North Korean aggression

Political Philosophy
1

The escalating crisis on the Korean peninsula is something I think we should all be considerably concerned about. As a consequence of the Clinton administrations rewarding of North Korean aggression with two Light Water Reactors and a steady fuel supply in 1994, Kim Jong Ill is confident enough to think that a resurrection of his aggressive polices will have no serious repercussions. Unfortunately he seems to be right. Instead of tailoring its policy towards the DPRK in the same guise as Iraq, the Bush administration is foolishly committing itself to the pussyfoot diplomacy that caused this problem. The most realistic move that could be made right now is a surgical strike on North Korea’s nuclear installations, followed by a military build in the region in preparation for a potential invasion. America has to demonstrate that it is a force to be reckoned with, and that it will not cow tow to a pissant like Kim Jong Ill.

This issue needs a lot more attention than it is currently receiving from the world media. What are your thoughts?

2

Well, speaking from experience, as I was stationed roughly 37 miles south of the DMZ for one year (last year), I can tell you that most people would agree with you. I, however, do not. When you have a military as top notch as North Korea’s there are a few things to worry about. We could never do surgical strikes against a country who knew that they were coming before we launched them. While their country may be poor and starving, their army is not. Over one third of all their economy goes to their defense department (33.9% in 2003).

When we performed excercises, they knew about it weeks in advance. I’m now on the island of Okinawa. North Korea knows everything that goes on over here as well. Kim Jung Il is a desprate communist tyrant who has the capability to do great harm. If he knows that something like that is coming, he will not hesitate to take extreme action. When we performed excersices on the peninsula we had to have South Korea placate them enough and convince them that we weren’t taking action against them.

You could, of course, believe what you want on this matter. I’ve been to the DMZ and I’ve seen glimpses of how North Korea operates. It’s not pretty at all. I didn’t like being staioned at a base that was nicknamed “speedbump” as in, that’s all that South Korea is with the addition of American troops on the peninsula, to North Korea.

Also, for a pisant, he sure does have a rather large army- more than 30 times greater in size than what we have stationed there. Factor in what we have in Okinawa and their forces are only 20 times more.

3

This to me is the most intriguing of our current threats to our nation. Iraq was quite frankly an easy target, offering up the resistance many planners expected. I wondered to myself at the outset of “shock and awe” how much this played into its implementation. I don’t think Iraq was a great threat, but combine its #4 status with its relative military weakness, and the proper fireworks display ensued.

As LucentBrave states, North Korea has a much more viable military force. Doesn’t this constitute therefore a greater threat? I just wonder at what point does the apprehension have to give way to the fact that their strength IS the reason to take on their aggression. Personally, I don’t think the US is quite ready to do so (I for one am not), but I think it begs the question: at what point do we have to realize their threat? I just wonder if these relatively easy campaigns to rid the world of aging dictators isn’t affecting not only global military readiness but also the American psyche to the point that when we do enter a conflict that has greater signifigance and also more resistance and US losses that the public will simply cry “Vietnam” as some already do.

[this is particularly disgusting to me, but that’s another post…]

4

Do the NKoreans have any great amount of military capital - tanks, fighting vehicles, advanced weaponry, fighters/bombers, ships, and subs? And what can it do against them, should the US decide to invade (as it should)?

Note: duty not to depose Kim Jong Il, but duty to protect Americans in the face of danger.

5

FYI: North Korea has a website…hosted in Canada. The website, along with the news agency paints an accurate picture of North Korea, if you know how to read between the lines. All of it is in English, of course.

6

North Korea has a much more viable military force.

I highly doubt this. A single low-yield nuke dropped on Kim/Pyongyang should be sufficient – the North Koreans themselves will take care of the rest.

7

Would we be morally justified in dropping the bomb on North Korea? Absolutely.

It would be wonderful to take out the Dear Leader, but even using a low-yield nuke wouldn’t solve our problems and would open up an enormous can of worms.

  1. To attack, we would have to have the cooperation of Japan – which we don’t, and most especially, South Korea – which we don’t. We could not simply lob a bomb without being fully prepared to back up that action on the ground because our own military would then be under grave threat. Logistically, we simply cannot do this without South Korea’s cooperation.

  2. When we do go in (and I think we will eventually have to), it will be much more costly, in both lives and treasure, than what we’ve expended in Iraq or Afghanistan. We are, however, in no position to do so at present. It is very easy to propose the use of nukes, but they are not the answer to every problem. No matter how hard you try, you can’t get away from the reality of what war entails in sheer logistics, no matter what weapons you use.

