Open Thread: Korean Fighting (Updated with Video) (Update: S.K. Leader Threatens Enormous Retaliation)
[Guest post by Aaron Worthing; if you have tips, please send them here.]
Update: Ace has video, here.
Update (II): Via Hot Air, we learn the South Korean President is saying that if his country is provoked there will be “enormous retaliation.”
I really don’t have a lot to say about this story, but I did find this article in the AP/NYT a little strange. The headline says “North Korea Reportedly Fires Artillery Near South[.]” So that headline suggests 1) we are not sure the shots were fired, and 2) they were not shot into South Korea territory. And then the very first paragraph completely contradicts this:
North Korea shot dozens of rounds of artillery onto a populated South Korean island near their disputed western border Tuesday, military officials said, setting buildings on fire and prompting South Korea to return fire and scramble fighter jets.
So according to this paragraph, the shots were definitely fired, and in fact did land in South Korean territory. But to be fair, this might be a “breaking story” and they are justified in changing it on the fly, and thus perhaps the headline is an artifact of an earlier version.
Mind you, the story actually has to be breaking news to justify changing it without issuing a correction. So that time they changed the article on the Coons/O’Donnell debate without issuing a correction doesn’t count. They owed us a correction. But my sense is that this story better qualifies as breaking news.
Anyway, I don’t have a great insight into what is happening beyond that, so I figured I would create an open thread. Let us know what you think of it all, and if you learn of any breaking developments.
I will note that Glenn Reynolds writes this: “If they start anything, I say nuke ‘em. And not with just a few bombs. They’ve caused enough trouble — and it would be a useful lesson for Iran, too. We can’t afford another Korean war, but hey, we’re already dismantling warheads. . . .”
[Posted and authored by Aaron Worthing.]
The bad part about NK is that we have several thousand troops on the DMZ. If they ever decided to go south we would take enormous casualties. It would justify a nuclear response but I’d prefer we scale back the number of troops to a very small number and openly declare that an attack on the south would justify a nuclear response.
VOR2 (8e6b90) — 11/23/2010 @ 6:19 amWith all due respect to many decent South Koreans — that country deserves to be invaded for their willful malfeasance.
Many in Korea have painted the US as the enemy and the lone reason unity has not occurred. Evil Bush, blah blah, evil US, blah blah
I say we let them have unity North Korean style by leaving the peninsula and putting our treasure back in our pockets.
The South Koreans would surrender in 48 hours and choose to live as slaves.
Torquemada (a8a9b2) — 11/23/2010 @ 6:26 amFollowing up on VOR2 comment about large number of troops stationed within few miles of the korean dmz – as of the late 1990’s, large segments of the troops included military families with young children stationed within few miles of the DMZ. Talk about the concept of military effectiveness (ala pat schroeder d.col)
Joe (6120a4) — 11/23/2010 @ 6:30 amtorq
so a few people act like shmucks, therefore every man, woman and child should lose their freedom?
Aaron Worthing (e7d72e) — 11/23/2010 @ 6:31 amI would note two things:
1) The North Koreans claim the South fied first, and the South has stated that they were firing to the west as part of drills before the shooting. Hence, the North may have decided it was an opportunity too good to pass up.
2) That said, North Korea may have just handed Obama an opportunity that HE will decide is too good to ignore. After all, his advisors may say, what better way to counter his bad polls than to act toughly and decisively.
jim2 (a9ab88) — 11/23/2010 @ 6:31 amAaron,
I disagree with Reynolds suggestion. The peninsula is only 684 miles from north to south with most of our troops in the middle. Pyongyang is 215 kilomters from the DMZ and Seoul less than an hour south of the DMZ. Drop a bunch of nukes and even if it prevents a full army assault from the north we have contaminated Seoul and most of our troops.
