1 Don't worry. This time, you have me!

2 Good for South Korea for finally standing up for themselves. If push comes to shove they need to be the ones leading the fight not the US. Let our military play a supporting and logistics role. Let the Koreans do the heavy lifting

3 I dropped a kimchi bomb on this Korean chick I was dating.  Yeah, she digged it.

4 I'm surprised every tin-medal dictator in the world isn't making a play.

5 Hillary to show up and hit the reset button any minute now?

No, no.  A basketball.  Use a basketball.

6 SK has as much punch as Obama will give them.  So they're basically fucked.

7 Ace would be a fearsome player of that board game RISK

8 If there were only some way to install BHO as the head of North Korea to collapse them from within.

9

Don't worry. This time, you have me!

Operation Skittle-Bomb!

10 But what about the Black Koreans? Like Heinz Ward?

11

That's about the same as "stern condemnation" from Hillary, right?

 

12 fire up the criminal complaint machine....boys.

Denounce yourself, or face arrest.

13 I'm like the Ben Rothlisraper of the US Congress, bitches!1!!!1!! I love me some Heinz Ward!1!!11!11

14 I would have thought artillery fire would have been sufficient to have drawn a response. Why do they need to do it again?

15 Margaret Cho is parachuting in to help as we speak!

16 Are 'air strikes' anything like 'air guitar'?

17 Why do they need to do it again?

SoKo is only at the double-dog dare stage.  Just wait until they get to triple-dog dare.

18 No matter what happens, your right to a government-funded abortion will be secure.

19

Our 10 year warranty does not include parts stocked in South Korean warehouses that may get blown up or contaminated with radioactivity.

But I can get you some AWESOME deals!  What can I do to put you in this car TODAY?

20 I wonder if Kim Jung Il wears a condom in his condominium.

21

I don't know how much punch South Korea has -- anyone who does, please put me some information.

Jebus! You've never had Kimchi breathed in your face.

22 Are 'air strikes' anything like 'air guitar'?

I thought that was 'air-bowling'?

23 We should pull out of South Korea immediately.  They're wealthy enough to pay for their own defense.

South Korea is not an ally in any meaningful sense; anti-American sentiment is rampant there.

24

This is for domestic consumption. The previous defense minister resigned after the last incident so obviously the man replacing him must appear hardline on this issue.

I highly doubt they would actually use airforce to attack north korea.

25 If I'd worn a condominium I'd be King today.

26 A frightened world turns its meth-addled eyes to you, Madeleine Albright and your Steve Ray Vaughan hat.

27 I think the North Koreans may fold as fast as Saddam's Super Duper Elite Killer Ninja Republican Guard when push comes to airstrike.

I hate that we have up to 28,000 American hostages standing there that kinda depend on how big the Sorks's balls are. The ROK  soldiers are as tough as they come, but it's all about the leadership.

I do think that the Sorks will have a big 5th Column problem should a shooting war break out. Lots of surrender-monkey protests in South Korea whenever anything happens. Too many young punks don't mind the commies, just like here in America.

Would love to see China roll in from the north and topple Dear Leader and set up a more stable puppet.

28 Is that an airstrike-airstrike?

29 Hey guys, this is just a little saber rattling for fun, right?  You're not going to use any actual weapons are you?  Cause I'm down for the struggle as long as you don't really mean it, ok.  Let's not get all wee wee'd up over a few artillary shells, ok?  Some say that the Norks deserve what they've got coming to them.  I say unless they are actively participating in the Tea Party Movement or work for Fox News or Right Wing Talk Radio, we need to let cooler heads prevail.  Hey guys....

30 Looks like I picked the wrong week to quit dating arsenic-based Korean Swedes.

31 More background here from StrategyPage. I worry that the Nork leaders are clueless about the dynamics in a democratic - especially the fact that once the people there get aroused, there's a certain amount of momentum that can't be stopped on a dime.

32

The Norks won't use their nukes on Seoul.  They don't want to contaminate the crown jewel of the peninsula they seek to conquer.

They'll use them on Tokyo and sneak them into the harbor at Long Beach.

That's why a pre-emptive strike on Yongbyon is worth the risk.

33

We should pull out of South Korea immediately.  They're wealthy enough to pay for their own defense.

Yeah, let's shit on our treaty commitments.

That will make the world safer.

34 Why do they need to do it again?

I'd guess they expected some backup from someone they didn't get it from. So the message isn't aimed at the Norks (who don't do messages anyway). "Fine, we'll handle this. You sure you don't want to jump in? Sure-sure? Really?"

Good times.

35 Some steel rain on the North troops might change their minds.  It's not the best way to die. 

36

"After, After, After Mash."

That's what I'm talking about.

37 Much like the democrats in the last election, South Korea doesn't need to worry about anything.  They've got ME!!

38 Way past time for North Korea to be defanged.

39 This is for domestic consumption. The previous defense minister resigned after the last incident so obviously the man replacing him must appear hardline on this issue. I'll get back to you on this.

40 Why didn't we think of that? If only we could practice Swedish justice!1!!1!11

41 Am I healing, yet?

42

I'd guess they expected some backup from someone they didn't get it from. So the message isn't aimed at the Norks (who don't do messages anyway). "Fine, we'll handle this. You sure you don't want to jump in? Sure-sure? Really?"

Good times.

Posted by: oblig.

Surely you aren't referring to the great and powerful O?  PS Sorry I called you surely.

43

Time to apply a couple of shitloads of smart diplomacy. So with Zero and his crab lice in charge, I'd say we're fucked.

44 The real target audience is Hu Jin-tao.  Rein in your rabid pet lunatic, dude.

45 "South Korea is not an ally in any meaningful sense; anti-American sentiment is rampant there."
Posted by: sandy burger at December 03, 2010 04:26 PM (twiRb)

This might be the real Sandy Burger; it is certainly stupid enough to fit the bill.

46 Here is what wikipedia has for the South Korean airforce. I didn't see heavy bombers or significant helicopters.

47

Chicago Boyz has an interesting PsyOps idea for N. Korea:

http://tinyurl.com/2wurt6l

48

'You mean sinking one of your ships wasn't enough? I fart in your general direction.' - Kim

49 Don't worry. Korea has ninjas!

50 More background here from StrategyPage. I worry that the Nork leaders are clueless about the dynamics in a democratic - especially the fact that once the people there get aroused, there's a certain amount of momentum that can't be stopped on a dime.

Posted by: Mætenloch

 

Dunno. There's a reason that NK attacked an island, rather than the mainland. And they are bitching about military exercises. I'm sure that there are enough idiots who will mangle the definition of proportionate response is SK shelled NK proper, if that island is again attacked. And remember that this cycle started when they sank a warship (itself an act of war), and nobody bit then. This has been spooling up for months.

51

Actual, like real-world balls-out action to stop a bully?

Bwahhahhaahhhhaaaaaaa!!!!11!!!!!11eleventy!!!11!!!

52 18 Margaret Cho is parachuting in to help as we speak!

...wait, that was supposed to be a parachute we strapped on her...?

^{/looks out the hatch and waves bye-bye}

53 No problem with "lights-out" air raid drills in Nork land. They don't have any.

54

North Korea has a huge infantry based Army... and has been digging in for 50+ years...

S. Korea has a fairly modern Army, with pretty good armor, Helicopter, and Air assets...

Straight Fight?  S. Korea eventually wins... IF they can absorb the Civilian casualties the the NORKS will cause with emplaced artillery (at least until China yanks the NORK Leash)....

55

Yeah, let's shit on our treaty commitments.

That will make the world safer.

Our "defense welfare" to S. Korea and Europe has not made the world safer.  What it's done is produced large segments of the wealthy world with no sense of reality, who are perfectly content to allow events to spiral out of control, and blame America for trying to contain the damage.

56 So if there is another Korean War, what will they call the TV show? S*M*A*S*H?

57  Read that the artillery barrage between  North and South would be equivalent to  what we would have seen if Russia had invaded West Germany.

