Armchair General and HistoryNet >> The Best Forums in History

Armchair General and HistoryNet >> The Best Forums in History (http://www.armchairgeneral.com/forums/index.php)
-   North Korea (http://www.armchairgeneral.com/forums/forumdisplay.php?f=274)
-   -   War: North Korea vs. U.S. (and South Korea)? (http://www.armchairgeneral.com/forums/showthread.php?t=177018)

EastFront 14 Apr 17 11:27

War: North Korea vs. U.S. (and South Korea)?
 
Please state what you think a war with North Korea against the U.S. (and by necessity its partner South Korea) would look like. Should be fascinating reading & debate. :banana:

Please give your ideas on as many of these as possible:

1. WHERE: Would the most likely points-of-attack be?

2. WHEN: Would it most likely happen?

3. WEAPONS: What types would be used?

4. SOLDIERS: How many from each country & where?

5. COUNTER ATTACKS: Where and with which weapons?

6. CHINA: How would they react?

7. OTHER COUNTRIES: Which ones would get involved, and how?

Thanks.

Escape2Victory 14 Apr 17 17:31

Trouble with a question like this is it means people will by dying. People here may know servicemen stationed there or in any case may have concerns for them.

I see you are a new poster and we all make mistakes. I would advise a bit more sensitivity on these topics going forwards though.

lirelou 15 Apr 17 12:20

Points of Consideration that will guide the ROK position.
 
Korea is a coalition under a UN cover. The Commander of US Forces Korea is also the Commander of the US-Korean Combined Command, and the Commander of UN Forces Korea, which usually consists of the those foreign military attaches accredited to the UNC, who investigate incidents violating the Armistice, plus whatever small third country contingents that may be in theater for an exercise, or as part of the UN Honor Guard Company. (Aussies, Kiwis, and a few Thais and Filipinos in my time (2001-2007). Note: The US was considering rotating a Korean General through the Combined Cmmander post when I left.)

The ROKs have been reluctant to go to war not because they doubt the result, but because they presume the end game will mean a much damaged Korea on both sides of the DMZ, and a potentially hostile Korean population that would constitute one third of a reunified Korea, and the impact that absorbing that population would have upon modern Korea's standard of living in the post-war period.

Germany was fairly successful because East Germany only counted 17% of a reunified Germany, and had a fairly robust, if outdated, industrial infrastructure and economic base. North Korea has been an economic basket case for years, with very little industrial base to build from, just the opposite of their position in 1950. South Koreans live in one of the most technologically advanced nations in the world. Medical care there is on US levels. North Korea is run down and backwards outside Pyongyang, and their medical care outside Pyongyang is at third world poverty levels. Finally, living under communism has habituated the population to look to the government to made their life decisions. For instance, when you leave the Army, you don't necessarily go back to your home town. Yo go to where the government sends, which will be based on your military skills and the needs of their reserve forces. So yu can end up in a town you've never seen at the opposite end of North Korea. As of November 2007 (when I left) the majority of North Koreans who had defected to South Korea were experiencing many difficulties in the transition which made them resentful of the ROK and its go-getter workaholic culture.

So, there are many valid reasons the ROK side will argue for allowing more time for North Korea to collapse on their own, something that they have been waiting for since the famine of the early 90s.

Japan must also be taken into the equation. In 2007, six of the military bases we occupied in Japan were under authorization of a treaty between Japan and the United Nations, established to provide a base for supporting any future war in Korea. So, those bases and their surrounding population are likely targets for any North Korean missiles and Special Ops incursion, and Japan therefore will weigh in on whether we go to war or not. Denial of those bases to US Forces would seriously impact our operations in Korea.

Urban hermit 15 Apr 17 12:50

In order for N.K. to collapse, China will have to join the rest of the world in boycotting them economically.
But if NK does strike first, all bets are off.
We can not sit idly by while this madman lobs missiles toward Japan, SK and the US.

EastFront 16 Apr 17 12:52

This is not a Disneyland site, but rather Armchair General. It focuses on war. All the various angles of it. The good, the bad, and the ugly.

And in war people actually do get hurt, and yes, even killed.

Everyone here is well aware of that. It is not a big surprise.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Escape2Victory (Post 3351817)
Trouble with a question like this is it means people will by dying. People here may know servicemen stationed there or in any case may have concerns for them.

I see you are a new poster and we all make mistakes. I would advise a bit more sensitivity on these topics going forwards though.


Rojik 16 Apr 17 13:13

China is the key. If China stands back then it will be over very quickly. There will be a Götterdämmerung as NK fires off whatever the hell it has, but every flash will be met with a counter flash. Bad luck for the south, bad luck for the north, but better now than 5 years from now, when they might have the ability to nuke other parts of the world

EastFront 16 Apr 17 13:15

"lirelou": Great insight into the behind-the-scenes factors playing into the whole Korean conflict. I didn't know that the North "relocated" their servicemen after they leave the army.

