U.S. aircraft carrier's arrival off Korean peninsula also sends a message to China.

Discussion in 'Academy/Military News' started by bruno, Nov 27, 2010.

  1. bruno

    bruno Retired Staff Member

    Joined:
    Feb 2, 2008
    Messages:
    3,001
    Likes Received:
    301
    http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dy...1/24/AR2010112407028.html?sid=ST2010112302868

    This is perhaps the biggest conundrum the United States and its Allies has to face today. The North Koreans with their nukes are truly an existential threat to a close American military and economic partner- yet what to do in response to the North Korean attack on South Korea? The South Koreans have to lead here but short of a full out war with the huge costs and casualties inherent in that option- what can be done to North Korea if the Chinese choose to do nothing? Clearly the North is not deterred by the prospect of the George Washington Task force as they are still firing their Artillery (link below).


    http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2010/11/26/AR2010112605902.html?
     
  2. luckymacy

    luckymacy Member

    Joined:
    Nov 10, 2010
    Messages:
    291
    Likes Received:
    0
    I've been watching events too. It's hopeless? American leadership is scared crap by china and the south is scared to death about the north - no doubt they can and will fight much harder and more capably than in the past when pushed. China I think actually enjoys the tension and economic and political drain on the south by the north. No love lost there and China knows it has the upper hand everywhere now.

    All this draws attention away from China eventually finding the guts themselves to 'reunite' Taiwan with the mainland. I think once our Wal-Mart type dollars finally fund enough indigenous military stealth technology within China, Taiwan’s days are numbered. When will we ever not be spread too thin to really stop them conventionally?

    This is only a pregame warm up to how scared and timid we're all going to react once Iran and others like her also get nuclear weapons and an effective means of delivering them. I think Israelis are going to become over the top schizoid ten years from now. We probably will be in 20. Even the rich Saudi's who can't stand Iran can't do anything about that part of the world. Yikes.

    Future is going to be one scary *** place and a military career is going to continue to be pretty 'exciting' if not frustrating.
     
  3. futureAFA

    futureAFA Member

    Joined:
    May 14, 2010
    Messages:
    272
    Likes Received:
    0
    Maybe, but in my opinion there won’t be a major conventional war, nor will there be any country nuking another country. I think weapons are too powerful and accurate to have another war like WW2, Korea, or Vietnam.
     
  4. bruno

    bruno Retired Staff Member

    Joined:
    Feb 2, 2008
    Messages:
    3,001
    Likes Received:
    301
    I agree FutureAFA- there is not likely to be a conventional war. That is however exactly why this is such a problem. North Korea possesses a nuclear arsenal and a strong and entrenched military establishment 45 minutes north of the Seoul metropolitan area which means that There are very few options to dealing with North Korea. And yet- No sovereign country can stand bye and watch it's citizens killed by the deliberate military actions of another - which has happened twice now this year- and this time the casualties are civilians. So what is South Korea to do and what does the US do? Jimmy Carter was in the Post the other day saying essentially that the North Koreans have been perfectly consistent and it's the US that is the root cause of the problem here. I think that Jimmy Carter has been consistently wrong about many things and especially about North Korea- but I don't profess to know what we or the South Koreans can or should do here.
     
  5. LineInTheSand

    LineInTheSand USCGA 2006

    Joined:
    Nov 25, 2007
    Messages:
    8,756
    Likes Received:
    1,005
    I'll take 1 B-52 over 10,000 North Koreans with guns any day of the week. Yes, South Korea would feel the wrath of art. rounds falling on their heads. And yes, we would lose U.S. military stationed in South Korea.

    I personally think it would be conventional warfare, and the bloodiest kind. North Korea wouldn't be dumb enough to use nuclear weapons.


    I fear this administration is more comfortable sticking its head in the sand, and I wasn't especially impressed by a State Department official saying it's time to have talks (after our ally is attacked)....of course I can't remember the last time an embassy or state department official impressed me either.
     
  6. futureAFA

    futureAFA Member

    Joined:
    May 14, 2010
    Messages:
    272
    Likes Received:
    0
    I think if it led to war, it would be a lot of artillery between N Korea and S Korea, and the US’s biggest role would be lots of special forces missions, because we can’t just go bombing North Korea until they give up, as much as it may be effective and fast. The ROE would not allow that, and the liberal media would hate it. North Korea and South Korea I also doubt will be involved in a war. Possibly just occasional bombings though.
     
  7. Maximus

    Maximus Member

    Joined:
    Jun 19, 2008
    Messages:
    1,484
    Likes Received:
    0
    From what I read, aren't the NK's just going to end up getting what they wanted in the first place? 6 or what ever multiple party talks thatb they want so bad? You know, the talks the evil GW told them to pound salt with?

