North Korean aggression

Political Philosophy
21

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.

Check again it is more around 100,000. Their job is to go behind enemy lines and cause as much havoc as possible and distract American/South Korean forces from the main DPRK assault. They would try insertian via submarines and submersibals, a long with tunnels under neat the DMZ.

Their presence on the Battlefield would certainly elevate the potential number of casulties on US/ROK sides, exspecially when it comes to destroying South Korean infrastructure which would certainly make it hard for resupply.

The US Government has never claimed they are the best, they are simply the most numerous.

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.

I get my information from people that have served in the military and people who have served in South Korea. None of them are making the assertians that you are making (such as the DPRK having 500,000 special forces).

The South Korean Army consists of 560,000 men which is 49 Divisions and 19 Brigades. They don’t have 500,000 Front Line troops but they certainly have over 500,000 Soldiers. They also have over 2,000,000 that could be called up, mostly Infantry forces which would be better supplyed and better fed then the average North Korean soldier.

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

It’s funny how people never state exact numbers because “it is against the law”. It holds absolutely no credibility. Since you can’t prove either because it’s true or you are making it up there is no point in claiming “I can’t post the real numbers”.

This being said if we were going to do a suprise attack, we would have to fly in as many Strategic Bombers and as many fighters as we can spare before we can attack.

We will have to target their artillery sites concurently with NBC sites. This will force them to launch an attack because that option will be out of the picture once most of the artillery is destroyed. This will force DPRK artillery out of their hiding to open up on the DMZ minefields and thus expose them to US/South Korean counter-artillery fire. The North Koreans will meat the bulk of US and South Korean forces in a battle they were not prepared for.

This is the best option short of nuking them.

22

I’m sure you all are stating truthfully what you have heard on the subject at hand. I have merely been stating information that I have heard from what I believe a highly credible source ( although I’m quite postive that the government has been wrong in the past).

Praxus, I can’t see how violating a military law, of the UCMJ, and a violation of OPSEC (look them up on the internet to quench your knwledge) can be warranted as “funny.” I have a SECRET security clearance, which you can look up as well and see what that entails. I could furthermore prove my credibility by emailing you all of my military info. However, I am not a subjectivist. I don’t need to prove to myself, let alone to anyone else that I am in the military. I know that I am, I don’t need your reasurrance for me to be so. It’s your choice to believe me. If you don’t, I really don’t care. What you shouldn’t do is subtly state that I am “bullshitting”, when I am not. I have a pretty reliable source. I deal with, and have dealt with this stuff in the past- nor have I exaggerated what I have heard.

The bottom line is: We won’t have our concrete proof until something actually happens. What we have stated here-myself included- are no more than highly researched opinions. I don’t see the point in arguing over anything that we can’t prove until the actual result occurs. We dont’ even have enough info to acurately determine what we should do.

“Oh we should just go in there ad bomb the hell out of them.”

“Oh, no we shouldn’t, it’s too risky.”

How do we know if it’s too risky or not?

How do we know that we can pull something off without negative consequences.?

We can’t, because we’ve been analyzing unproven data and numbers to determine something, that has not come about yet.

I’m done with this topic. Believe what you want to believe, as I’m not cut out to be a preacher.

23

There is one last aspect that you guys are forgetting. There are 10,000 pieces of artillery fortified along the North Korean border.

Seoul, the capital city of South Korea, is 35 miles from the DMZ, well within range of the NK long range artillery.

Seoul, is a city of 14 million people(29% of the South Korean population).

So if there were to be a war, it will be a logistical nightmare to evacuate 14 million South Koreans to safety away from their capital city. North Korea do not need to use nukes to hurt South Korea badly, they only need to fire their artillery pieces to cause massive civilian death tolls.

The fact of the matter is, even tho it will the North Koreans fault for their deaths and the blame will rest on NK’s head for all it’s threats it has done over the years, you can’t expect South Korea to agree to a course of action to support a US invasion with such a huge possible death toll looming over their heads. The gun is just too well pointed.

To put it bluntly, the job of the North Korean war should have been completed in the 1950s and not left to fester for so long allowing them to fortify the border and heavily complicate the situation.

NK is just too big a problem to deal with at this present time. Leaving them for 2-3 years won’t change how screwy the situation with them is to make it much worse because it already is pretty bad. However, we got a nation, Iran, that is starting to develop into quite a problem right at this present time.

Deal with the middle east first so that the same mistake isn’t repeated there as what happened with NK. Stop the middle east from turning into a future giant problem and eliminate all possible threats there.

In the meantime with the conflict in the Middle East, back at home in the US, develop new attack scenarios to deal with N Korea, as well as accelerate possible new technology designed especially for fighting North Korea.

I am no expert on military technology by any means, but I see a possible candidate in the following - http://www.defenselink.mil/photos/Apr1996/…-0000U-001.html & another article here on it - http://www.spacedaily.com/news/laser-00g.html

Once the Middle East campaign is completed and the new technology is operational(an artillery/rocket shield) and rolled out in South Korea, they will potentially be more cooperative and then full attention can be given to the North Korean threat to wipe out that threat as soon as possible.