However I was totally confused as to what you meant by "ROK".

You never say what it stands for, but use it at different times to point to both the North ("As of November 2007 (when I left) the majority of North Koreans who had defected to South Korea were experiencing many difficulties in the transition which made them resentful of the ROK and its go-getter workaholic culture."), and the South ("So, there are many valid reasons the ROK side will argue for allowing more time for North Korea to collapse on their own, something that they have been waiting for since the famine of the early 90s.").

But thanks again.

Rojik 16 Apr 17 13:24

Republic of Korea ie the South

EastFront 16 Apr 17 13:39

Quote:

Originally Posted by Urban hermit (Post 3352055)
In order for N.K. to collapse, China will have to join the rest of the world in boycotting them economically.
But if NK does strike first, all bets are off.
We can not sit idly by while this madman lobs missiles toward Japan, SK and the US.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Rojik (Post 3352358)
China is the key. If China stands back then it will be over very quickly. There will be a Götterdämmerung as NK fires off whatever the hell it has, but every flash will be met with a counter flash. Bad luck for the south, bad luck for the north, but better now than 5 years from now, when they might have the ability to nuke other parts of the world

Yes, I totally agree that China is the linchpin to this whole conflict. Their support for North Korea is the only reason that country has been so 'brave' and shrill in threatening its neighbors and the US with not only war, but 'total annihilation' for years.

If Trump can convince China not come to North Korea's rescue, then they can agree to 'split up North Korea'. The invasion would have the US & So. Korea come up from the south, and the Chinese from the north, to keep a 'buffer zone' between the two countries.

Similar to the 1939 pact made by Nazi Germany and the USSR regarding Poland, but without the fatal political hatred those 2 WWII countries had for each other.;)

Escape2Victory 16 Apr 17 14:34

Quote:

Originally Posted by EastFront (Post 3352352)
This is not a Disneyland site, but rather Armchair General. It focuses on war. All the various angles of it. The good, the bad, and the ugly.

And in war people actually do get hurt, and yes, even killed.

Everyone here is well aware of that. It is not a big surprise.

With a smiley face and dancing banana? Carry on like that and you will antagonise people. :thumbsdown: it was a crass post.

ljadw 16 Apr 17 16:10

The problem is that the collaps of NK will be a disaster: millions of fugitives going to ROK,which also will collaps and international help will be needed ,which is code language for : the US tax-payer will be robbed again and Elizabeth Warren will demand the immigratio to the US of 1 million North Koreans . Plaisant outlook . After the poor Syrians, the poor North Koreans.:nuts:

Mechashef 16 Apr 17 19:44

So is it likely that when we see footage Kim Jong-un watching his forces on parade, it is not actually him but is instead a look-alike?

He must have some concerns the US will wait until they know where he is and hit him with a missile, hoping the country won't go to war without Kim running it.

EastFront 17 Apr 17 02:27

Quote:

Originally Posted by Mechashef (Post 3352448)
So is it likely that when we see footage Kim Jong-un watching his forces on parade, it is not actually him but is instead a look-alike?

He must have some concerns the US will wait until they know where he is and hit him with a missile, hoping the country won't go to war without Kim running it.

Sure, I wouldn't be surprised to find out Kim uses a 'double' during his public appearances. But if he's assassinated that won't solve the problem at all. He's got a bunch of brothers and other cronies who could easily assume command and continue their family's reign of terror for decades to come. :mad:

No, there needs to be a way more far-reaching solution to this crisis. Unfortunately it will need to be an invasion by several countries, including South Korea. :salute:

EastFront 18 Apr 17 01:58

Quote:

Originally Posted by Escape2Victory (Post 3352391)
With a smiley face and dancing banana? Carry on like that and you will antagonise people. :thumbsdown: it was a crass post.

Please stop harassing me on here. I don't know how many others you have done this to, but I do not appreciate it.

We Armchair General members have the right to post and debate here freely without the abuse you have been showing. Please cease and desist.

BELGRAVE 18 Apr 17 07:17

Quote:

Originally Posted by EastFront (Post 3352764)
Please stop harassing me on here. I don't know how many others you have done this to, but I do not appreciate it.

We Armchair General members have the right to post and debate here freely without the abuse you have been showing. Please cease and desist.

It's not really "abuse",I think, but legitimate sensitivity and an expression of concern.
While agreed this is a forum primarily concerned with military matters it should never be forgotten that an end result of any conflict is misery, death and destruction.
Surely you must realise that gleefully decorating your iniitial posting with a dancing banana ,is rather akin to dancing on the graves of the victims:-should the war you happily seem to anticipate actually happen.
That said , I think that General Mattis is the key to US involvement. He ,more than any other, should be in the best position to judge North Korean real capabilities and intentions.


All times are GMT -4. The time now is 20:38.

Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.8 Beta 1
Copyright ©2000 - 2018, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.