VOR2 (8e6b90) — 11/23/2010 @ 6:32 amVOR2 –
While I do not necessarily endorse any nuke proposal, I think the distance would easily be enough. After all, we had troops a lot closer to a lot larger and dirtier nukes during the testing period. That is one positive to the much smaller weapon yields of the later designs.
jim2 (a9ab88) — 11/23/2010 @ 6:37 amChina should be ashamed. They need to keep their little dog on its leash.
happyfeet (42fd61) — 11/23/2010 @ 6:37 amso a few people act like shmucks, therefore every man, woman and child should lose their freedom?
With all due respect AW, the South Koreans have been acting like supplicants to the North at every opportunity over the past few decades, not just for a few years. Hundreds of thousands of citizens demonstrating about the evil warmonger US (albeit please keep your troops directly in harm’s way), and BTW, let’s try our new “Sunshine Policy” of engagement, where we kiss Dear Leader’s arse in full view of the entire world.
I’ll also agree that Clinton’s policy of appeasement with Madeline the Troll dancing with Dear Leader and exclaiming he was someone “we can do business with” didn’t help one iota. Still, you eventually reap what you sow. If they decide to hide their heads in the sand one more time it may be their last.
Dmac (498ece) — 11/23/2010 @ 6:42 amA confrontation with North Korea would not be limited to the Peninsula, if you all were paying
narciso (82637e) — 11/23/2010 @ 6:43 amattention when the Kim was throwing some missiles around in the spring of last year, that provoked
the activation of the ABM radar network, why the matter of Ft. Greeley’s missile defenses came into being
As a general rule, yes Dmac, but this regime is not committed to the same kind of games, that the previous one was
narciso (82637e) — 11/23/2010 @ 6:44 amIf NK felt it was going to be annihilated I think you could expect that Tokyo would be targeted. Losing Tokyo would trigger a collapse of the Asian markets with the rest of the world to follow. They are said to have about six nukes – one for Seoul, one for Tokyo, and who knows where the others would go, Okinaway possibly. In any event our American troops and dependents in that region number close to a quarter million.
VOR2 (c9795e) — 11/23/2010 @ 6:46 amIt is a dicey dicey situation requiring very careful responses.
I say we blame china, and stop all debt payments and declare the bonds they hold null and void until they overthrow the regime in PYngytown and rejoin the two countries
problem solved…
EricPWJohnson (d84fb0) — 11/23/2010 @ 6:46 amNorth Korea has been a festering boil in Asia that each administration has hoped would not erupt until after they had passed the baton to the successor administration.
One of these days, the music in that game of musical chairs will stop. And a more horrific war than the first Korean war will erupt.
SPQR (26be8b) — 11/23/2010 @ 6:48 amSPQR
I dont thik so, the north knows its cannot win and the South doesnt want 100,000 deaths to take back the peninsula
Militarily, North Korea is a paper tiger with gun emplacements being the backbone of thir military projection
As some may have forgotten, the t34/85 was the most advanced tank still, in the world in both numbers, speed and firepower and they wrought havoc, until we brought what few heavy tanks and guns we had to throw them back. We never really committed to the war on the Peninsula, we never fielded enough troops to fight the chinese, many were afraid that it would erupt into europe.
THis is not the scenario today, yo have China which needs the cheap North Korean neighbor and our dollar bonds to prop up their fake currency.
Totally different, the Chinese will have to act, but they themselves are somewhar anxious about their peoples armys willingness to fight
Which could undermine their precarious position as a superpower
Thix could be a match that eraddicates the last of the communists regimes as we know it – all without firing a shot
EricPWJohnson (d84fb0) — 11/23/2010 @ 6:58 amMore like 28000 US troops, just for the record.
Bob Reed (5f2db5) — 11/23/2010 @ 7:00 amSome clairifications
I was refering to the 1950 war and China is using cheap NK labor in many of their more productive factories
EricPWJohnson (d84fb0) — 11/23/2010 @ 7:00 amBob,
VOR2 (c9795e) — 11/23/2010 @ 7:02 amAdd dependents, Oki and Tokyo based troops and dependents and it starts to add up significantly.
