There are so many variables. I've just read a piece by a USAF pilot who thinks we'll finish it all in two hours. I hope he's right, but the Greeks taught us the dangers of hubris.

All of the planning that has gone into this thing makes me think that for every measure there is a countermeasure and a counter-countermeasure ad nauseum. How much do the NKs know about our capabilities? What kinds of countermeasures have they taken at the strategic, operational, and tactical levels? To what degree is our firepower going to be so overwhelming that even the NKs can stand against it, and to what degree will our firepower be neutralized by imaginative and/or effective countermeasures? I honestly don't know the answers. In the mid-90's, I might have said I had a loose grasp on what was going on in Korea. Now, I just don't have any current information.

What I do know is that I am very, very wary of accepting the idea that we would destroy the DPRK's ability to wage war in the space of a few hours. That just seems too good to be true. It also implies that the NKs haven't thought this thing through. Comparisons between Iraq and North Korea have at least as many entries in the unlike column as the alike column.

Hopefully, it's all just posturing. Hopefully, something won't go terribly wrong somewhere as everyone runs around playing their part during the posturing.

Webstral

The Watchcon went to 2 when Kim Il-Sung died and Kim Jong-Il took over. We were worried and closely monitoring the situation in North Korea for about a month. We were ready to go at any moment. That managed to resolve itself; hopefully this will too.

Apologies if someone has already linked to this
http://www.washingtonspeakers.com/pr...Game.07.05.pdf

It's a report on a wargame/brainstorming session held in 2005 by "The Atlantic" magazine. The results (and opinions) make interesting reading. Incidentally, the pdf also mentions a 1961 treaty that - if NK is invaded - obliges China to commit troops in support of North Korea.

What I like about the paper Matt linked us to is the idea that war in Korea is not simply a matter of dropping some, or a slew, of precision munitions on NK conventional forces as they strike south across the DMZ. It's not even about firing a ton of cruise missiles and other precision munitions at targets in the PDRK to wreck the North Korean ability to wage war. Even if we achieve a smashing conventional victory in defeating Northern aggression against the South, we are confronted with the North's possible NBC actions, possible ongoing infiltration and sabotage, possible attacks on shipping by NK submarines, and the ongoing existence of the regime. If the loss of a conventional war in Korea leads to the collapse of the Kim regime, the crisis takes on a whole new dimension that is not amenable to solution by JDAM. If Iraq and Afghanistan have shown us anything, it's that we can't skimp on occupation forces. Where are a half-million (or more) riflemen supposed to come from? I'm past the point where I'm going to volunteer for a year of peacekeeping in Korea, and I'm too old to be drafted.

Not all problems can be solved with high explosives.

Webstral

hehe
 

:D
or they are incredibly optimistic - I mean - come on...relocate to sunny North Korea ???

LOL!

I second this
 

Firstly - these are just opinions that I want to share to see what others think of them - and since the thread is somewhat political - there is no intent to provoke etc etc .Just saying - giving my 2 cents ,I would be happy to read a reply that proves me wrong as I care not for any dictatorship,but as of late has concluded that the situation seems bleak for the good guys.

As it stands today - the US/ROK could not satisfactorily win a second Korean war .I will explain what I mean by "win" - but in essence what Web says - you might kill most of their troops,down their MIGs and get three major damage results to each T-55 they have .They will still need to be invaded and pacified at a cost geater than Iraq and other operations combined.there is little in the way of natural resources to help pay the bill .And drastic measures such as a draft AND/OR an enthusiastic coalition of allies with big contributions is needed.In todays economy this doesnt seem possible.

That USAF pilot who said it would all be over in a matter of hours cannot be expected to be taken seriously .

The NK forces has had over 50 years to dig in ,stock up and prepare for round two .Whereas the west and the UN lead coalition has tried to avoid the war sparking up again ( its not formally over ) and opted for a hope for peace ,the NK has thrived on the policy of tension -indeed their main rationale for keeping the elites in power over there has been the image they have created of the West as a dangerous and unthrustworthy enemy that needs to be guarded against at all times - lest "paradise" be lost .