Not healthy for children and flowers and hippy shit if that happens.

58

Let's send Jesse Jackson & Jimmy Carter over to negotiate with Kim Jong Mentally Ill.

THEN carpet bomb the Norks along the border, and send a text to Jimmy & Jesse to let them know they should try getting out, quick.

59

I didn't see heavy bombers or significant helicopters.

F-16's would likely be the strike aircraft.  Looks like we sold them some used Apaches in 2008.

60 Isn't no-mans land mined?  If so and the North tries to cross.  Body donor parts are going to increase 10 fold.

61

Our "defense welfare" to S. Korea and Europe has not made the world safer. 

You are a goddmaned idiot if you actually believe that.

62 It doesn't matter  how strong the military is.  Your threats have to have some credibility.  Let's see, we sink your ship, you do nothing.  We launch an artillery barrage, you wilt.  But now we are going to take you seriously when you say you are going to do something.

63 I think it is time to send our best strategists on up there to give them a talk.
First lets warm them up with Jesse Jackson and Carter

64 If you're going to hit them at all... maybe it's just best to anticipate that they're going to wildly escalate and commit to wild escalation in the first place. Decapitating strike, destroy the border troops and artillery with Daisy Cutters. You sound like General Buck Turgidson, without all the chewing gum in your mouth. Should have shelled the shit out of them ages ago. Macarthur had it right. Should have nuked China while we had all sorts of superiority over them and the Russkies. Should have never allowed Mao to take over China in the first place. Wow. How many "should haves" could a guy post in one diatribe? Should have counted them.

65 The SKs have a modern military and they're apparently good soldiers with good equipment. The problems are China (they have to let this happen), the US (Bambi has to accept it), the South Korean people (they're going to have to accept some civilian casualties), and the usual fog of war. This might be the tipping point. I don't know if we've ever heard this from the South before.

66

I'll allow you to repeatedly strike about the head and shoulders, bloody my nose, and box my ears until they turn into cauliflowers because I'm oh so much better than you are and I refuse to stoop to your level regardless of how many times you...

BOOM!

67 59 No problem with "lights-out" air raid drills in Nork land. They don't have any.

Posted by: sTevo at December 03, 2010 04:34 PM (VMcEw)

Heh. That is no shit.

68 They need to evacuate Seoul.

69 Our "defense welfare" to S. Korea and Europe has not made the world safer. We've had 65 years now of no worldwide war. Considering WWI & WW2 were only 21 years apart, we're doing pretty good.

70

Should have never allowed Mao to take over China in the first place.

I'd be fascinated to hear the "how" on that one.

71 The upside is that it will help the US auto industry since Kia and Daihatsu vehicles will be bullet ridden.

72 Margaret Cho is parachuting in to help as we speak!

...wait, that was supposed to be a parachute we strapped on her...?

This is where I picture Wile E. Coyote pulling the string on the pack and pots and pans flying out.....

73 Our "defense welfare" to S. Korea and Europe has not made the world safer.  What it's done is produced large segments of the wealthy world with no sense of reality, who are perfectly content to allow events to spiral out of control, and blame America for trying to contain the damage.

Posted by: sandy burger

 

And the alternative is to ignore what may happen, and then fight our way onto the continent (World War II) or land on the peninsula in disarray, and then get kicked down the length of said perimeter, taking casualties the entire way, and trying to salvage what is left in an arduous campaign (Korea). Or we ignore it entirely.

Yes, stationing troops in Europe has a downside as well as a plus side. We opted for this.

74 74 They need to evacuate Seoul. Posted by: FlaviusJulius at December 03, 2010 04:39 PM (SJ6/3) They never should have kept Seoul as their capital after 1953. Pusan should have been the demographic, commercial, and government center of South Korea.

75 I'd be fascinated to hear the "how" on that one. We had nukes in 1949. They didn't.

76 Yes, stationing troops in Europe has a downside as well as a plus side. We opted for this. Posted by: Blue Hen at December 03, 2010 04:40 PM (R2fpr) If nothing else, to this day our troops in Europe are keeping on eye on the Germans. You never know when old national tendencies suddenly flair up.

77 My guess is that the Norks will try to hit as many Americans in a strike as possible. That way when we retaliate, the anti-war pussies and other America-haters can undermine our strategy and lose us another war. Every Hollyweird and NYT sucker of cock, not to mention Pelosi and Reid, would instantly be on the surrender bandwagon.

China and Russia would most likely sit out a North-South war without American involvement. But with a pussy American President like Jugears, they may jump in if they see a chance to embarrass US and pluck a ripe plum like South Korea at the same time.

I see zero chance of Barry letting America win a war against communists.

78 Decapitating strike, destroy the border troops and artillery with Daisy Cutters.
++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++

It's been a few years since I served, but back in them days C-130 carried daisy cutters which are darn slow and make easy target.

79

We had nukes in 1949. They didn't.

Since Chiang had sacrificed the countryside for the cities, exactly what would "we" have nuked?

P.S.:  The Soviets acquire nukes in '49.

80 I hear Kim Jong loves the Hennesy. Send him a nice bottle full of poison. Kill the leaders. Everyone in a position of authority. Have South Korea take over. Get the fuck out. Even China is on board with this idea.

81 Damn, out of popcorn again.

We need to bust some heads.

82 They need to evacuate Seoul.

Posted by: FlaviusJulius

 

This is the problem. Seoul is easily within heavy artillery range. NK doesn't even have to cross the 38th parallel to make the city untenable. it could take weeks to neutralize the artillery hammering the city, and would likely require manned strike missions to do it.

83 You are a goddmaned idiot if you actually believe that.

Mind your tone, please.

NATO was fantastic, for a time.  It stopped the march of the USSR.  But by failing to transition the defense of Europe over to the Europeans, look what happened:

France in particular realized that their best position was to straddle the fence, and due to America's defense guarantee, there was no cost to them.  The rest of Europe became complacent, such that they were unable to do anything to prevent genocide in their backyard or the re-emergence of Russia as a threat.  And all the while, despite all the blood we shed for them, their contempt for their welfare providers has grown.  Just look at the spasm of hatred they had for our attempt to liberate Iraq.  Whether or not you think the Iraq war was smart of idiotic, the European and Korean view of our actions there was insane and hateful.

84

Gotta be a way to blame the US, and especially Bush, for this shit.

Must think...must think...

85

Posted by: FlaviusJulius at December 03, 2010 04:32 PM (SJ6/3)

ROK Helicopters are part of their Army.. with.. 2 Aviation Brigades??? (if memory serves).

86 NATO didn't stop shit.

The United States military did.

NATO filed some shit.

87

 it could take weeks to neutralize the artillery hammering the city, and would likely require manned strike missions to do it.

I disagree. With our modern radar, those guns could be silenced in hours. If we had enough guns in place, minutes. I expect the South Koreans have this technology. I'm sure our guys do.

88 Yes, stationing troops in Europe has a downside as well as a plus side. We opted for this.

Posted by: Blue Hen at December 03, 2010 04:40 PM (R2fpr)

If nothing else, to this day our troops in Europe are keeping on eye on the Germans. You never know when old national tendencies suddenly flair up.

Posted by: CoolCzech

 

Yes, though I think this to be so remote as to be unlikely. Prepositioned heavy equipment and the knowledge that ANYTHING would result in US casualties, thus bringing the US in, both in Korea and Europe, has been key. That's why US Cav units were sitting in the Fulda gap for thirty years. The #1 tank route into the FDR involved hitting American troops.