VOR2
Those troops are there to be deployed either in Taiwan or in South Korea, within 60 days we could have 150,000 troops
This is a wakeup call for those who thought that high tech toys were a trade off for raw military power
EricPWJohnson (d84fb0) — 11/23/2010 @ 7:07 amEPWJ, the NKPA of today is not the NKPA of 1950. It has a huge number of very destructive weapons. And North Korean has a very ruthless leadership that is sitting atop an immense powderkeg and knows it.
Making analogies to the 1950 war is just silly.
SPQR (26be8b) — 11/23/2010 @ 7:10 amUS to North Korea: If you attack the South again, our next protest will be written in ALL CAPS.
tmac (5559f7) — 11/23/2010 @ 7:12 amEPWJ,
Ask any person who has done time in the ROK and you are likely to hear the term “speed bump”. The troops in rear locations would not stop the high losses we would initially suffer.
VOR2 (c9795e) — 11/23/2010 @ 7:12 amMy point about Reynolds sentiment is that if we go balls to the wall we likely see Tokyo and Oki hit long before we deploy out or evacuate dependents and non-combatants.
It’s a fair point to consider, also the conflict won’t rest there. Is it a coincidence this is happening in the lame duck session
narciso (82637e) — 11/23/2010 @ 7:15 amEric –
If one expects to get true credit for high tech toys as “trade off”s, one may need to convince others that those toys will be used. (e.g., MAD)
jim2 (a9ab88) — 11/23/2010 @ 7:16 amSounds like that 3AM Call came in. Who picked up the phone? Obama or Hillary?
Dennis D (e0b996) — 11/23/2010 @ 7:21 amI am wondering if this is concerted, i.e. did the Norks sortie their Navy prior to this, did they tunnel their assault troops (which is why the “Nuke them until they glow…” strat is contraindicated) and did they sequester their leadership?
If yes, then this was planned
MunDane68 (54a83b) — 11/23/2010 @ 7:22 amAW,
No Aaron, it is not that they deserve to be slaves but they have an obligation to defend themselves. We have no obligation to defend them yet we do.
We always talk about how Welfare Programs hurt the poor b/c they create dependence …. well WTF is our S Korea Policy if not Nation-State Welfare Payments?
Let me be clear, I am not for any US Aid to any country unless it puts treasure back in our pocket.
Germany, Japan, South Korea, Iraq should be held responsible for their own defense and live with the consequences of not doing so.
Extend the same logic to all the drug and medical devices we develop which we then ‘give away” to all the national health care payers who mock us.
Fr Foreigners, Come to Jesus Time if I was POTUS.
Torquemada (a8a9b2) — 11/23/2010 @ 7:25 amtorq
okay, that makes more sense. i still disagree, but its a different kind of disagreement.
Aaron Worthing (e7d72e) — 11/23/2010 @ 7:30 amThere were two other confrontations in this same area, in 1999 and 2005, it’s like the Rumayla line
narciso (82637e) — 11/23/2010 @ 7:30 amon the Iraq/Kuwaiti border
For some time, especially in the ’60’s and ’70’s, the purpose of the US troops in South Korea was not to protect South Korea. Rather, the reality was that it was to prevent the South Koreans from restarting the war. There was a period when US military planners believed that the South Koreans had the capability of taking North Korea and were seriously considering doing it.
SPQR (26be8b) — 11/23/2010 @ 7:32 amAW,
For example, United Nations, why?
What do we get out of it?
Cut it loose or get a favorable funding formula.
From a policy perspective what do we get out of it other than a bill?
Saudi Arabia is on the Women’s Right Commission or some other nonsense.
Look at all the Peace Keeping they do? What is it? Jobs program for Sri Lankans who then use their pay to buy prostitutes in Haiti and Africa?
Give me a break. Cut them all loose and let the primates figure out how to walk erect.
Torquemada (a8a9b2) — 11/23/2010 @ 7:32 amSPQR,
If a military planner actually thought South Koreans would have a snows ball chance versus the Chinese errrr. North Koreans then Military Establishment is much dumber than I can even imagine.