A North Korea on the offensive in traditional terms is higly unlikely .There is little chance of hordes of NK troops crossing the DMZ .In the open , the allies have the upper hand.

To expose the army to the USAF and other branches airpower would be folly - the Norks know this , and in my opinion they have tailored their military to oppose the US and ROK forces in a defensive manner that is laid out in a way that the conflict will drag out and become a stalemate or war of attrition .
In a defensive battle , the relative superiority of the US/ROK/UN forces would be canceled out to some extent - I believe to the extent that it would in effect be a huge gamble to try a military solution with the NK.

A win will not be assured -even in terms of beating their military forces conventionally .( Wow- western militaries loosing a conventional all out war /or a draw - a situation unheard of for a long time .)

If they can achieve this protracted battle , the political situation in the ROK and the US will turn to their advantage and the war will simmer down and new talks will be held and the cease fire will once again take effect .

Only now , the North Koreans will have a galvanized populace behind them ,the leaders will have been proven right .

The tribulations that the sanctions and economic mismanagment has caused the civilians will not lead to popular uprising or regime change - they will only lead to continued suffering for the populace and strengthen the position of the Kims or the junta that will follow them once they are gone .

As for the Chinese intervening on "our " side - it is possible given the close economic ties between the West and China - but they face the exact same military problem at the nothern border and in its hinterland as the west does at the 38th parallell.The Norks have fortified this direction too - north of Pyongyang is a major fortified area etc .

Add into the equation that the Norks have the possibility to strike against international shipping lanes,possibly have wmds,that they have Seoul and 10 million South Koreans in range of their artillery, the fact that the US would need 12 months -probably much longer - to build up a force to overthrow the regime .

I dare say that the reason that they havent already been hit by us is the fact that it just isnt possible to win unless you get the world to accept millions of dead and major disturbances in global economy as a price.

all in my humble opinion of course .

adventure idea...(MERC)
 

enter the north north-korean jungles with one missile - and fire it away against the Nork elite - hopefully hitting the target. Any GM will probably say the elite was at a tea/torturing party at one of their slave-camps so the fight must move there.

Obstacles include loads of Norks in various combat effectivnes in jungle warfare, ending in a glorius stealth mission in one of the palaces of the Nork Elite. Ramafacations would include anything from global economic instability , increased oil prices to all out global war.

...puts ideas to my mind it does ;)

Well, the ROK Army could quite successfully repel an invasion by the North. Reunification is quite another matter -- the primary unifying force would have to come from the North Korean and South Korean people themselves, just as it did in Germany. You can't force democracy on anyone -- that pretty much goes against the very definition of democracy, and democracy won't take root unless the people of a country are ready for it and want it. That's something Bush and Cheney didn't bother to think about during their ill-conceived and unnecessary invasion of Iraq, and it won't work in Afghanistan either.

yes
 

I agree. The ROK could repel an invasion- at great cost to their nation .So my statements will only be true if the war takes another form .If the NK come screaming across the DMZ in force ,and the USAF and USN could respond quickly enough ,they would be slaughtered.
Reunification through force would be another matter .

The latest:

http://english.yonhapnews.co.kr/nati...05600315F.HTML

http://www.businessinsider.com/chine...he-curb-2010-5

For the moment, let's assume that the North Koreans have some understanding of what they are up against in terms of Allied (my term, for simplicity's sake) firepower. Let's assume that they either know they'll get their fourth points of contact kicked and therefore won't do much more than rattle sabers or that they have a game plan more nuanced than lining up their forces in neat rows on the MSRs to be pounded to hamburger and flaming ruin by the Allies. If I’m wrong, then the North Koreans are defeated in three days or less and everyone who thinks brute, albeit precision, fires will win the day can say they said so. If I’m right, we need to think about more than Tomahawks and F-16s lining up to hit the latest version of the Highway of Death.

If the North Koreans are just rattling their sabers a bit more vigorously than usual, we can go back to worrying about the economy in a little while. If there’s a different story, it may play out in a number of ways.