89 O-yeah.... Steel Rain thanks to MLRS.  
That should keep the North under control.

90 Best approach is an enveloping attack, truncating the entire N. Korean Leadership and command and control structure while simultaneously disabling all communication and media of the North Koreans. Of utmost importance is to identify senior No. Korean elements of the military who  can and will be co- opted to a peacful stand down with Financial remuneration as the major incentive. J-Dams and Daisy Cutters must be used liberally to destroy missile control functions.  Quick strike special forces need to be inserted into the major North Korean urban areas within 24 hours of the initial counterstrike seizing Airports, Train stations, police command centers And media centers so as to broadcast the fall of the Stalinist Puppet Regime that was installed by the Soviet Union in 1945 to the general public. Reinforcements have to be brought in under cover of night post haste.  The bulk of the Lower eschelon Military command structure must be preserved as best as possible so as to maintain public order. These conscripts can be mustered out and given paid labor for reconstruction so as to avoid having an idle and disgruntled youth who can become insurgents.  Within  6 months of the North Korean collapse a formal Unification ceremony should be held, picking an auspicious date in Korean history that is favorable to success.

91 ace, the ROK has a real army and a real air force, with lots and lots of highly trained personnel at all levels--and lotsa reservists ready for The Call

They and the American troops there have trained for a NORK attack since 1953

tactical nukes will arrive from offshore...........

92 http://tinyurl.com/2af97kk Here's the breakdown.

93 The NORKs may need to lose a war quickly if they want to eat this winter.

94 85 The Russians had only just detonated their first bomb in '49 (thank you Julius & Ethel) and we had by then stockpiled several hundred, as well as having the bombers to drop them. I think we may have even had battlefield nukes (fired by artillery) but not sure on that. You seem to have a better knowledge of the strategic/military situation at the time, so I will defer to your observations and stand corrected. But, hey, just sayin'!

95 96:  First wave, shells.  Second wave, soldiers.

Third wave better be food, or all hell will break loose.

96 And the alternative is to ignore what may happen

I shouldn't have said "immediately".  We need to give them enough time and assistance to successfully take over their own defense.

North Koreans are starving.  South Korea can defend itself, the problem is that they haven't needed to.

97 Mind your tone, please.

Sorry, but, just where the fuck do you think you're posting?!?

98 NORK Stats

from global fire power

99 someone needs to tell Hillary not to pull a Dean Acheson

( he gave a speech in early 1950 about US interests in Asia, and spelled out which areas we would defend, including Japan, Taiwan, etc; he neglected to mention Korea )

100 it could take weeks to neutralize the artillery hammering the city, and would likely require manned strike missions to do it.

I disagree. With our modern radar, those guns could be silenced in hours. If we had enough guns in place, minutes. I expect the South Koreans have this technology. I'm sure our guys do.

Posted by: jimmaheffincarter, Former idiot in chief. at December 03, 2010 04:47 PM (OlN4e)

 

Some of this artillery is literally underground, in hardened sites. They have been placing this crap for decades. And the problem is that even a few remaining batteries trained on the city would make a human and politcal disaster. Ewmwmber the announcements that all of the SCUD launchers had been found and killed during Desert Storm. We never got all of the.

101 North Koreans are starving
++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
I have a great idea. Instead of firing bullets. Let's drop turkeys & spam.

We would win in 10 min's flat.

102

Mind your tone, please.

Piss off--say something stupid, I'm going to call you stupid.  And if you are some kind of intellectual sissy, you're in the wrong place.

The U.S. has treaty commitments.  If you tear them up, there are consequences.  I'll refer you at this point to the wonderful decade after we cut South Vietnam loose and the Soviets came thisclose to tipping the scale.  Hey, you know what's fanstastic?  Cuban troops all over Africa because the U.S. demonstrated that its word was not to be trusted. 

DeGaulle took the French out of NATO for purely domestic political reasons.  Their staff still coordinated with NATO even after the "pullout" and they would not have stood on the sidelines if the Soviets had ever come through the gap.

Things get goofy at the edges when we're not around.  Read some history that Pat Buchanan hasn't written and you'll get it.

103 96: If we actually do attack, it will be interesting to see the reaction of the populace. They have literally been held incommunicado for nearly 60 years! They do not know who the Beatles were, let alone rock and roll and have been fed a steady diet of the most vicious anti-American propaganda. It's as if they are another planet. Then again, they make Biafrans look like Rosie O'Donnell. But they have a standing army of 3 million men, who are in theory as brainwashed as the Moonies.

104 Every overseas American base is basically an armed camp of hostages in Indian Country.
Guantanamo, Germany, Saudi, and friends, Japan, South Korea, etc. Those places are giant landmines waiting for some stupid somebitch like Kim to set them off.

105 If they have 185 MLRS that is more then enough for all the Nork Arty within 18 miles of Seoul.

106 Obama is coming very close to Dean's 'defense perimeter' speech.  Most people seem to agree that Acheson's "oversight" led to a NoRK attack five months later

very similar to April Glasbie and Kuwait / Iraq in 1990

107 Lets give new comment thingie a headache.      

                North Korea    South Korea

CURRENT GFP RANK         20        12
            
Total Population         23,479,088     48,379,392
Military Manpower Available     12,414,017     26,721,668
Fit for Military Service     10,280,687     21,966,367
Reaching Military Age Yearly     392,016     696,516
Active Military Personnel     1,170,000     687,000
Active Military Reserves     4,700,000     4,500,000
Active Paramilitary         189,000     22,000
Total Air-Based Weapons     1,778         538
Total Land-Based Weapons     16,400         8,325
Total Naval Units         708         85
Towed Artillery Systems     3,500         4,000
Merchant Marine Strength     167         812
Major Ports and Terminals     12         4
Aircraft Carriers         0         0
Destroyers             0         6
Frigates             3         9
Submarines             97         20
Patrol Coastal Craft         492         75
Mine Warfare Craft         23         15
Amphibious Operations Craft     140         28
Defense Budget / Expenditure     $5,500,000,000     $25,500,000,000
Foreign Reserves         $0         $262,200,000,000
Purchasing Power         $40,000,000,000 $1,206,000,000,000
Oil Production             141 bbl     17,050 bbl
Oil Consumption         10,520 bbl     2,130,000 bbl
Proven Oil Reserves         0 bbl         0 bbl
Total Labor Force         20,000,000     24,220,000
Roadway Coverage         25,554 km     102,062 km
Railway Coverage         5,235 km     3,472 km
Waterway Coverage         2,250 km     1,608 km
Coastline Coverage         2,495 km     2,413 km
Major Serviceable Airports     77         150
Square Land Area         120,540 km     98,480 km

108 If they have 185 MLRS that is more then enough for all the Nork Arty within 18 miles of Seoul.

Posted by: FlaviusJulius

 

I was in and out before MLRS entered the arsenal. If you think that they have a fire plan to smother NK artillery, great. Seoul is a big target, and any protracted firing upon it is going to be bloody.

109 109:  Think of a concentration camp, from WWII.

Now imagine one with 24 million people in it.

I wonder if the civilians would notice.  I really do.

110

If they have 185 MLRS that is more then enough for all the Nork Arty within 18 miles of Seoul.

Not to mention the shitstorm we'd unleash from on high on their command structure.  Those guys can't take a dump with approval from twenty rungs up the ladder.

111 They won't drop the nuke right away (that's step... three) but they'll shell Seoul.

I don't think they have deployable nukes yet. From what I saw that test was a failure.

112 Posted by: Circa (Insert Year Here) at December 03, 2010 04:37 PM (B+qrE)

I was going to try to answer this idiot, but I think your plan is better.

113 111 If they have 185 MLRS that is more then enough for all the Nork Arty within 18 miles of Seoul. Posted by: FlaviusJulius at December 03, 2010 04:54 PM (SJ6/3) There are probably Nork sappers spread throughout the South. There would probably be some attrition from sabotage.

114 Obama is coming very close to Dean's 'defense perimeter' speech.  Most people seem to agree that Acheson's "oversight" led to a NoRK attack five months later

very similar to April Glasbie and Kuwait / Iraq in 1990

Posted by: Gert Frobe. dba SantaRosaStan at December 03, 2010 04:55 PM (UqKQV)

Like anyone listens to what Obama says.

