how powerfull is the North-korean army?
357951
North Korea continues to position forces into the area just north of the DMZ— in a position to threaten Combined Forces Command and all of Seoul with little warning. Seventy percent of their active force, including approximately 700,000 troops, over 8,000 artillery systems, and 2,000 tanks, is postured within 90 miles of the Demilitarized Zone. This percentage continues to rise despite the June 2000 summit. Most of this force in the forward area is protected in over 4,000 underground facilities, out of over 11,000 nationwide\n\nAs of 1992, the army was composed of sixteen corps commands, two separate special operations forces commands, and nine military district commands (or regions) under the control of the Ministry of the People's Armed Forces). Most sources agreed that North Korea's ground forces consisted of approximately 145 divisions and brigades, of which approximately 120 are active\n\nAs of 1996 major combat units consisted of 153 divisions and brigades, including 60 infantry divisions/brigades, 25 mechanized infantry brigades, 13 tank brigades, 25 Special Operation Force (SOF) brigades and 30 artillery brigades. North Korea deployed ten corps including sixty divisions and brigades in the forward area south of the Pyongyang-Wonsan line. \n\nAs of 1996 the North Korean ground forces were composed of twenty corps commands including four mechanized and two artillery corps as well as a Tank Instruction Guidance Bureau and an Artillery Command, and one Light Infantry Instruction Guidance Bureau which controls special operations forces. On the eastern front is deployed I Corps, V Corps on the central eastern front, II Corps on the central-western front, and IV Corps on the western front. In the central and Pyongyang areas III, VII and IX Corps, and the Pyongyang Defense Command are deployed. The VI, VIII, X and XI Corps are in the rear. \n\nAs of February 2005 Defense Intelligence Agency analysts were reported to believe that North Korea may already have produced as many as 12 to 15 nuclear weapons. This would imply that by the end of 2004 North Korea had produced somewhere between four and eight uranium bombs [on top of the seven or eight plutonium bombs already on hand]. \n\nAt the onset of hostilities, North Korean Forces will seek to suppress Allied counter air operations. Scud-B and -C Missiles, with persistent Nerve Agent in the warheads, would be launched against airbases such as Kimpo, Osan and Taegu. Command, control, and communications centers, and logistics depots are also likely chemical targets. \n\nIn the artillery preparation, the North would attack ROK defenses in the corridors with a mix of conventional high-explosive and non-persistent chemical strikes. North Korean 122mm and 240mm multiple rocket launchers are particularly effective for delivering Hydrogen Cyanide and Sarin.\n \nyou only asked about the army, so i'll leave the airforce and navy out...
877701
yes they do and there army is equipped with material that is state of the art.  They mostly operated in coordination with the Belgium army  ( Korea, SFOR,IFOR, etc) .  For the moment they do have troops in Afghanistan and I belief also in Lebanon
944698
If they do have nuclear weapons the answer is North Korea. They seem the most willing to use them.
807856
neither them are powerful compared to Al Qaeda.\n\nmossad and cia still starving to crackdown alqaeda fugatives.\nand keeping up the death toll rising all the day.
855280
The primary tactic being used right now are economic sanctions against the North.  This includes reducing the amount of goods we and other countries contribute, including food and oil.  Basically, if NK follows the rules, the may get additional economic aid donated to them and if they don't, we'll further restrict the amount we contribute to them.  \n\nIf problems escalate, we may put a full economic embargo on them, surround their country with our navy, and basically not allow any goods to enter or leave the country.
24960
North Korea is a limited threat even with their nuclear capabilities.  They have limited funding and their people are starving.  They would not be able to sustain any military actions if they start one.\n\nThe bigger issue is Iran.  They have the resources, oil that can finance a lot more problems.  They have made threats to other countries and have the money to back it up.
1061173
No.\n\nNorth Korea has let their army fall apart.  Basically all they have are their missiles.  And if we demonstrate that we can shoot down their missiles at will - they have no leverage over anybody whatsoever.
1150923
no!!!in fact they have about as much power as the us exucitve branch does.
933840
With North Korea...who knows.  They often say one thing and do another!!
146686
There was an actual threat from Iraq.  Saddam has attacked other countries in the past (Kuwait and Iran) leaving even more countries in the area feeling insecure (Saudi Arabia and Israel).  Throw on some suspected WMD's, his disdain for the Western World, and know terrorist training camps in country and you have the recipe to get overthrown.  \n\nNorth Korea on the other hand is all bark and no bite.  Most of North Korea's military equipment dates back to the 1950's.  Plus, it's population is starving, so it's people are most likely not going to support it's government in a fight.  Have you ever scene National Geographic's world picture at night.  Notice South Korea is lit up like a Christmas tree while North Korea is almost completely dark.
978819
Kim Jong Il of North Korea - the nuclear arms architect
783200
#4 sounds kinda dumb... you don't threaten a country with nukes, unless you want to go to war with them.\n#5 economically isolate them so there are no export/import to and from Cuba\nNote: North Korean CANNOT invade South Korea. An army with more men don't mean nothing. It's due to the fighting abilities/technological weapons. South Korean would own North Korea.\n#6 Have a United Nation concil meeting, explain the situation to the world, and other countries would help us gang bang Cuba and North Korea.
947693
North Korea has an unstable leader.  Whatever I would do to convince them would be in vain.\n\nIran has an unstable population that is ruled by unstable people with money.  Whatever I would do to convince them would be in vain.\n\nRealistically, the only way to FORCE, not convince, them to give up nuclear weapons is through global political action.  Specifically placing pressure on these countries through allies in their regions.\n\nIdealistically, we could destroy our own stock pile of nuclear weapons and hope they take this as a sign of good faith and do not continue to pursue them anymore.  The problem is that if someone wants to attack you with a stick and you put your stick down, what do you think actually happens?\n\nO.K.  Now let me directly answer your question.  I would tell other countries that their inability to safegaurd nuclear programs and the weapons they produce is an unacceptable liability that would not be tolerated.\n\nI would set a deadline for these programs to be ended.\n\nOnce these deadlines were not met, I would order the men in charge of the weapons programs to be assassinated.\n\nConvincing enough?
204478
aiight bro. I just got back from living in korea and deploying to iraq with the US army. Nobody is going to mess with north korea without some serious backup. They invest almost all thier gross domestic product as a country into strengthening thier military. They have a standing army of over two million people. Iran is just another iraq except for the fact that during the 70's we supplied them with arms and were trying to make them a puppet state of democracy, (sounds familiar huh) but jimmy carter let the sha of iran fry when he needed our help during the islamic revolution. so iran is now the bad guy and for a while was a puppet of the soviet union and got arms from there. So they have been hooked up big time and got some good equipment, but they dont have the military leadership that can compare or the precision strike capabilities or special operators like we do. North korea does and is therefore a completely different animal. we can go into iran and knock heads, but if we need to hit up north korea, we need like everybody to have our back.
1113064
At the moment, we know North Korea has nukes and so far as we know, Iran doesn't (although I can't shake the feeling that they may have nabbed some of the ones that were shipped out of Iraq.) Therefore, I'd say North Korea is presently a bigger threat, although the fundamentalist regime and mentality of many Iranians probably makes them the more dangerous long-term.
1040881
There is no official peace treaty, so yes.. they are still in a state of war. The Korean border is the most heavily guarded in the world.
119231
very little except what they tell us, and half of everything kim jong il says is utter nonsense.  but they have supposedly peformed nuclear testing and have a working bomb, but that doesn't mean they have any missile capabilities to launch it (it would have to be dropped from a plane ala hiroshima and nagasaki).