Another day, another threat of all-out war.

[AshtonBlack]

Want to borrow some body armour and a helmet?
I have a spare set.

[FBM]

Want to borrow some body armour and a helmet?
I have a spare set.

Yes, plz.

[Coito ergo sum]

The war would not be as big a deal as many have suggested. The bigger problem is the humanitarian crisis when the entire fragile infrastructure of the DPRK is shut down, and the ground forces of the DPRK decimated. Given the superior naval and air forces of the South and the US, giving air and sea superiority to the the ROK/US, there will be little the DPRK can do save try to hold out. Within a couple of weeks, all power in the DPRK would be down, all effective communications would be gone, and the chain of command would be severely threatened.

There will then be an immediate and growing problem of starvation and mass casualties on a scale we haven't seen since the Khmer Rouge and the communist North Vietnamese and their proxies after the fall of Saigon.

That's my guess, anyway.

[Trolldor]

The war would not be as big a deal as many have suggested.

'


As ineffectual as North Korea's weapons may have been, they are certainly effective enough to strike at South Korea. Yes it will be a big deal.

[Coito ergo sum]

The war would not be as big a deal as many have suggested.

'


As ineffectual as North Korea's weapons may have been, they are certainly effective enough to strike at South Korea. Yes it will be a big deal.

Well, I should have chosen my words a bit more carefully.

I believe the military conflict itself will be lopsided in favor of the ROK/US forces because, while the DPRK has a formidable ground force, they have nothing at all that could challenge US air power and naval forces. Our ships can send missiles and hit almost any target via satellite guidance, and our bombers could fairly quickly take out any targets that could hit the ROK.

By the time there was ground conflict between infantry, the DPRK would be so softened up they would have little chance - their supply lines would be cut and communications would be down. Any attempt to move large masses of DPRK troops south would be seen and bombed to oblivion.

The ROK/US naval forces would blockade the DPRK and prevent all commerce and food deliveries. The DPRK is on such a shoe-string that in weeks the country would be starving.

Obviously all war is a "big deal" but with the overwhelming air and naval power against it, and with China not going to allow mass migration from the DPRK to China, the humanitarian crisis would be far worse, and for that, regardless of whether it was Jong Il who started it, the ROK/US would be blamed for it.

[Gawdzilla Sama]

Note to the military: This time, remember, DON'T GO NEAR THE FUCKING YALU!!!!!!!!!!!

[Ian]

The war would not be as big a deal as many have suggested. The bigger problem is the humanitarian crisis when the entire fragile infrastructure of the DPRK is shut down, and the ground forces of the DPRK decimated. Given the superior naval and air forces of the South and the US, giving air and sea superiority to the the ROK/US, there will be little the DPRK can do save try to hold out. Within a couple of weeks, all power in the DPRK would be down, all effective communications would be gone, and the chain of command would be severely threatened.

There will then be an immediate and growing problem of starvation and mass casualties on a scale we haven't seen since the Khmer Rouge and the communist North Vietnamese and their proxies after the fall of Saigon.

That's my guess, anyway.

If it's a full-scale war, it would be a very, very big deal. The ROK and the US have a huge advantage over the North in terms of quality of equipment, communications, logistics, etc. Their air forces and navies would rule the skies and seas by the 2nd day. But as a wise bastard once said, "Quantity has a quality all its own." The North's ground forces are massive, even if they're outmoded. And their artillery could reduce Seoul -a modern, global city of 12 million people- to rubble by the end of Day #1 of the war.

The North most likely cannot finish the war themselves. But the South and the US won't be able to push the North back beyond Pyongyang until huge US reinforcements arrive. And that takes time. To affect a quick cease-fire on terms favorable to them, the North might end up doing something as crazy as start smashing Seoul.

[Gawdzilla Sama]

The war would not be as big a deal as many have suggested. The bigger problem is the humanitarian crisis when the entire fragile infrastructure of the DPRK is shut down, and the ground forces of the DPRK decimated. Given the superior naval and air forces of the South and the US, giving air and sea superiority to the the ROK/US, there will be little the DPRK can do save try to hold out. Within a couple of weeks, all power in the DPRK would be down, all effective communications would be gone, and the chain of command would be severely threatened.