115 MLRS can kill anything in a 1000 meter grid square in under 2 minutes. 185 would clear the table.

116

Things get goofy at the edges when we're not around.  Read some history that Pat Buchanan hasn't written and you'll get it.

Circa - well said.

117 Posted by: sandy burger at December 03, 2010 04:44 PM (twiRb)

NATO did its job, and nothing more:  It built a fence around a degenerating and severely dysfunctional entity and contained the USSR until that monstrosity finally imploded.

Since 1990, NATO's been an old man farting in a quiet semi-crowded room

118 LOINS GIRDED!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

119 121 MLRS can kill anything in a 1000 meter grid square in under 2 minutes. 185 would clear the table. Posted by: FlaviusJulius at December 03, 2010 04:59 PM (SJ6/3) Nork artillery near Seoul is in caves or hardened shelters.

120 I was in and out before MLRS entered the arsenal. If you think that they have a fire plan to smother NK artillery
++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
Hmmmmmmmm, they don't call it "steel" rain for nothing. 

You do not want to be anywhere near these thing when they go off.

121 Sorry, but, just where the fuck do you think you're posting?!?

Good point.  Can I have my man card back now?

say something stupid, I'm going to call you stupid.

Blah, blah.

The U.S. has treaty commitments.  If you tear them up, there are consequences.

So, we come to a new agreement, just as there will be a new agreement if the North and the South reunite.  We are not obligated to be their servant for all eternity.  We don't need to tear anything up to change our relationship with South Korea.

I'll refer you at this point to the wonderful decade after we cut South Vietnam loose

And this situation is nothing like that.

Read some history that Pat Buchanan hasn't written and you'll get it.

See, you're being an idiot here.  I'm not an isolationist, and I'm certainly not in the Buchanan school of thought.  e.g. I support the Iraq war.

You're shooting off at the mouth because you think I'm arguing for a philosophy that is pretty much 180 degrees from what I actually think.

122 Posted by: jimmaheffincarter, Former idiot in chief. at December 03, 2010 04:47 PM (OlN4e)

+1

American counter-battery fire is awesome, and the Israelis might be even better. It has been awhile since artillery was truly safe in their defilades.

123

I was in and out before MLRS entered the arsenal. If you think that they have a fire plan to smother NK artillery, great. Seoul is a big target, and any protracted firing upon it is going to be bloody.

Posted by: Blue Hen at December 03, 2010 04:56 PM (R2fpr)

Killing civilians has little military impact.  Its a diplomatic hole card, but that's all. Once the shelling starts, the civs will be evacuated or sheltered and losses will decline to minimal levels.

Meanwhile, the supply lines to those frontline NK troops will be cut and they will starve or run out of shells.

124 Posted by: CUS at December 03, 2010 04:55 PM (wOGfT)

yeah, as Goldfinger said, the ROK has a real army and a real air force, and lotsa reservists.   Those boys train up real good, too............

125 Nork artillery near Seoul is in caves or hardened shelters.

Posted by: joncelli© at December 03, 2010 05:01 PM (RD7QR)

If you jam the doors, they can't fire.

126 Posted by: Sponge © at December 03, 2010 04:51 PM (UK9cE)

Mind your tone please.

Hahahahahahaha!

127

Posted by: Blue Hen at December 03, 2010 04:56 PM (R2fpr)

My brother is an artillery officer. He assures me incoming artillery round trajectories are computed, and their origins calculated and extremely accurate return fire will be in the air prior to the first rounds hitting, if the South Koreans have their shit together.

128 I hate when Michelle goes to the beach and I have to eat Sandy Burger.

129 As a former combat medic I can tell you MLRS are bad if your anywhere near them. Think of dying buy a thousands razor cuts.

130 There are probably Nork sappers spread throughout the South. There would probably be some attrition from sabotage.

Posted by: joncelli© at December 03, 2010 04:59 PM (RD7QR)

If I were an NK sapper in the south, I'd be too busy eating cheeseburgers to go off and blow up a bridge for Kim whatever.

131 131 Nork artillery near Seoul is in caves or hardened shelters. Posted by: joncelli© at December 03, 2010 05:01 PM (RD7QR) If you jam the doors, they can't fire. Posted by: Oldcat at December 03, 2010 05:03 PM (z1N6a) Could artillery fire collapse a cave mouth? Not snarking -- it's an honest question.

132 Donald Trump actually had a good point about this on Fox yesterday. The South Korean economy is booming, largely due to the security and stability provided by the implied assistance of the US military. I deal with the South Koreans almost every day in my line of work. However, South Korea has refused to negotiate a trade deal with the USA. Let's pull out those 28,000 troops and move the warships away and see how many people want to hire the South Korean engineering companies in Seoul. Let the South Korean taxpayers pay to defend themselves for awhile, instead of counting on the US taxpayer to do it (driving up the USA cost of doing business). That extra few percentage points in USA tax cost can be the difference between $1 billion going to Houston and $1 billion going to Seoul. Screw them--what are they doing for us? Absolutely nothing. Grim

133

My brother is an artillery officer. He assures me incoming artillery round trajectories are computed, and their origins calculated and extremely accurate return fire will be in the air prior to the first rounds hitting, if the South Koreans have their shit together.

Posted by: jimmaheffincarter, Former idiot in chief. at December 03, 2010 05:04 PM (OlN4e)

And if that doesn't work, you send the air force with smart bombs to try and take out that particular opening.

134 136 There are probably Nork sappers spread throughout the South. There would probably be some attrition from sabotage. Posted by: joncelli© at December 03, 2010 04:59 PM (RD7QR) If I were an NK sapper in the south, I'd be too busy eating cheeseburgers to go off and blow up a bridge for Kim whatever. Posted by: Oldcat at December 03, 2010 05:04 PM (z1N6a) True, and I'm betting the SKs have turned some of them. Still, there will always be some diehards.

135 Posted by: Sharkman at December 03, 2010 05:01 PM (sqNU7)


That dizzy bitch needs to sail away......

136 The 1st time N Korea test a nuke was 2006. I doubt that they have been able to build one that can fit on a missile in the 4 years since then.

137 For those who think the Sorks will fold due to internal pressure...guess again.  Recent polling says that almost a minority wants a preemptive strike and the majority of the rest wil support military action.  Over 80% either want a first strike or support military action.  That's huge considering they _know_ they will be shelled.  Importantly, the protests in the street are about _not_ striking back.

The RoK military is quantitatively better equipped then the Norks in all but artillery. The Nork divisions are old equipped, slow and hard to maneuver other then preplanned assault routes.  Essentially the Norks have been putting all their dough in two areas subs...particularly midgets...and huge tube artillery. Bigger even then the Soviet model. 

The large caliber artillery is precisely to threaten the front as well as Seoul. They are hard to move, slow to fire and difficult to reload.  The first five minutes will just suck;after that the Norks are toast.  _That's_ why the attitude of the people is so important. If they become more afraid of continued Nork aggression then they are of Lil' Kim's arty the Norks are done.

138 Never underestimate the power of the Congressional/NYT/Academia 5th Column back here at home.

They'll do more damage to morale and strategy than three divisions of heavy armor.

Any conflict will have to be over within two weeks or the usual suspects will make sure the South loses. Nothing pisses off the MFM more than a free country defending itself well. Case in Point: Israel.

139 Every time North Korea acts up, people in the west rush in to give them things like food and nuclear power plants. They have nothing to lose by doing so and continually gain, so why not?

140 NK has no supply lines for a prolonged battle.  Food is limited, gas is limited, moral is low.  Defections would be high if given the opportunity to defect from NK to SK.  It would be SK's to lose.  Now if China jumped in to help then all bets are off.

141 Could artillery fire collapse a cave mouth? Not snarking -- it's an honest question.

Posted by: joncelli© at December 03, 2010 05:05 PM (RD7QR)

Probably in some cases. If there's dirt above it like in a hillside an avalanche could be triggered.  With today's hyper accurate munitions there could well be other cards to play than just "we have to fire shells into the area at random like in the WWI era.