We don’t know a lot about what goes on inside North Korea. This lack of intelligence means that we don’t have a good grasp of power politics in the North. I’ve read that Kim Jong-Il is anxious about getting his son set up as the next leader. If there is a succession crisis brewing, a war is a wonderful way to unite the population—at least for the time being. A war of aggression may not be practical, but a defensive war—that’s gold. An escalation of incidents that leads to an Allied bombardment of the North could be just what the doctor ordered to get truculent but hard-to-replace Communists in line behind Kim’s son. Whether it’s a good idea or not is irrelevant. It’s about what the Dear Leader believes. As for provoking an Allied bombardment of the North, the People’s Democratic Republic has a wide variety of tools besides outright invasion of the ROK.

A series of escalating incidents, perhaps moving through the use of chemical weapons against the South, may provoke an Allied invasion of the North to put an end to the affair. In this arena, the Allies may find themselves hard-pressed. If Kim’s objective is to solidify his passing of the torch to his son, heroic defense of the homeland under the increasingly visible leadership of his son may fit the bill. Kim is a totalitarian dictator. He may be willing to countenance massive destruction and loss of life in his nation to secure his dynasty. I don’t know. I don’t know who knows, which is part of the problem.

Going forward, Kim may believe that massive casualties among the ROK populace and Allied troops may bring the Allies to the bargaining table when the northward offensive runs out of steam (assuming it runs out of steam). Maybe he’s right. Maybe he’s not. If he’s right, then he wins—despite whatever damage the PDRK suffers. If he’s wrong, then maybe he loses his head. Someone new takes control of the PDRK. Maybe the PDRK can’t be held together once the chocks have been knocked out. If it can, we’re stuck with an unknown in power in Pyongyang. If the PDRK collapses, the Allies are left holding the bag. There are many way for that to get quite ugly.

How much of this Kim has considered is hard for anyone to say. Ruthless dictators can be very tight-lipped about such things. How likely Kim considers any of the myriad of possible outcomes is also very difficult to say but absolutely crucial in predicting where all of this might be going.

Heck, it might not have anything to do with the Kim dynasty. Maybe the sub that fired on the ROK corvette didn’t mean to do it. Maybe Kim did mean it for some other purpose entirely. Maybe a replacement leader hopeful somewhere in North Korea ordered the action to discomfit the Dear Leader as part of the chess game at whose configuration we can only guess. Maybe Kim got bored. Maybe Kim is looking to leverage the West for more of something that he needs. So far, such a strategy doesn’t appear to be paying off, but that doesn’t mean the strategy can’t still pay off or that Kim hasn’t miscalculated badly.

I bring all of this up because an intelligent discussion of where the current crisis might go should move beyond the idea that the USAF and the USN (with its tomahawks) are going to pulverize the southward-bound NK Army on the roads and destroy critical targets and infrastructure with precision bombardment. If Kim is a complete fool, we’ve got him. If not, or if he listens to his generals, then he’s got something more nuanced than lining up his troops and facilities like ducks in a shooting gallery.

Simply put, North Korea has strengths. If the NKs have been paying attention to their Sun Tzu lessons, then they will try to maneuver the Allies into choosing between giving the North what it wants or forcing the Allies to operate in the North’s area of strength and not the other way around. Since we’re all more-or-less in agreement that a straightforward invasion of the ROK is untenable, let’s think of what else could be in the works.

Webstral

JFTR, North Korea continues to dig new tunnels daily. The Highway of Death Revisited is a pretty unlikely occurrence, IMO.

Like other nations, our intel might not be so good on the inside of his country, but his intel on the outside is fairly good. I'm sure he's realized that large masses of assets will make good targets.

That said, other than a two-hour briefing/lecture from MG Tucker that I mentioned in another thread, I don't have any more real answers than Web does.

Here are two other things that I haven't seen mentioned, or have I missed them.

the Norths Nukes. How many do they have? Will they use them? Most likely. That is a deterent and as we have seen in the last few years a chip that is used to blackmail aid and to wratchet up the brinkmanship, so they crank it up, extort aid and then return to the status quo.

China; in reguards of Immigration.

I have read reports that China has as big an immigration problem with N. Koreans fleeing their own country and sneaking into China as we here in the US have with the states on our Southern Border.