Torquemada (a8a9b2) — 11/23/2010 @ 7:34 amWell that was a similar reason why to support NATO,
narciso (82637e) — 11/23/2010 @ 7:39 amkeep the Russians out, keep the Germans in and out
of causing mischief.
Ah NATO …
We defend, you complain.
Another fairly useless organization we prop up with billions while surrendering power to Western Europeans who dislike us.
Another example, of cut them loose. You want an Air Base somewhere — pay the Romanians some dough and get twice the value for 1/20 the the cost.
Torquemada (a8a9b2) — 11/23/2010 @ 7:44 amOne is struck by something, almost every third world proxy, that the Us ends up defending whether
Korea, Vietnam, El Salvador, Iraq you can throw Israel into that hopper, is always considered unworthy. Every foe is always given due deference
and accorded rationalizations for every vile act,
Now there is a degree that the long term military regime that ran the country from the 50s on, probably conditions this response among the S. Korean youths, but how deep is that sentiment
O and a blast from the recent past;
http://www.associatedcontent.com/article/1633484/sarah_palin_concerned_over_north_korea.html
narciso (82637e) — 11/23/2010 @ 7:49 amPosted this over on Gateway Pundit this morning:
This is an extremely dangerous situation.
Watch the Japanese. What the ChiComms and Norks fear most is a nuclear armed Japan. Japan is probably a week away from testing a nuke. With no confidence in the U.S. and facing an aggressive nuclear equipped North Korea, I expect the Japanese Self Defence Force to assemble and detonate a weapon. The Taiwanese could follow suit in about six months. To put it mildly, these events would destabilize East Asia.
BTW, I earned my BA in Asian Studies at the University of Oklahoma in 1967.
Arch (24f4f2) — 11/23/2010 @ 7:51 amNo, Torquemada, the South Koreans rapidly built a very capable army post ’50’s. And there was a period of time when they could have successfully taken North Korea, albeit at large cost.
SPQR (26be8b) — 11/23/2010 @ 7:52 amArch, what evidence do you have that Japan is one week away from assembling a nuclear weapon?
SPQR (26be8b) — 11/23/2010 @ 7:57 amSPQR,
I don’t think he has any evidence of that. I read an article in Foreign Affairs a couple of months back in which someone suggested that Japan may ease up on some “restrictions” and letting us base some nukes on their land to make the point. But nothing about creating their own.
Torquemada,
VOR2 (c9795e) — 11/23/2010 @ 8:10 amYou do realize that the constitution we wrote for the Japanese limits their military to self defense and a percentage of their GDP don’t you?
SPQR:
First, the Japanese have had the technology since before WWII. As Germany collapsed in 1945, a German submarine carrying enriched uranium was en route to Japan with two Japanese officers aboard when they were told to surrender to to the US Navy. The Japanese officers committed suicide and we used the uranium in one of our bombs.
Post WWII, there was an anti-war and a strong anti-nuclear movement, which is understandable and politically convenient for a nation protected by the nuclear umbrella of the United States. The Japanese forces are called Self Defence Forces, a renunciation of aggressive war. Only after 9/11 did any Japanese military operate outside their own defense zones.
The North Korean nuclear program has encouraged the political debate in Japan. As you remember in 2006, the North Koreans, without notice or permission, launched ICBMs over Japan. In 2009, they conducted another test.
The long pole in the tent for a nuclear weapons program is either plutonium or enriched uranium. The Japanese have for decades stockpiled tons of plutonium and have constructed and operate a uranium enrichment facility. With these industrial capabilities, the Japanese have the tools necessary to machine these metals. The necessary electronics are basically off the shelf.
The JSDF, a former customer of mine, are extremely concerned about their internal political non-nuclear stance. From my associations with defence executives in Japan, I understand that critical subsystems have been designed, prototyped and tested by large Japanese industrial conglomerates. If you attend Farnborough or the Paris Air Show, you will see that the Japanese have the technology.