142

Where's a little freakin' McArthur-like balls when you need them? He was right and you know it. 

143 How do we have a trade deal with China but not South Korea?

144 Things get goofy at the edges when we're not around.

No shit.

Hey, you know what's fanstastic?  Cuban troops all over Africa because the U.S. demonstrated that its word was not to be trusted.

In today's world, if you're a foreign country, should you be America's ally?  Well, you certainly don't want to be America's enemy, but being on the fence and flirting with America's enemies is by far the most advantageous position.  Africa is already slowly being colonized by China, wrestling control away from France.  Our Korean policies are beside the point there.

What I want is for our foreign policy to recognize our actual allies, like Israel and India, and let non-allies like South Korea and France pay their own way.

Keep repeating that I'm an idiot, but spending blood and money paying for people who despise us and don't need our help sounds pretty idiotic to me.

145 We have some rocket-assisted naval munitions that are GPS guided, I think. Pretty bad medicine for a stationary cannon crew in the North.

Also, MOAB.

146 According to a US Army intelligence guy (native South Korean, I tutored his kids) who is now attached to American units in South Korea, South Korea would lose a one-on-one fight with North Korea. The South will need US help to make good on this threat. Maybe President Obama has is 9-11 challenge, here. 

147 Posted by: Oldcat at December 03, 2010 05:10 PM (z1N6a)

yeah, but NORK hills, like those in the south, are much more rock that dirt.  It must have taken those commie peasants many years to dig tunnels and caves.

148 All  S Korea has to do is lob sandwiches over the DMZ to get the Norks out of their holes, then murder them.

149

@100

Yes, we did have battlefield nukes --

Operation Upshot-Knothole (Shot GRABLE), M65 Atomic Cannon, M109, M110,&  M114  howitzers.

http://tinyurl.com/29ydzfp

150 Also, MOAB.

Posted by: sifty at December 03, 2010 05:13 PM (jXC9M)

Those would only be useful if the North starts sending its men walking South. It is not a penetrator weapon useful against hardened targets like bunkers, trenches and so on.

151 Hopefully South Korea is not counting on any KATUSAs to fight; they are quite possibly the most worthless soldiers in the world. Even Serb militias worked hard at raping and killing; KATUSAs are too fucking lazy to flush toilets. The ROK Army infantry and Marines are supposed to be pretty good, however, and they benefit from not subsisting on a diet of tree bark and shoe leather like the Norks.

152 Posted by: sandy burger at December 03, 2010 05:11 PM (twiRb)

Do you actually know anything about SK? Because while there is a small and vocal anti-American contingent, the majority are pro-American.

153 Yes, the MOAB will be ineffective as a bunker penetration weapon, but think of the shit-their-pants factor of having to sit through a few of those.

The US has lots of bunker-busting toys, but I just don't think Doofus will let us lend a hand.

154 "Essentially the Norks have been putting all their dough in two areas subs...particularly midgets...and huge tube artillery. Bigger even then the Soviet model. " Can't that much artillery be defeated by air superiority? SK will no doubt have that, as I'm not sure NK even has fuel for it's planes, let alone training and maintenance. Massive air strikes would take care of any artillery superiority, no?

155 yeah, but NORK hills, like those in the south, are much more rock that dirt.  It must have taken those commie peasants many years to dig tunnels and caves.

Posted by: Gert Frobe. dba SantaRosaStan at December 03, 2010 05:13 PM (UqKQV)

Basically my point is that if you can use precision fire to jam doors, break or cover the gunports then you don't have to "bust" the hardened shelter. They can't fire and are no longer a threat.

The North really doesn't have any true military options. Even using the nuke won't win them the war.

156 President Barry won't promise air strikes because when he says "punch back twice as hard" he only means against Republicans.

157 29 Ace, you have to see what South Korea has in terms of military punch to know what South Korea has for military punch.
__________

South Korean Punch is undoubtedly full of fish and kimchi, which explains why Hawaiian Punch is much more popular.

158 I was under the impression that South Korea's military was a good deal better than the North's.

159 The tale of the tubes:
Nork Tubes
Towed Artillery: 3,500
Self-Propelled Guns: 4,400
Multiple Rocket Launch Systems: 2,500


Rok Tubes
Towed Artillery: 4,000
Self-Propelled Guns: 500
Multiple Rocket Launch Systems: 185

All the NORK stuff is old.  MLRS is Katyusha style, SPs are are knock offs of late 50's Chinese.

All the RoK stuff is brand new. MLRS is ours and it is bad ass.

What the RoK needs the US for is our air power to kill as many NORK tubes as possible as quickly as possible.  Within minutes we will know the GPS location of every NORK tube...but without the US air power it will be hard for RoK to quickly knock them out.

160

D'oh! Sock-b-gone!

161 Can't that much artillery be defeated by air superiority? SK will no doubt have that, as I'm not sure NK even has fuel for it's planes, let alone training and maintenance. Massive air strikes would take care of any artillery superiority, no?

Posted by: UGAdawg at December 03, 2010 05:19 PM (/VjHB)

Eventually, but not before they get some shots off. Which is why the big guns are diplomatically valuable, if nothing else. Getting in a shooting war would be costly - far more costly then buying off the North. Which is the point.

162 A ROK Marine saved Dad's life in '66. He poured my Dad into a jeep and took him back to base in Cam Rahn Bay when he was drunk and got left behind in a bar. My Brother, my Sisters and I wouldn't be alive without the ROK Marines.

We've always been fans. Dad said they were the toughest muthafuckers over there with us aside from the crazy-ass Aussies.

163
What I want is for our foreign policy to recognize our actual allies, like Israel and India, and let non-allies like South Korea and France pay their own way.


We send billions to countries that want to see us wiped off the face of the earth.  What makes you think we'll just tell ROK and Frenchies to pound sand?  Libs LOVE France.

164

I was one of the guys who would have delivered a tactical nuke in an F-4 Phantom to the North back in the '80s.  My guess back then is that we would have authoritatively won with heavy civilian casualties on both sides.  It was an uneven balance of forces then, but the North could still fight with Soviet and Chinese support.  That ended long ago.

After sixty years of capitalism, South Korea is pretty well muscled economically and militarily.  After sixty years of communism, North Korea is a puny midget.  Wealth has led to a population explosion for the South while poverty has kept the North a fraction of the South's population.  The North can barely feed itself with the handouts it gets.  The military gets preference but even its rations are so poor that its troops can't do a full hour of physical exercise.

My guess is that if there were a second Korean War, the South would win easily with a lot of civilian casualties in Seoul, which has ten thousand North Korean artillery tubes pointed at it.  It would be a very uneven contest.

Some things I've noticed when flying against undeveloped countries is that they're not very good in the air, mostly because they simply don't have the cash to buy enough gas to fly enough to get good.  Secondarily, they don't spend what flying they get very well due to cultural problems, ie questions of face.  In our air force, a captain and a lt col will face off in a mock dogfight and neither will give the other any break.  That makes for good training.  However, in most of the world, particularly Asia, dogfighting practice is more like a scripted performance, with the higher ranking guy always winning.  That makes for bad training.  Most undeveloped world fighters are hapless in the air in the face of a Western air force.

My guess is that the North's fighter jets and air defenses are atrophied from lack of exercise.  Any attempt by the South to penetrate the North and attack a target will probably succeed.  Politically, this may be the precipitating act which begins the collapse of North Korea.  If you can scare Kim Jong Il enough to flee Pyong Yang, then his government will collapse in dog eat dog anarchy.

South Korea is not a Western nation which pulls its punch.  Its military is under severe discipline.  Some older officers told me they saw the heads of North Korean infiltrators on stakes on the road to one South Korean army base.  Another officer told me he saw Korean intel officers inject a syringe full of hydrochloric acid in the ear of a North Korean defector who was not forthcoming in his answers during interrogation.  A friend of mine was a general's aide when a Korean air force F-4 went missing.  He was in the command post when they found the pilot dead.  The Korean air force general said, "Better for him."  The Koreans have what you might call a low tolerance for mistakes when it comes to losing jets.