There will then be an immediate and growing problem of starvation and mass casualties on a scale we haven't seen since the Khmer Rouge and the communist North Vietnamese and their proxies after the fall of Saigon.

That's my guess, anyway.

If it's a full-scale war, it would be a very, very big deal. The ROK and the US have a huge advantage over the North in terms of quality of equipment, communications, logistics, etc. Their air forces and navies would rule the skies and seas by the 2nd day. But as a wise bastard once said, "Quantity has a quality all its own." The North's ground forces are massive, even if they're outmoded. And their artillery could reduce Seoul -a modern, global city of 12 million people- to rubble by the end of Day #1 of the war.

The North most likely cannot finish the war themselves. But the South and the US won't be able to push the North back beyond Pyongyang until huge US reinforcements arrive. And that takes time. To affect a quick cease-fire on terms favorable to them, the North might end up doing something as crazy as start smashing Seoul.

Situation calls for Old Painless.

[Ian]

The war would not be as big a deal as many have suggested. The bigger problem is the humanitarian crisis when the entire fragile infrastructure of the DPRK is shut down, and the ground forces of the DPRK decimated. Given the superior naval and air forces of the South and the US, giving air and sea superiority to the the ROK/US, there will be little the DPRK can do save try to hold out. Within a couple of weeks, all power in the DPRK would be down, all effective communications would be gone, and the chain of command would be severely threatened.

There will then be an immediate and growing problem of starvation and mass casualties on a scale we haven't seen since the Khmer Rouge and the communist North Vietnamese and their proxies after the fall of Saigon.

That's my guess, anyway.

If it's a full-scale war, it would be a very, very big deal. The ROK and the US have a huge advantage over the North in terms of quality of equipment, communications, logistics, etc. Their air forces and navies would rule the skies and seas by the 2nd day. But as a wise bastard once said, "Quantity has a quality all its own." The North's ground forces are massive, even if they're outmoded. And their artillery could reduce Seoul -a modern, global city of 12 million people- to rubble by the end of Day #1 of the war.

The North most likely cannot finish the war themselves. But the South and the US won't be able to push the North back beyond Pyongyang until huge US reinforcements arrive. And that takes time. To affect a quick cease-fire on terms favorable to them, the North might end up doing something as crazy as start smashing Seoul.

Situation calls for Old Painless.

"...the free world will conquer communism. With the aid of God, and a few Marines."
-Gunnery Sergeant Hartman

[Coito ergo sum]

The war would not be as big a deal as many have suggested. The bigger problem is the humanitarian crisis when the entire fragile infrastructure of the DPRK is shut down, and the ground forces of the DPRK decimated. Given the superior naval and air forces of the South and the US, giving air and sea superiority to the the ROK/US, there will be little the DPRK can do save try to hold out. Within a couple of weeks, all power in the DPRK would be down, all effective communications would be gone, and the chain of command would be severely threatened.

There will then be an immediate and growing problem of starvation and mass casualties on a scale we haven't seen since the Khmer Rouge and the communist North Vietnamese and their proxies after the fall of Saigon.

That's my guess, anyway.

If it's a full-scale war, it would be a very, very big deal. The ROK and the US have a huge advantage over the North in terms of quality of equipment, communications, logistics, etc. Their air forces and navies would rule the skies and seas by the 2nd day. But as a wise bastard once said, "Quantity has a quality all its own." The North's ground forces are massive, even if they're outmoded. And their artillery could reduce Seoul -a modern, global city of 12 million people- to rubble by the end of Day #1 of the war.

That I disagree with. But, it is all speculation. North Korea is no duck-walk like Saddam Hussein's army was, but there are some similarities. The first similarity is that the massive army you refer to are sitting out in the open. The ROK/US forces would have complete ownership of the skies, and the artillery positions and missile positions would be bombed from the air, and hit with missiles and bombardment from the sea.

I've already clarified my "big deal" language in a later post, and indicated that it was words that were not the best chosen. Yes, the war would be a big deal, but it would still be a lopsided engagement. The bigger deal would be the humanitarian nightmare after the destruction of the state controlling millions of malnourished and brainwashed people.

The North most likely cannot finish the war themselves. But the South and the US won't be able to push the North back beyond Pyongyang until huge US reinforcements arrive. And that takes time. To affect a quick cease-fire on terms favorable to them, the North might end up doing something as crazy as start smashing Seoul.