For delivery systems the Japanese have nuclear capable fighter aircraft, naval strike missiles and a three stage ICBM with a payload measured in tons. The French have offered Japan a submarine with nuclear strike capability.
The estimate of one week to a test is mine. They already have a design. They own the tested components. If they haven’t already done it they need time to mill the plutonium or uranium, assemble the device and clear a test site. Testing a weapon crosses a political line.
Barack Obama’s stated position that he would not use a nuclear weapon even if we had been attacked along with his soft positions in the Middle East have not supported the anti-nuclear argument in Japan.
Some background data:
Arch (24f4f2) — 11/23/2010 @ 9:10 amhttp://www.fas.org/nuke/guide/japan/nuke/
More:
http://www.globalsecurity.org/wmd/world/japan/nuke.htm
SPQR, if we really believed the South had a chance of liberating the North, why on earth would we want to stop them?
Milhouse (ea66e3) — 11/23/2010 @ 9:21 amAnd if we really did stop them, then that makes us morally responsible for everything the North does, forever more. It certainly makes us responsible for defending the South forever, for free.
Milhouse (ea66e3) — 11/23/2010 @ 9:22 amVOR2:
Nukes are a much cheaper means of defense than supporting and operating a large conventional force.
Arch (24f4f2) — 11/23/2010 @ 9:31 amNorth Korea is a claw tip of the Chinese tiger. This is more distractions for the American experiment currently headed by Barack Hussein Obama.
Whether its financial crisis’s, China asserting sovereign rights against the Japanese, Vietnamese or Phillipines, Afghan insurgents armed and supported by the Chinese proxy state of Pakistan, economic warfare using currencies, cyber attacks against the DOD, it all comes down to China asserting itself against American interests.
This is just getting started.
richardb (11d6f5) — 11/23/2010 @ 9:37 amSPQR,
You think South Korea taking over North Korea in the 50’s and the Chinese letting them do so was a viable option?
Torquemada (a8a9b2) — 11/23/2010 @ 9:38 amGreetings:
At the risk of appearing trite, the relationship between the two Koreas reminds me of when your best buddy is in love with an evil woman. There will be pain.
After the tepid responses to the sinking of the Choenan, this comes as no real surprise. Kim the Second was involved in the North’s terrorist activities prior to his ascendency. Same-same for Kim the third. Bones will be made.
As long as compassionate-humanitarianism continues, the North won’t take us or the South very seriously. Time to share the pain.
11B40 (525c0c) — 11/23/2010 @ 9:39 amYep, the reality of SK’s prostrate response to the recent killing of their sailors gave a veritable green light to NK – actions (or non – actions) eventually have consequences. There have also been many provocations from NK in the past that were met by similarly meek responses.
As much as I disliked MacArthur, he had a point about using nukes on the Chinese during the tail end of the war.
Dmac (498ece) — 11/23/2010 @ 9:45 amit rolled over to voice mail.
redc1c4 (fb8750) — 11/23/2010 @ 9:58 amIt might have been George Schultz who was once asked how long it would take for Japan to have a nuclear weapon if they wanted one. He answered, “They could pull an all-nighter.”
More realistically as has been stated above, they have everything they need to do it, including the experienced personnel, and the only thing holding them back is how much engineering they want to put into it.
luagha (5cbe06) — 11/23/2010 @ 10:51 amAm I the only one who finds it refreshing that this $h1tdisturbing is done by a non-Muslim nation?
TimesDisliker (cf4368) — 11/23/2010 @ 10:53 amThe South Korean defense minister just asked if the US would redeploy our tactical nuclear weapons into their country. They had tossed us out in 1993.
My first F4 squadron was en route to Phu Cat AB, when we were stopped on Guam and sent to the Kunan to sit nuke alert. No fun, that.