  3. The chaos involved in taking down a government is almost beyond a civilized person’s comprehension. Saddam’s Iraq was bad, but it was Disney World compared to North Korea. Here again, logistics rule. This is a country where fully two thirds of the population is starving to death – to the point of cannabilism. We would have to be prepared to supply enormous amounts of food, water and medicine immediately and while we were still fighting. We may say, in the comfort of our living-rooms, that the people would simply have to die until we won the war, but you aren’t going to convince the men on the ground to walk away from starving women and children. It isn’t even a matter of altruism, but simple human decency. Our warriors have to live with themselves after being in battle. War is hard enough when you know that what you are fighting for is right. Living the rest of your life with the images of the carnage of war is something you can’t imagine unless you’ve been there. (My father had nightmares, until the day he died, after fighting in the Pacific during WWII, and then Korea. After almost 40 years, my husband still suffers nightmares from Viet Nam, which can be brought on by a mere smell. War bruises the brain of any rational being.) Try to imagine the trauma of stepping over the bodies of children who starved to death because you didn’t have the food or medicine to save them.

I won’t even bring up the strategic problems we’d face with China and Russia – who also have nukes and the means to use them.

I wish like hell that we could take care of that murderer by simply blowing him off the face of the earth. However, while we are justified in doing so, and, in the end, will be forced to do so to defend ourselves, it is unfortunately not as simple as unleashing our nuclear arsenal against his country. Would that it were.

8

Oh, and DO go to North Korea’s website. You can’t imagine the crudity of their propaganda without seeing it for yourself.

9

Your post contains some false assumptions:

a. The people of North Korea would be worse off without half the population enslaved in slave labor camps to make Kim’s weapons.

b. I consider the fate of North Koreans my responsibility.

c. I give a damn about what other countries think. (As far nuclear retaliation - they wouldn’t dare once we demonstrated we were willing to use them.)

The ideal plan would assist South Korea in a takeover, but unfortunately, they’re too damn pragmatic to even consider it – they actually pay Kim to negotiate with them. Not one penny of aid, however.

10

“. (As far nuclear retaliation - they wouldn’t dare once we demonstrated we were willing to use them.)”

The US already has Nuclear weopans credibility, in fact we are the only nation EVER to use them

11

The US already has Nuclear weopans credibility, in fact we are the only nation EVER to use them

Do you think that credibility still stands? (I’m not actually sure…) That was a long time ago–I wonder if they might think that we’ve lost the cajones required to do such things. (Especially when they look at the news and see all the war protests, etc…)

12

“Do you think that credibility still stands? (I’m not actually sure…)”

I do, in fact I would challenge you to find someone in the world who has voiced an opinion to the contrary.

“I wonder if they might think that we’ve lost the cajones required to do such things”

I dont, after all … a) we have been CONSTANT state of military conflict with various countries since we proved our willingness to drop bombs b)we just destroyed one of worlds 15 largest armies in a couple weeks. c) We did it without the stamp of majority domestic support, and without the stamp of world approval. D) our National security strategy document has strengthened our stance on Nuclear retaliation, and our defense secretary has reiterated such a stance.

On top of that, the Administration is crawling with Neo Con’s and PNAC peoples, we have thousands of Nukes ready, etc etc etc.

I

13

Over one third of all their economy goes to their defense department (33.9% in 2003).

This may seem a significant amount but relative to the overall size of North Korea’s economy it isn’t. At a GDP per capita of only $1,000, the DPRK’s Military expenditures amount to only $5,217,400,000, compared to the $276,700,000,000 defence budget of the United States.

CIA World Factbook

North Korea’s escalation is an attempt to win concessions from the U.S. government. If action is not taken against it other countries will adopt similar tactics of nuclear blackmail as a means to extort the American people. So, what action can be taken? At the very least, all international aid must be cut, and heavy sanctions should be put in place. But this alone will not suffice. North Korea would still be developing a nuclear arsenal and would continue to flaunt it as means to hold the US to ransom.

Ultimately we are left with two options: miitary action now against a nation developing WMD’s, or military action at a “later date” against a nation with an advanced unconventional weapons program.

14

North Koreas military is by far over estimated. They have an ancient strategic doctrine based partly on Soviet Deep Battle. Their armor and vehicles are ancient and most likely would not see combat in the opening days of the war due to the estensive cratoring along the DMZ caused by DPRK artillery bombardment of the minefields to clear the way for attack.

If they attack Seoul head on they will be meeting over 500,000 Highly Trained South Korean Soldiers and 32,000 US Soldiers plus all the air support and artillery we can muster. The second option is they can attack to the east were the only credible manouver force in the region would have to meet them(2nd ID). I can’t remember a time when an Infantry force no matter how large stood a chance of taking on the best trained armored manouver force in the region in a non-urban area exspecially when fire support is not forth coming.

While this is happening the Pacific Fleet and what can be spared from Atlantic Fleet will be launching Tomahawk Cruise Missiles dismanteling their Command and Control and the USAF and USN will be hitting artillery sites day round. Another thing is that US bases and many South Korean bases are protected from DPRK artillery by intervening mountain peaks(same goes for Seoul) leaving most of our artillery in tact to return counter-fire.

Despite popular belief North Korean air defenses are not very good. They have no advanced radar to attack Stealth Aircraft or Cruise Missiles which will be carrying out Suppression of Enemy Air Defense missions in the opening days of the war. They would have to use a combo of optical tracking and IR to knock it out of the air and that is really hard. What further hurts them is that once most CNC is knocked out they will have no means to integrate radar.