The bottom line is that the South Koreans are nobody you want to mess with.  They'll probably slash through the starving North Koreans like a hot knife through butter.  I'm also guessing that a lot of North Korean equipment won't work and many of their troops will panic and run.  North Korea is a paper tiger.

On the negative side, the North Koreans will probably put a lot of shells into Seoul, though our jets and artillery will probably work them over.  We've had half a century to map their positions and organize the counter-fire.  The North Koreans have a supersized special forces.  In any war scenario, they'll probably fly a lot of those guys across the border to raise hell.  They've got scads of these fabric covered biplanes that don't show up on radar, each of which carries a stick of troops.  Their purpose is to terrify the civilian population so that they take to the roads, blocking military movement.

The North is isolated and doesn't understand the outside world.  They've been threatening the South for decades and it's always worked.  They haven't recognized how much they've declined and how much stronger the South has become, mostly because their threats always worked.  They're like a mean kid who has been teasing a puppy chained in the yard for years as it grew up into a Rottweiller.  One day, the mean kid throws a stick at the dog, not realizing its slipped its chain.  Uh oh.

That said, I don't want to see a war in Korea.  I'd rather see the South flood the North with cell phones, DVD players, emergency radios, and hand-cranked laptops so that its people discover the outside world and realize that their government is a pack of liars.  That shock of information could kill Kim's government.  The best case is where the people of North Korea overthrow their own government and the North Korean troops abandon their government and walk away from their artillery.

The bad part will be reunification, like Siamese twins joined at the hip, one healthy, one zombified.  It won't be pretty.

165 But libs would rather soak up the wine and cheese in Paris than go anywhere near Seoul.

And in the end, aside from chaos, liberal foreign policy is about where liberals like to sun their pee-pees.

166

I win!  I win!

 

I win!

167 American counter-battery fire is awesome, and the Israelis might be even better. It has been awhile since artillery was truly safe in their defilades. They're not only in defilade, they're dug into caves on the reverse slopes of mountains. Hard to dig out even with bunker-busters, but should be possible to suppress. Last I was there, the ROK army had 680,000 actives, with about twice that in reserves. Mind you, this is a country where every male at age 18 has to serve two years. The invasion corridors are limited, with the only room to maneuver being through the Chorwon valley (MSR 1, from the DMZ through Uijongbu to Seoul). Guess where the kill zone is? There are invasion tunnels that cross under the DMZ, and even some that cross under the Imjin River, which is the only way they'll get that far south. Try to bridge the Imjin with engineers or boats and it'll be a slaughter. Any forces infiltrating from invasion tunnels we don't already know about are going to be cut off and defeated in detail. Imagine a country that has been preparing for invasion for 57 yrars. Every hill riddled with bunkers and trenches. Every road able to be cut off at multiple points with rock-drops, prewired to blow at a minute's notice. Ditto for every bridge. Every valley floor salted with tank traps and triple-strand concertina, with FASCAM or Volcano-deployed minefields ready to be laid scattered instantly. Machine gun emplacements in the middle of towns, with permanently-painted range cards in place. That country is South Korea. It CAN'T be successfully invaded with what the Norks have. My dick gets hard at the thought that they might try. What the CAN do is indiscriminately kill a lot of people with massed arty fire. Maybe they're crazy enough to try. If so, North Korea's gonna need a new coat of paint and a shitload of screen doors.

168 Posted by: Tantor at December 03, 2010 05:26 PM (blNMI)
Posted by: Empire of Jeff at December 03, 2010 05:28 PM (dyE0a)

Interesting perspectives, but both assume that the current SK government will have the fortitude to fight, and not simply back down they way they have on many occasions. I think that they will, but it's not a sure thing.

My experience with South Koreans has shown me that they are very tough people. I would not want to fight them unless I had to.

169

@158 They are our friends.  My son just did a tour there. He likes them.

We are having a trade dispute. Friends can do that. It is not war, or disloyalty. Some of you guys have a lot of pent-up hostility, there. I presume you are bored with our allies and would like to find some fresh exciting ones. Good luck with that.

SK spends a lot on defense, and they build a lot of their own hardware. It is damn good; their APC's are probably better than ours, and their special-purpose tanks are just as good. Very few nations can build their own jet fighters. They build some under license from us, and have some they designed themselves. They're not just Kia good, they're LG Samsung good. NK's small contingent of Mig29's are a worry, but if they do their own maintenance, not so much. Of course SK has no "heavy bombers." They have plenty F-15's. What were you planning to do, carpet-bomb?

These daisy cutters and MOAB's you're tossing around upthread? You must know where they are stockpiled because I sure don't. Here is a god damned hint: We don't have any. 

Two places I'd like not to be when SHTF, besides downtown Seoul:  in the comm tent at Osan, or aboard one of NK's 97 supposed submarines. I'd call them "submersibles":  they're guaranteed to go down under the water. Guarantee ends there.

 

170 Interesting perspectives, but both assume that the current SK government will have the fortitude to fight, and not simply back down they way they have on many occasions.

I think the firing of the defense minister in response to the island shelling and the rhetoric from his replacement might validate that assumption.

171 Because while there is a small and vocal anti-American contingent, the majority are pro-American.

Here's some actual (outdated, unfortunately):

http://freekorea.us/?p=2034
http://tinyurl.com/367rdvs

172 I'm pretty sure the plan is to force captured gangs of drumming circle hippies to manufacture MOABS and Daisy Cutters under terrible sweatshop conditions.

At least I  hope so.

173 They are our friends.  My son just did a tour there. He likes them.

A guy I know lived in China for a few years, and also had a good experience.

174 I don't know how much punch South Korea has -- anyone who does, please put me some information.

I ain't talkin'.

175 The ROK army will fight. I was on the QRF detail at Warrior Base on the DMZ in summer of 97 when the Norks sent a 9-man armed patrol into the DMZ unnannounced. When challenged by the ROK post nearby, one of the Norks rsaised his weapon and that was all it took. The ROKs cancelled Christmas for those motherfuckers on the spot. Don't mistake politics for will to fight.

176 The bad part will be reunification, like Siamese twins joined at the hip, one healthy, one zombified.  It won't be pretty.

North Korea also has major crime problems due to social breakdown and legal anarchy.  Teenagers routinely engage in appalling gang violence.  And things won't get any better as China starts to slurp all their young women away.  Even if North Korea magically democratized tomorrow, reunification simply won't happen any time soon.

If their government loses control, maybe they'll basically turn into a Chinese satellite.  Man, a country's gotta be in pretty bad shape if being taken over by China is a step up...

177 South Korea should threaten to bomb their supper.

178 South Korea has a red state- blue split just like we do. 

Once upon a time South Korea was one of the most pro-American nations in the world.  The US saved their bacon and they appreciated it.  I remember older Marines telling me how they couldn't buy their own drinks there.  Also, their military was one toughest in existence.
That was a while ago.  The older folks still like us but their kids despise us.  Same thing happened in Europe.  The South Korean military is probably pretty good but I doubt that it is what it used to be.
The South Koreans have a modern military.  The US is there to back them up.
But they can no longer count on American nuclear weapons to deter the North Koreans from using chemical and probably biological weapons.  The North Koreans almost certainly don't have deployable nukes at this point but they have nerve gas.
And smallpox.
The biggest game changer is The One.  The man told the world that he would never authorize the first use of nuclear weapons.  Not long after that (less than a month IIRC), the North Koreans sank a South Korean ship.  I know that the administration has qualified that position but the damage has been done.
I don't anybody can predict who'll won or lose but one thing is certain: a lot people would die.