24

Are you sure of those range figures Zirjan? Our longest range artillary, as far as I can tell, is only about 18 - 20 miles. The NK has something with double that range?

25

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

Not only would we be justified in bombing North Korea, but we should also bomb South Korea as well for being appeasers. It’s because of them and philosophers like Kant that evil exists today. So i agree with Greedy Capitalist, but think he’s not going to be solving the entire problem. We shouldn’t be dropping a low-yield nuke on just North Korea. We should be dropping a couple of high-yield nukes on the entire peninsula and rid ourselves of the problems that have been escalating since the Korean War. And backlash be damned! It’s not America’s fault that North Korea continued to be a threat to freedom. We are justified in acting in our own self-interest and need not justify our actions to any other country. If any other country has a problem with out bombing campaign on the Korean peninsula, they can surely expect a bombing campaign on their own asses as well. :yarr: :slight_smile: :angry:

26

“Pirates - you shall ph34r m3, the g0d1y n1nja, or you shall be banging your heads against brick walls!”

Whatever happened to throwing-stars and walking the plank?

27

They don’t have emoticons for that.

…AND this isn’t a laughing matter.

28

We need to exercise brinkmanship against Kim Il Jung. This jerk is a real blowhard. He knows he can bluff us because he did just that with Clinton, and he appears to be succeeding with Bush.

If he violated any agreements he made towards the end of the Korean War regarding deployment of weapons we need to call him on it. We need to maintain a presence in the pacific that emphasizes heavy striking capability which does not require the use of infantry. This way, if Kim decided to construct a nuke plant that can produce weapons-grade nuclear energy we can threaten to blow such plant off the face of the earth if he doesn’t take it down within a quick, prescribed period.

Brinkmanship did work with Russia. North Korea is far less of a military power than Russia.

29

There is one last aspect that you guys are forgetting. There are 10,000 pieces of artillery fortified along the North Korean border.

Seoul, the capital city of South Korea, is 35 miles from the DMZ, well within range of the NK long range artillery.

Actually despite popular belief only around 800 Howitzers/MRLS mostly Koksan Guns and 240mm MLRS rockets could theoreticly hit Seoul. The problem for the DPRK is mountain peaks intercept the arcs of the artillery when fired at it’s maximum range(around 45% angle but depends on wind and other weather factors). Don’t get me wrong they certainly could hit Seouls Northern Suburbs but they would have to move their artillery up so they can fire on a higher arc to hit downtown Seoul and the majority of it’s population.

The fact is we can defeat North Korea and we should not tollerate their BS. We should use all weapons in our arsenal including Nuclear Weapons.

Praxus, I can’t see how violating a military law, of the UCMJ, and a violation of OPSEC (look them up on the internet to quench your knwledge) can be warranted as “funny.” I have a SECRET security clearance, which you can look up as well and see what that entails. I could furthermore prove my credibility by emailing you all of my military info.

You are claiming that you are more knowledgable by making a claim you are either not allowed to prove or can’t prove. So your just trying to gain credibility by claiming you have secret knowledge that no one else has.

I am no expert on military technology by any means, but I see a possible candidate in the following - http://www.defenselink.mil/photos/Apr1996/…-0000U-001.html & another article here on it - http://www.spacedaily.com/news/laser-00g.html

Yah I read about that, however it is not reasonable to believe you could knock down the ammount of artillery we are talking about in a DPRK attack on South Korea.

It would be a VERY effective active defense against Anti-Shipping Missiles and Ballistic Missiles.

30

LMAO… I give up. This is like watching comedy central. :blink:

31

Looking at a map of the region, I fail to see where those mentioned mountain peaks are. Seoul is on the west of the peninsula. All the giant mountain ranges are on the East side. Artillary can be stuck north of Seoul without much stuff blocking their line of sight.

A possibility however remains that the maps I am looking at, are low resolution and thus not showing all the detail that should be looked at. If you find a high res map on the net that refutes my point, I will be very curious to see it. :blink:

I like that laser technology because a single beam can destroy several artillary shells across the sky in a single pass if it was equipped with the right software. The beams are at light speed so it can track at short notice multiple targets.

It has a bit of a cooldown time in it’s present form which is it’s only downfall.

If there are a lot of those emplacements, they mightn’t get all the shells, heck, they might get only 20% of them, it is still an amount that could reduce the casualties and damage to infrastructure done, which will help sell the South Koreans onto the idea of taking on the North.

32

Praxus, since you aren’t bound to military law, please provide your resources, references, and proof. I would like to see where you are getting your numbers from. I have been to the DMZ. I have a piece of the old wire fence that they are replacing to prove it. I have seen there artillery. Now I ask once again: before making a claim, let me see your proof. You’re entitled to provide yours, while I am not.