If they were to fire at Seoul, that would be a death sentence for Kim Jong Il. If they pull that trigger, the regime is gone. Period. It has to be. To settle on any terms under those circumstances is something that the US cannot afford. If Seoul is hit - the US will, I would put money on it, destroy Jong Il's palace.

We do not need to have 140,000 men in North Korea, and would not be stupid enough to do that. We would devastate the North Korean forces from the air and the sea. We would do that until Jong Il is dead, and/or there is unconditional surrender.

[Coito ergo sum]

The war would not be as big a deal as many have suggested. The bigger problem is the humanitarian crisis when the entire fragile infrastructure of the DPRK is shut down, and the ground forces of the DPRK decimated. Given the superior naval and air forces of the South and the US, giving air and sea superiority to the the ROK/US, there will be little the DPRK can do save try to hold out. Within a couple of weeks, all power in the DPRK would be down, all effective communications would be gone, and the chain of command would be severely threatened.

There will then be an immediate and growing problem of starvation and mass casualties on a scale we haven't seen since the Khmer Rouge and the communist North Vietnamese and their proxies after the fall of Saigon.

That's my guess, anyway.

If it's a full-scale war, it would be a very, very big deal. The ROK and the US have a huge advantage over the North in terms of quality of equipment, communications, logistics, etc. Their air forces and navies would rule the skies and seas by the 2nd day. But as a wise bastard once said, "Quantity has a quality all its own." The North's ground forces are massive, even if they're outmoded. And their artillery could reduce Seoul -a modern, global city of 12 million people- to rubble by the end of Day #1 of the war.

The North most likely cannot finish the war themselves. But the South and the US won't be able to push the North back beyond Pyongyang until huge US reinforcements arrive. And that takes time. To affect a quick cease-fire on terms favorable to them, the North might end up doing something as crazy as start smashing Seoul.

Situation calls for Old Painless.

And,



And, a little o' that:




And, some o' this:

[normal]

=(

[Ian]

The North most likely cannot finish the war themselves. But the South and the US won't be able to push the North back beyond Pyongyang until huge US reinforcements arrive. And that takes time. To affect a quick cease-fire on terms favorable to them, the North might end up doing something as crazy as start smashing Seoul.

If they were to fire at Seoul, that would be a death sentence for Kim Jong Il. If they pull that trigger, the regime is gone. Period. It has to be. To settle on any terms under those circumstances is something that the US cannot afford. If Seoul is hit - the US will, I would put money on it, destroy Jong Il's palace.

We do not need to have 140,000 men in North Korea, and would not be stupid enough to do that. We would devastate the North Korean forces from the air and the sea. We would do that until Jong Il is dead, and/or there is unconditional surrender.

If push comes to shove, Kim Jong-Il may only need to threaten to bombard Seoul. Like I said, the counterinvasion would take time. In the meantime, the Blue House would be desperate to keep casualties low and its economy intact. Hence suing for peace while under threat of destruction. Maybe this risk doesn't seem entirely rational for Pyongyang... but then again, neither does slamming a heavyweight torpedo into a small warship during peacetime.

As for how the North can be beaten into submission, you obviously haven't read OPLAN 5027. I have. The US & ROK ain't gonna win by virtue of ships and planes alone, take my word for it. We'll need to have boots on the ground - a lot of them.

[Coito ergo sum]

The North most likely cannot finish the war themselves. But the South and the US won't be able to push the North back beyond Pyongyang until huge US reinforcements arrive. And that takes time. To affect a quick cease-fire on terms favorable to them, the North might end up doing something as crazy as start smashing Seoul.

If they were to fire at Seoul, that would be a death sentence for Kim Jong Il. If they pull that trigger, the regime is gone. Period. It has to be. To settle on any terms under those circumstances is something that the US cannot afford. If Seoul is hit - the US will, I would put money on it, destroy Jong Il's palace.

We do not need to have 140,000 men in North Korea, and would not be stupid enough to do that. We would devastate the North Korean forces from the air and the sea. We would do that until Jong Il is dead, and/or there is unconditional surrender.

If push comes to shove, Kim Jong-Il may only need to threaten to bombard Seoul.