    IMHO, I think Obama is just sending the "show of force" to appease his weak stance on the world and I'm sure next week he'll announce we have to sit down with NK and the other Nations.

    BTW, do I know what to do in this situation? Not a chance but I still say we don't give in to them with the multiple party talks, they are a rouge Nation.
     
  8. Maximus

    Maximus Member

    Joined:
    Jun 19, 2008
    Messages:
    1,484
    Likes Received:
    0
    That artillery would be landing on US positions and killing our men, we'd be slightly more involved than "Special Forces"
     
  9. bruno

    bruno Retired Staff Member

    Joined:
    Feb 2, 2008
    Messages:
    3,001
    Likes Received:
    301
    So what do you tell the South Korean Citizenry - that they should just learn to live with occasional outbreaks of North Korean acts of War? They just fired the SK Minister of Defense and Chief of Staff because the population was dissatisfied with the government's response to this act of war. The first function of government is to protect its citizens and its borders. How to do that without provoking a full up war is the dilemma.

    As far as the North Koreans- I would bet on nothing when it comes to them acting in a sane manner. The government there- despite the prognostications of Jimmy Carter et al, will not moderate because it is not in their interest to do so.(This is not a country where the leaders are confused about their well being compared to that of the general population). They do not calculate costs and benefits the way the west does and I frankly think that it is entirely possible that Nuke weapons are not just a theoretical possibility with them but a part of a very real list of possible scenarios that they have in their back pocket.
     
  10. futureAFA

    futureAFA Member

    Joined:
    May 14, 2010
    Messages:
    272
    Likes Received:
    0
    I just dont think we would be able to sustain a full on war against NK and in the middle east.
     
  11. hornetguy

    hornetguy USAFA Cadet

    Joined:
    Jun 9, 2006
    Messages:
    2,295
    Likes Received:
    129
    During the Clinton era, the military was designed to be able to maintain a full scale war in one region while holding against another adversary elsewhere. AKA, it was designed to fight a full scale war in East Europe while holding NK back until the Europe situation was resolved and forces could be diverted.
     
  12. jake s

    jake s USMA Cadet

    Joined:
    Sep 7, 2009
    Messages:
    325
    Likes Received:
    0
    If North Korea and South Korea went toe to toe:

    It'd be very interesting times for the 28,000 U.S. soldiers in South Korea. They'd help, yes of course. But how many more troops do we send? How many more troops will the American public allow? How much of the DPRK's armed forces could the South handle without more U.S. troops being sent?

    You can't just bomb North Korea back to the Stone Age, as Gen. LeMay suggested we do in Vietnam. They've had too much time to dig in, especially around the DMZ. If you look at the mountains/cliffs of North Korea, you'll notice that some of the lines are a little too straight to be natural.

    I really don't think nukes will go flying. The North knows that if they launched/detonated first, China would stand by while the U.S. made Pyongyang glow in the dark.

    Also, if the big one came within the near future, how would the North handle it from a leadership stand point? Kim Jong-Il's health is failing, and a power transfer has begun to give control of the country to Kim Jong-Un. They recently made Kim Jong-Un a four-star general. Do you want your country's commander in chief to be a 26 year old hot shot when you'll be facing the pointy end of the spear of the ROK and the U.S.?

    Oh, and another thing. How do you get all of the U.S. Armed Forces' dependents off of the Korean Penninsula? Do you evacuate them to Japan or possibly Guam? How long would it take to transport all of the dependents?
     
  13. LineInTheSand

    LineInTheSand USCGA 2006

    Joined:
    Nov 25, 2007
    Messages:
    8,756
    Likes Received:
    1,005
    I wonder what a number of European countries would have to say about it, say, up until the outbreak of WWII.


    Maybe war is unavoidable.
     
    Last edited: Nov 27, 2010
  14. hornetguy

    hornetguy USAFA Cadet

    Joined:
    Jun 9, 2006
    Messages:
    2,295
    Likes Received:
    129
    I will say without a doubt troops will be en route immediately in the event of an attack. No one will give a damn about public reaction, you can't let 28,000 service men and women be cannon fodder while you try to evac them and you can't just let them defend against a million NK soldiers. No one would forgive any hesitation to watch out for the lives of those soldiers. As many troops will go as are needed to protect our own and our ally.

    As far as dependents. I don't know the Army side, but it's a remote tour for AF. Dependents don't go with those deployed to Kunsan and Osan.