Although the CIA World Fact Book is great info, most of the sites that I use for military demographics require my social security number and a password. I wish I could provide you with the information to access the knowlege on the subject at hand, but I can’t. Have I proven anything, by saying this? No. I am stating true things that have been made public to back myself up. Now, let me see where your getting your info.

33

Here you are Praxus. Staright from the commander, USFK- General LaPorte.

Just some more numbers to prove yours wrong. Courtesy of DOD Defense Link News service.

http://www.defenselink.mil/news/Apr2004/n0…_200404016.html

This site is legit. They are a DOD media service. They don’t make up anything that they report. You can say that you don’t believe it Praxus, but that does not mean these numbers are false. If you were to suggest as much, you wouldn’t be in this forum.

34

Praxus: You throw around a lot of numbers, without providing any references or links, and then you sneer at Lucent? If you had a modicum of military savvy, you’d know that he isn’t just trying to blow smoke. My brother worked in Naval Intelligence for over 30 years – and still works as a consultant to the Navy. We discuss many things, but he has never, in all these years, told me anything he shouldn’t. He’s very blunt in stating what he can and can’t talk about. It is one thing to disagree, but I can’t say that I give much weight to what you say over Lucent. At least he sounds right to these military ears. Having friends in the military doesn’t give you any particular insights or special knowledge. It gives you the opinions of whatever particular rate and grade you’re talking to. Using a page from your own book of bad manners, why should we believe you?

Anyway, as Lucent pointed out, we are having a discussion based on a lot of assumptions, 99% of which are probably hogwash. The only point I wanted to make was that it is wrong to suggest that we take any action without having everything in place to back up that action. One needs only a knowledge of history to understand that.

I would like to know, however, how anyone could say that it would be ethically proper to bomb SOUTH Korea. If, as was stated, we ought to do so because they are appeasers, who do we go after next? France, Japan, Canada, Germany, Turkey? The United States of America?

35

Thank you, Old Salt. I was wondering when someone would understand.

3rd largest army in the world. Not a threat hmm…? Maybe not, if we gathered ALL of our military and launched an attack.

Praxus, remember one thing: just becuase you HEAR or READ one thing, it doesn’t erase the knowledge or experience that I have on the subject at hand. I’ve been to South Korea. Have you? I’ve been to the DMZ. Have you? I do not lie. I don’t have a reason to make excuses or to lie for myself. I am an objectivist. I thought that I have proven that a while ago.

Although, no need to prove myself exists. What I have heard, I discount until I hear the truth on the matter at hand. What I see- well, that’s another matter. I don’t imagine things subjectivist style, as you have stated that I have done (numerous times).

Please. Provide your references and proof. I am very curious as to where you are getting your very OUTDATED numbers from. According to Objectiviwsm, you can’t produce existents and reference numbers to them. Please provide your proof. If you don’t, I could care less. I am quite happy with what I know. I could care even less more if you believe me.

And bomb South Korea? That is the dumbest thing that I have heard of. In many ways, they are more free than the United States. Of course, My consciousness could have fabricated this as well :dough: Show me proof, somewhere that South Korea fabricated Kantism. I plan on moving there when I am finished with my second tour.

36

LucentBrave, could a flight of B-2 stealth bombers not deliver enough first-strike nuclear weapons to neutralize the NK forces?

37

I’m sure that we could- if there anti-aircraft artillery are used poorly. However, does that get rid of our problem? The United States still has no idea where all of the underground nuclear facilities exist. Nor have we developed a capable conventional weapon to preform the task of destroying underground nuke facilities. Look it up if you don’t believe me. Bunkerbusters, are NOT suitable to such a task.

In order to get somewhere, you have to know where you’re going first.

38

What is your proposal for dealing with the problem, LucentBrave?

39

My Proposal? Please don’t nominate me for Secretary of Defense just yet. I haven’t come up with one yet. It isn’t my job to do so.

ONCE AGAIN, if it were my choice to decide, we should have concrete info, before we do anything. Such as: develop weapons capable of destroying underground nuclear facilities.

Evacuating South Korea is a big thing. They only recently started excercises at that task in case such an emergency should arise.

We should also wait until we have ACCURATE numbers and compare military demographics before we do anything. I’m sure that it has already been done, as we haven’t taken action yet- and everyone’s opinion here (including my own) would have no effect on anything anyway.

I really don’t think that NK will do anything until they get what they want. However, when they run out of what they NEED (food and money), and China, Japan, and their other providers decide to jump ship on provisions, they will be nothing more than a HUGE rat backed into a corner. And what do HUGE rats do in such circumstances?

They fight back. They get desperate and untilize ALL weapons (nukes) and tools (once again, nukes) at there disposal.

40

LucentBrave, you seem to be saying that you have sufficient, first-hand information to refute everyone else’s suggestions as being impractical, but not enough first-hand information to know what is practical. Is that correct?