So, if there were a confligration I would imagine that alot of civilians from the North would pour into China from N. Korea. Can China handle such an influx when they are having economic troubles of their own? And would they stand for it? An unstable N. Korea where they would have to pour more aid into than they already are, with a population that is flooding their country and provinces and most likely wreaking havoc there. Would they either send in masses of troops to lock the border down? Or would they send forces into Korea to establish their own puppet leader, or aid the North?

We must also remember that in Asia the idea of "Face" is important. And has been the cause of some of the issues that the US has had with China in recent years, 2001 the colission of the Electronics Survielance plane and the Mig, the shadowing of US vessels by Chinese Submarines, the "lost" Chinese Submarines operating in Japanese waters.

Those are efforts of China to expand their sphere of influence. Since they are making efforts to expand their industrial capacity and their military capacity. After all, the US and its bases are a bit of a slap in the face to China, as we were the big dog in the area, and a loss of face.

So, how does "face" come into play with the Chinese in the event of hostilities between the two Koreas? Would they take direct action aiding the North? Move in on their own against the North? Take a truly passive stance? Take a semi passive stance against the North? Take a semi passive stance against Western Support and intervention of the South?

This is a good point. Waves of refugees would give China a fait accompli to invade N. Korea, perhaps just to create a "buffer" a few miles deep. Presumably, this would include the seizure of that port Matt mentioned.

Continuing on Webs thoughts
 

Again I underline that these are only my speculations...

I believe that internal politics in Pyongyang might be a factor that can escalate the situation too.In a play to manouver their faction to remain in power, war against outside powers is tried and tested.

What form it would take is hard to say - artillery exchanges and the retaliation war from the allies by sea and air could serve as a useful tool for the KIMs to galvanize support behind them and stay in power -even though the military suffer sa hammering from the allies.

The highway of death scenario has been thoroughly analyzed by NK - they will likely make only small sallies across the DMZ .Their main force will be spread out in an in depth defense north of the DMZ-hoping that this will lead to allied reluctance to see a war through .Ousting the regime by air is nigh on impossible imho.

After the dust settles and the bombardments are over the Kims are still in power and their grip still firm .

Their initial escalation will start much like the one we see now - agressive posturing ,incidents with loss of life and materiel and psy ops - this way they hope to coax the allies into "unfavourable political ( and geographical ) " terrain .Maybe sacrificing something like an airliner/cargoship that they sink themselves to have a tale for their propagandists to serve the world press etc.Assymetrial warfare type attacks are highly likely in a situation like this -indeed US soil and waters could be at risk of such.But this is ofcourse a knifes edge -it might lead to the US seeing no way out but winning outright at all costs.

I think there is a very real risk that this will occur in the next decade - as long as the Kims feel their power slipping .

But things could change - the US could get favourable results sooner rather than later in Stan and Iraq, and the economy could recover more rapidly than expected -leading to the odds for a coalition of Allies that actually will grit their teeth and see the war through rather than having to accept sort of a draw due to the enormous cost in life ousting the current regime will demand.Other factors would need to click into place as well of course .The NK populace might rise up and hope for outside intervention.

Distatseful as it may seem , propping up the regime until the Kims die off and a "new hand of leaders " is dealt might be the only alternative to a devastating war with hundreds of thousands dead -or indeed millions...

As for the "shooting range war" that some envision ,where the NK forces are eliminated enmasse by airpower alone seems highly unlikely .The massive columns that advanced on Baghdad would be the ideal scenario for the NK forces - provided their gamble onallied public support faltering holds water.

Just one guys opinion .

Wish I could see other options to get rid of the regime and liberate the people of NK .I think conventional war to topple it would entail battles on pair with the Korean War of 50-53 or possibly the second world war in terms of feriocity.

Not very optmistic prospects then from the Northern Branch of Twilighters United.

I had to login to move a thread from the archive and this thread caught my eye. I have lived in South Korea for about a quarter of the last five years, so this subject is obviously very important to me.

Some points. The South Koreans view the populace of the North as cousins held hostage. Everyone I have talked to desires reunification despite the monetary cost. The cost in blood is where people differ how reunification should be achieved.