    As far as bombing. Just watch how many missiles launch via sub, ship, aircraft, and land based. Anything not way under ground will be leveled most likely (militarily). And anything buried that we know about will have some bunker busters knocking at the door.

    Just my thoughts.
     
  15. futureAFA

    futureAFA Member

    Joined:
    May 14, 2010
    Messages:
    272
    Likes Received:
    0
    But I still doubt there will be any major war. NK knows if they start something major they won’t last long, and if they do a few bombs on SK but don’t go near US bases,we won’t be involved.
     
  16. jake s

    jake s USMA Cadet

    Joined:
    Sep 7, 2009
    Messages:
    325
    Likes Received:
    0
    After researching the issue further, the number one deterrent in the minds of the ROK government is that Seoul is close enough to North Korea to where it would sustain major damage from artillery before any large operations could take place. That's 19 million South Korean citizens in the line of fire. To compare, the entire North Korean population is around 24 million.
     
  17. jake s

    jake s USMA Cadet

    Joined:
    Sep 7, 2009
    Messages:
    325
    Likes Received:
    0
    tpg,

    I heard something very interesting today. What if, theoretically, China pulled their support for North Korea if a "war" broke out, with the mandate that once there was a united Korea all U.S. troops would leave the Korean Penninsula? China wouldn't have U.S. troops so close to their borders and a unified Korea (a few decades later, because unification would be an economic and political nightmare) would be a sword pointed at Japan.


    This paints a very broad stroke of the current situation, but what are your thoughts along these lines? In your opinion, what would China do if North Korea decided to take the ROK/U.S. to war?
     
  18. flieger83

    flieger83 Super Moderator Moderator

    Joined:
    Jul 26, 2008
    Messages:
    2,852
    Likes Received:
    343
    While speculation is fun...folks that have sat alert for the "Korean situation" are well aware of the "OPLAN" for what would theoretically happen should something occur.

    I have done this. I do NOT believe ANYTHING will happen; this in NK being bellicose, that's how they "extort" Western aid from us and others: sound ugly, act ugly, get millions of US dollars to be quiet.

    And that's how the world likes it.

    To discuss the OPLAN for ROK...besides the fact it's HIGHLY classified...well...that sorta says it all.

    You would NOT like it...the world would not like it.

    So...speculate all you will but realize this is saber rattling.

    IMHO.

    Steve
    USAFA ALO
    USAFA '83
     
  19. Bullet

    Bullet Member

    Joined:
    Jan 9, 2008
    Messages:
    994
    Likes Received:
    99
    Twoop, Steve.

    Been there, done that (prepped for the Korean O-Plan). NOT a pretty situation, and the devastation, to both sides, would be a rude reminder to the world just how horrifying war on this scale could be.

    Two things have kept the peace over the past few decades: N Korea's threat to Seoul (which has a population closer to 24 million if you count the outer suburbs, which are also in N Korean artillery range), and the US presence on the peninsula, which are unfortunately there to suffer mass casualties to ensure America would respond if N. Korea attacks (in fact, our troop reduction and movement away from the DMZ a few years back made S. Korea VERY nervous on our level of commitment to defending them).

    These two factors haven't changed (much), and have been an effective deterrent towards preventing full scale conflict on the peninsula. What also hasn't changed is Pyongyang's use of sabre-rattling to force the South (and US) to give them concessions. In this case, I think they are looking for the multi-lateral talks to resume (as Mongo pointed out), and are also probably looking for more food and technology shipments from the South.

    It's worked before (multiple times), so why should N. Korea NOT think it would work again?

    And to correct an earlier point from Hornet, while it is correct that the majority of the troops there are manning remote tours (one year tour, no dependents), I think about 1/4 of them are manning two year tours, with dependents on the peninsula with them, particularly at Osan AB. So, when would I start getting nervous? When I see us execute the plans for evacuating those dependents out of harm's way (massive airlift out of Korea, and remember those cargo birds would also be bringing reinforcements and supplies INTO Korea on the trips into country at the same time).

    For now, my impression is our government is making a very visible statement to Pyongyang: "we are no longer just going to roll over and give you whatever you want every time you start acting up. THIS time, we'll ratchet up the rhetoric as well." Risky maneuver, hope it works out (and I expect it will).
     
  20. sg1fan93

    sg1fan93 Member

    Joined:
    Nov 4, 2010
    Messages:
    191
    Likes Received:
    0
    Interesting article

    http://www.sublimeoblivion.com/2010/03/28/korean-war-2/

    just something I came across upon a while back while researching about a second war with NK. Pretty long, and I dont agree with everything said but nonetheless it still gives a numbered anaylsis of what would happen if war came.
     

Share This Page