Either way they get real close to Seoul and it gets real nasty real fast. In the end we route North Korean forces and South Korea occupies North Korea and intigrates them into a civilized nation.

Of course all this trouble could be solved by detonating about 20 Neutron Bombs a long concentrated ammounts of DPRK artillery positions. At 1000 meters a Neutron Bomb will give multiple lethal doses of Radiation when your inside a tank and undaughtadly a cave.

15

David, you’ve misread what I said – or I said it so poorly that I didn’t get my point across.

A. I don’t assume that the people of North Korea would be better off if they stayed under the thumb of that butcher. That would be like saying the victims in Hitler’s camps weren’t better off after they were liberated. My point is from the point of view of our own troops and what they would be facing and the logistical problems that would ensue. You can’t just discount what it would actually require in terms of planning. Those poor people could hardly be worse off than they already are.

B. I don’t consider the fate of the North Koreans to be the responsibility of the US. I consider the fate of those I ask to fight to be my responsibility if I consider sending them in without everything in place.

C. I only give a damn what other countries think to the extent that I must consider and plan for what they will do. I don’t honestly think that Russia would do anything, but I would never count on the totalitarian government of China to be rational. I don’t THINK they would do anything. We’ve held them at bay over Taiwan, and their own economic interests ought to be a deterent. I’m saying, however, that such things must be considered when planning such a strike.

Philosophy only tells us the right thing to do. Getting the job done is another thing entirely. It is actually doing the job that I’m concerned with. There is no guarantee that an attack on North Korea cannot escalate beyond a single strike. We can’t just go in without a plan in case it does. At the moment, our military is stretched to an incredibly dangerous extent. These people have been fighting steadily since we went into Kosovo. These are facts that any responsible administration must consider.

We live in a very dangerous world at the moment. It isn’t just Korea. It is the Middle East (in particular, Iran, who poses the same kind of threat as Korea), Southwest Asia, Pakistan (who could turn against us with the speed of a bullet in Masharif’s brain), and the machinations of Europe.

We are very good, but even we have our limits. I’m not saying that we shouldn’t act, I’m saying that we must take as much into account as possible before we do act. To do otherwise is willfully irresponsible.

(Tactically, North Korea won’t cause us much more trouble than Iraq has, though on a larger scale. It is a totalitarian regime after all. But the aftermath will be much more difficult.)

By the way, I come from a military family. My grandfather was career Navy, my father was career Navy (and died in service), and both of my brothers were career Navy. I grew up in post-war Japan. I served as a Navy nurse in Viet Nam. I’m not just chit-chatting; I know whereof I speak.

16

You all have wonderful points. However, you are all underestimating North Korea. Their special forces touted by the US government (my employer) as the greatest in the world and number 500,000. If you compare that to the amount of people that would be involved in such a war in the immediate region ( base-wise), we don’t have anywhere near enough. Yes South Korea once had 500,000 troops, back in the 60’s that is. I was stationed at Osan AB, the second largest base there. They don’t even have 1/4 of that many “highly trained” soldiers. I wasn’t joking when they said Yongsan, the Army camp defending the DMZ is nothing more than a road block. That includes American and South Korean troops. You guys get your information from the media. I get it personally, because it’s my job to know.

The Bush Administration, has taken note of this. That is why they are taking the diplomatic route. The understand the consequences of surprise attacks on North Korea.

I wish I could give you exact numbers. I can’t. It is against the law, and I would be severely punished.

I’ve thrown in my two cents in. My answer is:

No, we should not launch surgical strikes on NK

17

Which is why my position is:

We should invade North Korea, depose every level of their government, and destroy every level of their military.

We pull our military from where it’s not needed, including from vulnerable locations in the region - and devastate the country from air and sea before atttempting to invade or occupy it.

The number of “highly trained” soldiers North Korea ought not scare anyone. They have low productivity; what ten of their soldiers can do under Communism, one of ours can do with the capital equipment of Capitalism. So they’ve got tanks; blow them up from the sky. So they’ve got air defense; blow it up from the sea. So they’ve got propoganda; not for long.

It is North Korea that is the roadblock to American security.

18

Thanks for the info, Lucent. One more reason not to go in at this time – and a pretty sound one.

Boy, I knew I hadn’t been in the region for a long time, but seems like the tactical situation has sure changed. No wonder South Korea is stepping so lightly. They ought to be scared.

Our fellow citizens have gotten so used to the expertise of our military that they now expect a comparatively easy time no matter what they do. History if full of the conquered who had become overconfident and unrealistic. War on paper is just so easy :wink: .

19

LucentBrave,

You may be right but your comments sound a great deal like the ones I used to hear concerning the mighty Soviet military. Our government was fooled by the Soviet propoganda machine. Morale, training, supplies, leadership etc. were all enormous problems in the Soviet military. Imagine what those problems must be like in the military of a country like this: North Korea

20

Rome defeated itself from the inside - by proclaiming a king.