179 I spent a few years in SK working for a publisher, so let me toss in my two bits.
A large number of South Koreans of university age and under hate the US.  It's mindless nonsense, like many of the opinions held by that cohort of people.  But NK has infiltrated large numbers of people to act as agitators among the students and since students everywhere are the same, quite a few have bought into the socialism and anti-Americanism.  On the good side, all the males have spent two years in the army after high school and tend to be a little more rational about these things.  On the bad side, they want to get laid and are happy to go along with the girls on this nonsense.  Middle-aged people tend to be about evenly split, and those old enough to remember the war love us.
Most Koreans, while afraid of the Norks, are basically happy with the current situation.  They are less afraid of getting into a war than winning it, and having millions of destitute, uneducated North Korean peasants dumped into their lap to take care of.  They saw what happened in West Germany and they don't like the idea.
As far as our position goes, the time to pull out was years ago.  We sure as hell can't pull out now, just as the going gets tough.  Like it or not, we have commitments and I'd like to think the US honors its commitments.
Finally, and I'm surprised no one has mentioned this yet, we are still in a state of war with Korea.  We'd have to get involved regardless.
One last comment: I'm not sure I'm impressed by dug-in arty.  Fixed defenses haven't been of much use for over 60 years (See: Maginot Line, The; and Iraqi "Sea of Flames," the.)

180 And then everyone wrote about my stuff while I was composing my message.

181 "One last comment: I'm not sure I'm impressed by dug-in arty.  Fixed defenses haven't been of much use for over 60 years (See: Maginot Line, The; and Iraqi "Sea of Flames," the.)"

Those positions aren't defensive.  They're a weapon of mass destruction.

182 You're all forgetting that North Korea has one weapon South Korea can't match. The President of the United States will make sure no retaliation occurs.

183

you gotta lotta pull Grim. Good job.

http://tinyurl.com/2b7h22a

They new I was coming, and that I was pissed!

184 Out, damned sock!

185 Arrgh, "k"new I was coming.

186 "If you're going to hit them at all... maybe it's just best to anticipate that they're going to wildly escalate and commit to wild escalation in the first place. Decapitating strike, destroy the border troops and artillery with Daisy Cutters." --Ace

Take MacArthur's advice, at long last. Wipe out a no-man's-land with nukes.

187 The last thing China wants is South Korea and Japan joining The Club.

The Japanese went ballistic when the Norks launched a Daepodong-1 missile that overshot Japan in 1998.  Since then, the Japanese have approved deployment of X-Band radar systems on the home islands and have installed land-based PAC-3s and naval Standard SM-3s on their Kongo-Class AEGIS destroyers.

More on Japan's regional ABM systems in the linked Defense Industry Daily article LINK

188 Macarthur had it right. Should have nuked China while we had all sorts of superiority over them and the Russkies.

Patton as well had the WWII "ending" transition into taking out the USSR commies from power. As that went unheeded, Eastern Europe had to suffer along with Russia until Reagan denounced the "evil empire" with the battle cry taunt to tear down this wall.

No thanks, again, to Eisenhower on that count, Ike and Truman. Geez, Truman had the "guts" to blast Japan twice with Atom bombs; and then chickened out of preventing the Korean War by firing MacArthur who actually knew something about US warfare in Asia, timing being everything, what strategy works and what FAILS miserably, Truman willing to repeat errors that led to tragedies on the scale with Bataan.

189 South Korea Promises Airstrikes If the Norks Attack Again

Crikes, why talk about it? The NorKs have probably seen every "warning" in the book. Just make up your minds what the appropriate response will be to any further provocations and carry them out should those further provocations materialize.

190 The South Koreans are clearly a bunch of anti-Asian racists.

191 /...just watched several discs of Spielberg/Hanks "The Pacific" from Netflix, waiting for the rest now.

192 194, thanks some link, mrp.

193

Okay.  First of all, Western Civilization is good at putting others down and THEN helping them up again.   Example, see Germany and Japan WW2.  Example: see CSA 1864-65.  ala Sherman and Sheridan.   Hard War Boys.

Secondly, if the Norks start with the arty, you better take a picture now of the big South Korean cities because they ain't gonna be there later.  They gonna look like Berlin did after the russkie got done with it.

194 Proportional response is just a way of killing E5's on down. Massive retaliation is the way to go.  They kill a couple of yours and you go down town and start bombing holes in government buildings and factories.  all the while waiting for their artillary to poke their head out of the ground.  Make them squeal like a pig.  They either stop or die.  I would make a special effort to kill Kim jung Il.  I probably spelled his name wrong but I am sure there are a whole lot of people on his side of the border that want that pudgy POS dead.

195 But the warnings and counterbluffs and crap have got to stop. That looks weak and empty.

Next time the North does something, the retaliation should begin AT ONCE . . .

. . . assuming we had leadership interested in stopping North Korea's aggression. Which we don't.

196

I don't know how much punch South Korea has -- anyone who does, please put me some information.

Siege tanks, hydralisks, void rays...

Seriously though, think Israel, but richer.  A lot of people don't realize SKorea is as rich as the average Western European country.  Wiki.

The SKoreans fought next to us in Vietnam, and were ferocious by all accounts I've seen. 

197

If I may take a tangent here, "The Host" is a pretty good South Korean monster movie.  An evil American scientist, natch, orders his Korean assistant to pour pollutants into the Han River, which divides North and South Korea.  Next thing you know, a monster emerges from the river and gobbles everyone up. 

The more I think about it, the more I wonder if the director, Joon-ho Bong, is using the monster as a metaphor for the conflict between North and South, arguing that it is an invention of the Americans.  Many South Koreans are far more racist than nationalist and see the political division of Korea as an artificial line drawn by America.  The monster, a creation of the Americans, rages all over that line.

It's worth seeing, unless you've just seen all the Korean monster movies you can stand already.  If you like it, you might also try "Mother," which is also very good.

 

198 Tantor has the mil situation covered, but the politicians also think about economics. Half the population of SK live within artillery range of NK. A war and a lot of things short of war could devastate their economy, not mentioning the aftermath and costs of reunification which the World Bank estimated as $2-3 trillion—about three to five times South Korea’s current Gross Domestic Product (GDP). http://www.asianweek.com/2001_05_11/biz1_korea_sunshine.html.

This is Kim getting pissy because Lee won't play his "I act out, you give me stuff not to act out" game. We've been ignoring him and he doesn't like to be ignored. Returning to the six party talks rewards his bad behavior.

I think he knows he loses if he escalates to war, but he can really screw with the SK economy -- look what has happened so far. So best thing the ROKs can do is build counter-artillery defenses (yes, it's possible to intercept incoming shells) around Seoul and missile defenses throughout the country. Then they can have freedom to retaliate in-kind and bide their time till the SOB drops dead.

I do like the idea of the ROKs dropping Christmas turkeys and care packages on major cities. Now that would be a provocation.

199 OMG!  The US just ordered noncombatant evacuation operations to start on the Korean Peninsula.

Oh, wait, no they didn't.

Guess we're not too awfully worried about it yet, then.

200
"The more I think about it, the more I wonder if the director, Joon-ho Bong, is using the monster as a metaphor for the conflict between North and South, arguing that it is an invention of the Americans."

The South Korean media can be worse than the American media, though one shouldn't judge South Korea entire this way anymore one should America by what Michael Moore says.
Th South Koreans are a mixed bag and the ratio of pro/anti-Americanism changes when the North Koreans act up.
During the Bush administration, Rumsfeld reacted to a particularly nasty bout of anti-Americanism that happened when two Korean girls were killed in vehicular accident involving American servicemen.
Rumsfeld suggested that if the South Koreans didn't want dirty Americans driving around Seoul then he would be happy to pull them back from the DMZ.
The South Koreans threw a shit fit.
Mostly by the ones who hated us.
Ultimately, Americans were withdrawn anyhow.

Anti-Americanism kind of cooled down after that.
This lesson taught me something:  We should never be 100% committed to defending these people and we should make sure that they know that.

