warning to Saddam Hussein prior to the first gulf war that if Iraq used them Baghdad would be nuked. I'd imagine the same warning would be issued to North Korea (probably via twitter).

@jhungary, interesting point. Can Trump lawfully order a targeted strike on Kim himself?

That is the beauty of this, you don't actually have to kill Fat Kim to take him off the C&C chain.

What the US need to do is to isolate Fat Kim from the Military Command, in case of a war, or war would break out imminently, Fat Kim will most likely go underground and Fat Kim would most likely take on full military command himself, and there are only a certain way to communicate between a command bunker and actual force on the ground, they can be done by either physical relay via telephone cable, or by wireless order. Both of which can be either jam or physically destroyed.

If Fat Kim remain above ground, then the US can target Command and Control Element directly. And if push come to shove or target of opportunity present itself, a Black Ops can be called to eliminate Fat Kim before he can do anything.

 

[gambit]

@jhungary, interesting point. Can Trump lawfully order a targeted strike on Kim himself?

If you are wondering about international law, it is not so much 'law' as it is consensus and approval by either a majority of UN or the politically significant entities such as those on the Security Council.

 

[Jacob Martin]

@jhungary, interesting point. Can Trump lawfully order a targeted strike on Kim himself?

If Fat Kim remain above ground, then the US can target Command and Control Element directly.

If you are wondering about international law, it is not so much 'law' as it is consensus and approval by either a majority of UN or the politically significant entities such as those on the Security Council.

UNSC resolutions are usually worded in a manner as to extend their scope and ambit as much as possible. So they usually include the phrase "take all necessary measures", which has been interpreted to include targeting of command and control.

Surprisingly, the biggest hurdle to assassination of foreign leaders comes from within US law itself. Executive Order 12333, signed by President Ford in the 1970s, prohibits the act of state-sponsored killing.This Order was drafted in the wake of revelations of government involvement in plots to kill several foreign leaders, and is yet to be repealed.

However, getting global support for killing Fat Kim will be one of the easiest diplomatic tasks, IMO. He has sealed his own fate with the nuclear and missile tests. Their will be some token opposition but really, who can grudge taking out a psychotic guy with nukes?

 

[patero]

@gambit, I was thinking about US law when I put the question out there, Jacob Martin answered it in the post above.

 

[Mrc]

How would they bring this exceptional power against NK?? Their aircraft carier went the wrong way due to miscommunication by white house it seems

Seol is on its own at the moment ... battle group is in australia