Regarding manpower necessary to occupy the North, the ROK has a very capable army and massive reserves. As I mentioned above the motivation to unify is strong and I expect for at least a year all South Koreans (who are very duty bound) would make the sacrifices necessary.

Going into a little depth in to the duty they have towards their countrymen, I will tell you of one of the expectation of their hospitals. If someone is in long term recovery a family member is expected to come into the hospital and perform many of the duties that nurses would normally handle. If a person does not have a relative to help them, the family members of the other people in the room (their were 8 in the case I saw) will pull together to assist that person. It is not considered an annoyance, inconvenience, or hardship it is just their duty.

I have an anecdote about the brainwashing of the North Korean populace as well. While I was in Korea I happened to see a documentary about a North Korean woman who built a raft and floated something like 20km to the South. She was a 20 something widow with two children. From what I gathered she lived a simple agrarian life made much harder by the death of her husband. It was so hard in fact that while she worked in the market she would send her 3 and 5 year old children to look around the area of the market where rice was traded to pick up individual grains of rice which had escaped the bags.

Her five year old child was getting ill and she took him to the doctor. The doctors told her that he had leukemia and simply was going to die. They even went so far as to suggest that she give more of her meager food supply to the three year old since the five year old was a lost cause.

This woman, who in my mind seems to represent the average population, knew that the lives of her children would be better in the South. All that it took for her to overcome the fear she had of the consequences of an attempted escape was the pending death of one of her children. If you remove that fear I feel a vast majority of the North Korean population will be ecstatic about reunification.

To finish this post on a happy note the North Korean woman arrived safely and her son was successfully treated. She has a job and the last scene in the documentary showed them preparing for a substantial meal while the boy, now 8, was playing an X-box.

So what you're saying is, capitalism can cure leukemia!

Or perhaps he was indicating that things are a lot worse off in North Korea compared to South Korea and that the woman and her children's life is better in the South than in the North.

This whole Korea thing is kind of eerie as this is what T.R. and I came up with as the causal event that propelled the world towards our reworked "Twilight". It all depends on whether China works with or against North Korea as to whether our altered history ends up becoming a reality. Spooky.

In case you missed it, it was a joke.

:megawall:

Maybe the joke was lost in delivery! I missed it too, then again I tend to ignore........

You know, in light of our past, I can't really tell if that was supposed to be humorous or if it was another jab at me.

If I put someone on the ignore list, their posts don't even show up on my screen, correct?

Just your friendly neighborhood moderator popping in to remind everyone to play nice.

Kato, your reference to cultural values is a timely one. While I would expect the ROK to provide a large body of troops, I wouldn't have expected the ROK to be willing to foot the entire bill for 500,000 troops to occupy the North for 3-5 years. You are suggesting perhaps they would be willing to do so due to their emotional bonds with their captured cousins. Very interesting...

Webstral

brainwashed Norks
 

Well - as kato says there are many reasons that Koreans would be motivated for a reunification ,on either side of the Bamboo Curtain.

However - a huge number of people will still be in the category of "hard core" regime supporters.Certainly enough to make any attempted intervention or stirring of the situation a messy business.

I thought it might be, but since there were no smilies, no winks or anything else, I wasn't quite sure. Simple text tends not to convey humor without assistance. No worries from me, though. :)

No worries. I figured the ridiculousness of capitalism curing cancer would be enough of a clue. I tend to overuse smilies or not use enough, I never seem to get it just right.

Ironically, it probably will be capitalism that cures leukemia, in a way -- if it's profitable enough, some corporate executive will figure out a way to do it.

Yeah, but then we totally derail this thread with the eternal, profits from the cure vice profits from the continued treatment debate.

We should probably leave it at a bad attempt at a joke from me and let the thread get back to the North Korea vs. South Korea debate.

:o

Yes go to the User CP link on the far left of the blue bar.

Then click "Edit Ignore List"

Type in the name of the person you wish to ignore and click "Okay"

you will then see "This message is hidden because XXXXXX is on your ignore list."


Some notes:
* Threads will still show updates even if the only post is someone on your ignore list.

* You are not able to put Myself or any of the Moderators on ignore.