Arch (24f4f2) — 11/23/2010 @ 10:54 amI meant Kunsan
Arch (24f4f2) — 11/23/2010 @ 10:56 amUK Telegraph is reporting
“Naoto Kan, Japan’s prime minister, said he had ordered his ministers to prepare for any eventuality.
“I ordered (ministers) to make preparations so that we can react firmly, should any unexpected event occur,” Mr Kan said.
“We will make preparations so that whatever happens, we will be able to deal with it.”
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/worldnews/asia/southkorea/8153291/South-Korea-warns-North-Korea-it-will-sternly-retaliate-to-any-further-provocation.html
Arch (24f4f2) — 11/23/2010 @ 11:06 am……Present.
Obama (3e1a46) — 11/23/2010 @ 11:21 amIf I was Obama, I would recommend Congress issue a letter of censure.
TimesDisliker (cf4368) — 11/23/2010 @ 12:54 pmSPQR
Actually, no they dont have modern weapons, most of their artillery is circa 1960’s and thir tanks are the next generation tht were defeated by Israeli Shermans in 56 and 67
The army is much like it was in 1950, the organization, the formations and the placement.
Their Navy consists of XXI clones from 1944 and the missles are late 50’s technology
But a musket ball will make a hole, a million musket balls will make a million holes
South Korea has modern tanks, a series of forts, a highly trained airforce and a modern navy bigger than most european countries
It is the 50’s all over again
This time it should be an economic ar
EricPWJohnson (8a4ca7) — 11/23/2010 @ 12:57 pmEPWJ,
I disagree with you.
From Wikipedia
one million active duty and 8 million reservists.
VOR2 (8e6b90) — 11/23/2010 @ 1:05 pm“US to North Korea: If you attack the South again, our next protest will be written in ALL CAPS.”
tmac – To the F’ING U.N.
Just like with Saddam.
Call out the Lawyers! Take That Bitches!!!!!!
daleyrocks (940075) — 11/23/2010 @ 1:24 pmA good source of comparative orders of battle are John Pike’s websites – global security.org and federation of American scientists fas.org. See links below. They have pictures and some technical overviews. Pike is an anti-nuke guy, so expect that bias.
http://www.globalsecurity.org/military/world/index.html
http://www.fas.org/programs/ssp/man/index.html
Arch (24f4f2) — 11/23/2010 @ 1:25 pmVOR2,
All true, but what do you think the Chinese might do? Crazy Big Kim invading South Korea would totally f*** up all of China’s carefully laid plans. The Chinese may still be nominally Communists, but they’re not idiots. As Mafiosi would say, “Wars are bad for the busi-ness.”
Here’s my take: In 1950, the Chinese entered the first Korean War to stop the Norks from losing. In 2010, the Chinese may enter a second Korean War to make sure the Norks collapse in a controlled manner.
MarkJ (42fe5b) — 11/23/2010 @ 1:30 pmMarkJ,
That would be the optimal approach if they went in first. If the NK fire off their weapons first casualities (civilian and military) will be in the hundreds of thousands if not more.
As a contrast look at Israel. If they ever got hit with a WMD I think most people believe they have a doomsday plan in mind for most of the Arab capitals. It would be over in minutes.
If Kim felt the end was near I think targeting Tokyo and Seoul with nukes would be very likely.
Granted, the war would be a short one but 20M people live in Tokyo and 10M in Seoul. Depending on how looney he is Beijing might be a target with its 14M residents.
Like I said a dicey situation and as you pointed out China could be the key to stop it.
VOR2 (8e6b90) — 11/23/2010 @ 1:45 pmChina has the NORKS on a strong, tight leash and won’t let this go to war. Just as Stalin dictated policy to the NORKS some 60 years ago, Beijing runs the show on war and peace on the Korean Peninsula today.
richardb (2d1b4f) — 11/23/2010 @ 1:54 pmThis is just one of many Chinese provocations over the last few years that should be causing real concern in our nation’s capitol. Unfortunately the USA has many more pressure points for the Chinese to exploit. Manpads for the Afghan insurgents that actually work? Military buildup in Latin America? Overthrow of the Mexican government by Chinese backed drug gangs? Increased Iranian backed terror against Israel?