201 UGAdawg at December 03, 2010 05:19 PM:  "Can't that much artillery be defeated by air superiority? SK will no doubt have that, as I'm not sure NK even has fuel for it's planes, let alone training and maintenance. Massive air strikes would take care of any artillery superiority, no?"

Artillery is difficult to destroy from the air because its made from some very hard metal.  You can shred the tires and gun crews but you can't really put them down for long.  New gun crews can pop up to work them in a few minutes.  Generally, you can only suppress it from the air with cluster bombs for about half an hour while all the bomblets randomly detonate.  You only do that for AAA which is defending some target you want to destroy.  Example:  AAA arrayed around the Iraqi nuclear reactor at Osirak that the Israelis took out.

Also, the enemy can field a lot more artillery than you can bomb.  Air strikes aim for more lucrative targets, like armor and communication network nodes.

202 #52, when I was on Yongsan Garrison, Seoul, 1999-2000, I was on the HQ security detail. I met a lot of ROK officers. One of them, a ROKAF colonel, aksed if I'd visited the War Memorial Museum next door, and I said I had several times. I told him I was curious about the B-52D in the yard, since the ROKAF had never operated the type.

"We asked for one for the Museum, but your State Department said no to the twelve we wanted for spare parts."

"Sir, what were you going to do with twelve parts birds?"

"Overhaul them then carpet-bomb downtown Pyongyang, what else?"

"Sir, I suggest you read up on Operation Linebacker II."

"Defense suppression technologies have improved."

And according to a really good photoanalysis thread on military photos .net, contrary to popular mythology, the only tube arty systems that can range downtown Seoul are their infamous 170mm Koksans, the ones with the 55 KM max range. Everything else is SCUD and FROG. The bad news is they have a lot of SCUD and FROG. This is where the Block 3 Patriot batteries tasked to SHORTSTOP are going to earn their paychecks.

My personal hope is that the Norks are dumb enough to invade at the afternoon rush hour. The Seoul metroplex reaches up to around Camp Red Cloud, or what used to be Camp Red Cloud up around Uijongbu. The rush hour is like nothing you've seen in the States except MAYBE Southern California. There is no way any road will remain unjammed by cars. Forget it. It's a better barrier plan than the Siegfried Line.

203 Yeah,

Well first they will blow me.  Then they can blow me up.

204 South Korea just wants to steal Iraq's oil.

205

I'm living in Seoul currently, and based on my own anecdotal observations, the shelling of Yeoungpyeong-do was a big heaping dose of Nork reality on the SoKos.

The difference between this and the Cheonan? For one the killing of civilians. While the sinking of the corvette caused a lot of anguish, it was met with a certain degree of fatalism by the South. They are still at war, etc etc.

Seeing images of South Korean land burn played nearly constantly on MBC and KBS news here for for a week and a half has had a huge effect on the mentality of the people in regards to the North. Like stated earlier, pretty much the only protests that there have been have been because the South DIDN'T escalate and bomb the shit out of the North's artillery batteries.

As for anti-Americanism, I can only speak from my personal experience. I lived at Osan in '88 when my dad worked as AF Intel and there has been a HUGE improvement in their regard for Americans. At the least they sure want to look like us given the amount of money Korean girls spend on skin whitening cream and double eyelid surgery.

I think the South can handle the North, though command and control has been identified as a key opportunity that they have sought to address by adopting a Unified Command structure with the US. In essence, if war starts, the Pentagon will be in control of the South Korean military. 

And apparently the USS George Washington showing up was a huge effing morale boost for the Koreans. I kept getting asked at my school how long it would take for it to get here, how many jets, etc etc.  

206 i'm thinking these SK's can handle themselves-- anybody think that the NK's can provide any Air?-- i think we all know how to stop them and it's by hitting their artillery aimed at Seoul-- both Air Forces and Navy can make anything lousy for the North-- the NK forces don't get to practice with much of anything "live"-- our guys and the Sk's do-- makes a difference, i'm telling you-- talk amongst urselves-- t

207 Unlike the Germany split after WWII, I was not aware that North and South Korea have had any long geographic affiliation other than being on the same pennisula.

208 I think the South can handle the North,...

Under normal circumstances I'd agree, but I wouldn't be surprised if the NorKs were to try to use unconventional methods to gain the upper hand in a shooting match.

Keep in mind, the NorKs are not a signatory to the Chemical Weapons Convention

209 216  ... Keep in mind, the NorKs are not a signatory to the Chemical Weapons Convention

And if this proves important, I hope Cheney pipes up and says, "Can you find those WMDs NOW, motherfucker?"

210

I don't know how much punch South Korea has -- anyone who does, please put me some information.

I have left my boot prints in the DMZ and in highly classified intelligence and command bunkers further south.

When the US first went to Korea it was to protect the South from northern aggression. Our mission now is to keep the North from giving the South reason to kick their skinny asses off the planet. If it comes to a shooting war, Only a full fledged backing from China could hope to save NorK, and even then it would be a hell of a fight. Because China isn't that fast to mobilize, and unless NorK arraigns in advance to start some shit, by the time China gets revved up South Korea will have gotten a full head of steam and be crushing NorK like an empty beer can.

This has been the sour pit in my stomach every time NorK starts up with it's shit. Sure, they can kill a lot of people and cause a world of hurt world wide. might even start a third world war. But there is no way in hell they could survive more than 4 weeks of a shooting war. Making it past two weeks would be miraculous enough. The South would lose for about 4 days and then they would maul the North like a pit bull on a new kitten.

Think of two fighters. One (NorKim) is in full medieval armor with a Mace and broad sword. SK just has this long skinny sword that looks like a 3 foot tooth pick. Its just a thin little thing with a small sharp point, especially compared to the size of the big NorK sword and mace. But SK can put it right where they want it, in each and every seam of NorK's armor. That makes all the difference. 

211

SGT Dan,

I don't think the Norks can possibly invade.  Look at the lengths they go to in order to keep their people ignorant of how much richer SKorea is -- the Nork soldiers would probably desert en masse when they crossed the border and realized SKoreans all have cars and cellphones and TVs and lots of food.

212

Should have never allowed Mao to take over China in the first place.

I'd be fascinated to hear the "how" on that one.

Lend-Lease, only this time not helping the Communists.

Mainland China going red is arguably the greatest tragedy of the 20th, even more so than WW II.  Just imagine if they looked like Taiwan and SKorea today, just imagine how much they could have contributed to science, technology, and productivity.  Our own living standards might be 10-20% higher just due to gains from trade --  and NKorea wouldn't exist at all.

213

The NorKs will simply march a human wave of civilians at the DMZ in front of and mixed with their armor and mech units, setting off the mines and if even fired upon at all the human shields will soak up the defensive RoK fire.

The USA will have it's RoE firmly in hand and will hold their fire per Lawyers instructions.

214 Besides, if the USA will not support the RoKs and the China/Russian's do not support the NorKs then neither the RoKs or the NorKs will invade each other. Without a world power back up it's just a pissing contest.

215

Good for South Korea finally getting to the sternly worded warning.  Airstrike = North Korean stir-fry.

As for the idiot who says the US should pull out.  Oh sure, reneg on a solemn promise that tens of thousands of Americans plus UN allies like Canada, South Africa, Turkey, and Greece paid with their lives.  This is NOT a cell-phone contract you can walk away from.

216 I will endorse what others have recommended.  To stop a North Korean invasion, replace the DMZ with wall to wall fast food places.

217 hello everyone,im wholesale supplier  online

Welcome to our website   

=====   http://www.1shopping.us/    =======

accept paypal and free shipping

We need your support and trust!!!

Dear friends, please temporarily stop your footsteps

To our website Walk around A look at

Maybe you'll find happiness in your sight shopping heaven and earth

You'll find our price is more suitable for you.

And we shall be offer you free gift about MP4 if you more order.

=====   http://www.1shopping.us/   ========