Going back to Leukemia, certain types do have up to an 90% successful treatment rates (in advanced countries).

From what I have seen virtually all the animosity the ROK has for the North is directed at the highest echelon. Even the North Korean line soldiers are viewed with pity by the civilian populace. However that may change once shells land in Seoul and face to face combat begins.

If the ROK went it alone on occupying the North after reunification it would have a much lower media profile, making it a lot easier to get the job done, if they were facing guerilla resistance.

That's if there was any continued resistance -- communism seems much more effective at producing fanatically devoted insurgents among those whose experience with it is mostly fantasy rather than those who spend time living under communist regimes. Probably because the reality sucks so hard and because, unlike religion, communism is exclusively grounded in the here and now.

WAR
 

this sympathy might lessen the combat efficiency of the ROK units ?

I believe that the war of 50-53 -where both sides at one point beat the other side back and took their capital ( pretty interesting in terms of war as history study ) - showed that there was plenty animosity between the regular folk.A lot was to do with the hard core groups that roamed the lines like death squads taking care of "untrustworthy" individuals on either side .The executions and atrocities commited by these did a lot to infuriate the populace against eachother both sides had their own -also propaganda was harsh on both sides.

But I certainly agree that I would pity any countryman trapped in the NK regime ,and wish for a reunification to help them out -and given the altuistic sense of duty to nation that the Koreans have accordingto kato - the sense of kinship can be a major factor in the outcome.

Interesting article in today's Times...

http://www.timesonline.co.uk/tol/com...cle7140609.ece

Actually more like Capitalism will create Wealthy people and some of them will be altruistic, and or just interested in the tax breaks that they will get. Either way Donations will go to a group that will likely fund this research.

::begin rant::
Capitalism is not evil or bad. People are Evil or bad. There are plenty of evil people in "Socialist Utopian society's". ;) Such as "Smiling Uncle Joe" Stalin, Pol Pot, Adolf Hitler (yes he used Socialism to advance his Plan of a Utopia), Fidel Castro, Hugo Chávez, Mao Zedong, Etc... ;) Sure are/were allot of lower class people, and very few rich in these societies.

Its easier to work against an evil capitalist then it is to work against an evil Government.

Greed in a capitalist society creates wealth. The greedy want more, so they invest to create wealth generating enterprises, and they get more money in return for a good investment. A poor investment, leads to loss.

Greed in a non capitalist society tends to just make a very few filthy rich, and very little if no regular rich or generally wealthy people. Just taking money from the rich does not create wealth. It is just forced redistribution.

In a non capitalistic society, there will be less wealthy to do this sort of thing. The governments will not do it unless they see some sort of benefit out of it either.
And no one like to have to do anything they are told they have to do. Its human nature. You will get a whole lot more cooperation with a kind word and a reward, then a threat. (most of the time anyway)

The filthy rich will always be the filthy rich. Some will die and give their wealth to their spoiled offspring, other will die and give it all to charity, and others will do a combination of those in varying degrees.

Heck one of those rich might develop some of those afflictions and be very generous donations in order to help find a cure.
::end rant::

It takes all kinds. :D

See my last post. Actually a capitalist based economy will more likely to be the environment were it will be found. Though that's just one mans opinion. :)

It would be the end of NK.

Ditto, what he said.

I don't doubt that. I never doubted that. I was being a smartass about the Xbox comment. It struck me humorous that the information Kato provided ended with a boy playing an Xbox. All that seriousness and drama to end with an Xbox.

I have nothing against capitalism. I'm from America and two of my bachelors are in business. I epitomize a capitalist. I fully understand the advances that competition spurs historically.

I will try to refrain from making smartassed remarks anymore as nine times out of ten around here they are misunderstood.

Ahh, LOL No problem. :D, I did see it out of context.

You know I just realized what this new generation should be called.

"Generation Xbox" :P

Plus, where would Mom get spare parts for her Hyundai? :D

Seriously, this would be a huge mess indeed. I have an interest in following the two Koreas, my father was stationed at Camp Casey in 1955/56 and my Uncle Chuck was a paratrooper for the 101st in the Korean War.

Chuck

P.S. As to car parts, there are third party vendors.