Yes, he can and does threaten to bombard Seoul. The stalemate there - the check - is the certainty that Jong Il knows that if he crosses that line, he's dead - personally. He and his whole family, and every top guy in his regime. Dead.

Like I said, the counterinvasion would take time.

Sure, it takes months to build up a ground invasion. It doesn't take months to sidle up a couple of aircraft carriers, and start launching Stealth Bombing runs around the clock from Wyoming and Diego Garcia, among other places.

In the meantime, the Blue House would be desperate to keep casualties low and its economy intact. Hence a capitulation to the threat of a bombardment.

They already threaten bombardment. But, there would be no capitulation to any ultimatum by the DPRK. That's why the DPRK always veils their threats in language like -- "if you do X, Y or Z, then we will bombard Seoul."

May this doesn't seem entirely rational... but then again neither does launching a heavyweight torpedo into the side of a small warship during a time of peace.

That was a ballsy move. I think Jong Il must have calculated that he could either have plausible deniability, or that it would not be enough of an act of war to make Obama move militarily. The ROK simply can't act without US backing because the North could, without the US involved, have a good likelihood of taking the South. The North's army is just massive compared to the south. So, the ROK must follow Obama's instructions.

You obviously haven't read OPLAN 5027. I have. The US & ROK ain't gonna win by virtue of ships and planes alone, take my word for it.

I said they would soften the north up, take out its command, control, communications and supply, and devastate any large masses of troops that the DPRK attempts to move, while taking out major artillery and missile emplacements. We wouldn't move ground forces in until the North had been depleted and softened. We have a capability we did not have in 1951 - complete air superiority and complete naval superiority. That is a huge difference.

Regarding the DPRK's ability to threaten Seoul and maintain a presence beneath the DMZ, the OPLAN says, "the DPRK's ability to sustain these offensive operations, or advance its forces further to the south, is questionable.South Korean and American air forces could quickly establish air supremacy and destroy North Korean ground forces."

And,

"Pyongyang has the ability to start a new Korean War, but not to survive one."

Regarding the length of time to buildup, note:

"In late 2003 it was reported ["Military Alters Plans For Possible Conflicts" By Bradley Graham Washington Post November 18, 2003, pg. 18] that " ... the new plans would allow the United States to respond without waiting for as many ground forces to arrive, by substituting air power for artillery and getting such critical equipment as counter-battery radars -- for pinpointing enemy mortar and artillery fire -- on scene ahead of the rest of their divisions. The resulting force might not be as "elegant" as planners would like, but "it will certainly be capable... ""

Over the last several years, there has been a shift toward the use of air power to take out the DPRK's capabilities, and also to provide more missile defense to the ROK.

The deterrent to an invasion by the north is Jong Il knowing that whatever happens to Korea, he and his regime won't be a part of it. Certainly, they have the capacity to inflict a lot of damage on the South. They have a million man army, armed to the teeth. The main disadvantages they have though are (a) they are no match for the US/ROK air and sea power, (b) they do not have the supplies necessary to sustain a conflict very long, especially under constant air and sea bombardment, and especially after Command, Control and Communications are taken out from above. (c) they haven't fought a war in a long time, (d) their fighters would get knocked down in a heartbeat by our F-22's (assuming they're not all mothballed by Obama before they get the chance) - basically, their whole air force is mostly obsolete Russian and Chinese stuff. (e) their navy is basically a green water navy that, while fairly numerous, is also out of date and of limited range..

[Ian]

Your reasoning is perfectly logical. But that's the problem - You're putting yourself in Kim Jong-Il's shoes, and figuring out how you would best survive. But you are not Kim Jong-Il. You're more reasonable, and have a different perception from him. It's called the mirror-imaging fallacy.

As for the details of the OPLAN, yes the US and ROK would cause huge casualties to North Korean ground forces in the opening stages. But that isn't what the South wants. In the event of war, it wants 1) to sustain a minimum level of damage to itself, and 2) to counterinvade and remove Kim's government. Unfortunately, that's more than a basic strategy, those are its priorities. In order to achieve #2, it has to risk #1. It may not be willing to do so while it waits around for more US troops to arrive. Meanwhile, the US simply cannot count on its bombers to win the war. It can't be done without ground forces. It just can't. The delay between the opening stages and the next stage of counterinvasion may be too much for Seoul to deal with.