Arch, your “one week” estimate is frankly unrealistic in the extreme. I don’t dispute that Japan is technologically capable of being a nuclear power. But in the absence of a program already long underway to actually produce same, for which there is no evidence of actual existance of same, it would take a crash program months, not weeks and not a single week, to assemble a testable weapon.
SPQR (26be8b) — 11/23/2010 @ 1:58 pmAW, I am curious as to your reasons for disagreement in #28 with Torquemeda’s #27. I think this is an issue a lot of us have given thought to and when something like this latest action of North Korea happens, it brings the bigger picture and global/political strategy (if we can call it that) to the surface. If it’s too off topic from the thread, I understand.
No Aaron, it is not that they deserve to be slaves but they have an obligation to defend themselves. We have no obligation to defend them yet we do.
We always talk about how Welfare Programs hurt the poor b/c they create dependence …. well WTF is our S Korea Policy if not Nation-State Welfare Payments?
Let me be clear, I am not for any US Aid to any country unless it puts treasure back in our pocket.
Germany, Japan, South Korea, Iraq should be held responsible for their own defense and live with the consequences of not doing so.
Extend the same logic to all the drug and medical devices we develop which we then ‘give away” to all the national health care payers who mock us.
Fr Foreigners, Come to Jesus Time if I was POTUS.
Dana (8ba2fb) — 11/23/2010 @ 2:06 pmEPWJ, in point of fact, your understanding of the North Korean People’s Army is pretty obsolete. They are obviously not the equal of the US military in technological capability. But to quote a Josef Stalin, quantity has a quality all its own.
Obviously there are suspicions of a hollowness to the actual NKPA formations given its economic situation. Its actual cohesiveness and morale have not been tested in more than a half century. But the sheer mass of artillery, armor and special forces can’t be shrugged off.
Diesel electric submarines, properly handled in coastal waters like those around the Korean peninsula, give blue water navy ASW forces the willies
SPQR (26be8b) — 11/23/2010 @ 2:07 pmBased upon the statements of experts that visited the Nork’s new weapons plant for HEU, I wouldn’t underestimate their ability to field sophisticated and modern weapons. Perhaps not in the quantity needed to prevail but enough to cause large numbers of casualties and infrastructure damage. Don’t forget that should an actual shooting war erupt, China would likely supply the Norks with better equipment if not fully manned detachments for electronic attack, air defense, command and control.
richardb (2d1b4f) — 11/23/2010 @ 4:13 pmGod knows what else.
They had tossed us out in 1993.
Yeah, and if they want those weapons back I think we should tell them to stuff it, and pull out our troops immediately. Sick of risking blood and treasure to prop up a country all too willing to lay down at the first sign of conflict. This kind of nonsense has got to stop – either prove you’re capable of responding effectively to aggressors or admit that you’re just bluffing.
Dmac (498ece) — 11/23/2010 @ 4:21 pmSPQR
Maybe, but the ROK has the best equipped army in the world with nearly 2,000 tanks equal or superior to any available and designed to fight for 60 hours without resupply. Building an advanced IFV, which total numbers have not been disclosed but the effect is that the army is totally capable of defeating the NPRK in a matter of a few days at best.
Its the horrific loss of civilian lives and the lives of their fellow countryman the North Koreans that has the whole thing in libo
EricPWJohnson (2925ff) — 11/23/2010 @ 6:43 pmEPWJ, its amusing that you’ve google’d that. Shame your understanding of the NKPA threat does not match.
SPQR (26be8b) — 11/23/2010 @ 7:04 pmWith all due respect, South Korea is not our ally, they treat the US with contempt, they whine and complain about our troops stationed there, for their protection. Ban Ki Moon, of the UN, treats us like garbage. I believe we should tell China that they need to deal with North Korea, they need to pay to address the issue, as they want to play world power. Frankly, let the South Koreans experience where they’d be without us, and let them all go to hell, they don’t deserve our help. I believe China has helped North Korea build this new reactor facility, it hopes we’ll be distracted dealing with it. Let China clean up the mess they created.
jenny (090eb0) — 11/23/2010 @ 7:04 pmSPQR
No my info comes from IISS Strat Bal
plus just attended two mil equipment shows in the middle east
plus Decision games 🙂
plus the steel mill we were a DOD bidder
EricPWJohnson (2925ff) — 11/23/2010 @ 7:08 pmThe real issue here is, who is North Korea representing in this attack? Who is pulling the strings behind the curtain? And when they attack South Korea is that not a proxy attack against the US? Or do we just see North and South?
The Emperor (0ab629) — 11/23/2010 @ 7:09 pmDecision Games? Well, that explains it EPWJ. I played wargames with Chris Cummins more than three decades ago.
Maybe if you patronized GMT Games instead, you’d have a better understanding…
The Emperor, the easy answer is China but I don’t think that China has as much control over North Korea as either of us wish.
SPQR (26be8b) — 11/23/2010 @ 8:58 pmSPQR
Oh, I have a few GMT, SPI games and worked with Astell
However, Korea is a potent force in the middle east, dealing with shipping and heavy industry, all are halmarks of military arnaments
EricPWJohnson (719277) — 11/24/2010 @ 1:33 amComment by jenny — 11/23/2010 @ 7:04 pm
I agree with jenny. It’s dangerous to have European features in South Korea, whether you are a soldier or not.
Let’s abandon that armpit of the world to its own miserable karma, and send our resources to Japan and Taiwan for a US presence in the Pacific.
nk (db4a41) — 11/24/2010 @ 5:27 amGreetings: especially “jenny” and “nk”
Since the recent government-mandated analog to digital TV signal conversion, I’ve been receiving the Korean Broadcasting System’s KBS World channel. I don’t know if you all have that access, but, from what I’ve seen, those South Korean’s love their baseball and their rock ‘n’ roll. KBS even has a program on which Americans and Europeans are interviewed about how they experience Korean culture and living and how things are different in their home countries.
I think, in essence, Korea is a very Confucian country and culture, not exactly the best match for America’s brashness, not that there’s anything wrong with that. It’s just that they have a much different idea of relationships and hierarchy. From what I seen, age is an important consideration. Even Korean celebrities and entertainers are very conscience of who is even slightly older than whom, something I have seen much of in America.
The South has had a long hard slog sine the 1950s War. They seem to have gotten their economy on a successful track and their democracy, imperfect as it may be, seems very much to be moving on the right track. But they are our allies, not our automatons. They see the world differently and that, on occasion, causes frictions. My current concern is that they will lose faith in America because of how they see President Obama and his policies.
As Thanksgiving is almost upon us, one of my hopes is that Iraq will be doing as well in sixty years.
11B40 (8e6665) — 11/24/2010 @ 10:52 amOh, no! He’s a liberal and a Democrat.
This clearly would be much, much too tough and decisive.
I found a past press release regarding how The Big 0 plans to deal with such rogue actions. I believe this is about stage 5 or 6:
—————————————
IgotBupkis, President, United Anarchist Society (9eeb86) — 11/28/2010 @ 8:46 amBy Stage Nine, Rick Perry will have taken the newly reconstituted Republic of Texas out of the Union, and will be supporting insurgent groups in Alaska and other heavy carbon-footprint states (WV, PA, WY, etc – The Carbon Confederation).
AD-RtR/OS! (e2c6d2) — 11/28/2010 @ 10:30 amAici poti gasi Jocuri de colorat pentru copilul tau! Poti incerca diferite jocuri de colorat cu fructe, cu eroi din desene animate, precum si desene pentru copii cu animale de colorat. http://www.jocuri-gratis.ro/ref/ref.gif
reynaletitiaf (6418d6) — 1/8/2011 @ 1:47 pm