News What impact will a possible war with North Korea have on American troops?

[Pattonias]

I'm wondering what kind of impact an outbreak of war will have on the American troops. Being in the reserves right now, I'm becoming nervous.

I honestly don't see how it can be avoided now. The North Koreans have begun to gird themselves, and the South Koreans and the US can't ignore or backdown from a deliberate attack on a warship.

 

[mgb_phys]

Unlikely:

The army doesn't do jungles. Been there, didn't like it - not doing it again.

Reruns are never popular.

We are a little bit over committed at the moment. Even leaving out the military logistics you are going to be scraping the barrel for entertainers. Fighting a jungle war in SE Asia is bad enough - but imagine if the USNO concert is by David Hasselhof.

N Korea's major resource is Kimchi. "No blood for pickled Cabbage" looks silly on a protest banner.

Obvious place to outsource the job to is China. Seem to be having difficulty persuading China that invading 3rd world countries for their natural resources is part of being a free capitalist democracy.

So what can you do?
Admittedly sanctions are tricky when they having nothing anyone else wants (especially Kimchi) and nobody else has anything they can afford.
Best solution is probably the Cuba/East Germany model. Wait for dictator to die, regime falls apart then the population can move into the neighboring country and become petty criminals/hookers.

Remember this is a last gasp attempt by the N Korean government to get public opinion on it's side. The Americans invade and it's a "rally around the beloved leader to repel the foreign invaders".

It's like if you wanted to boost recruitment for any terrorist group the best way to do it would be to invade another country with no involvement and kill a bunch of civilians, then a large number of people switch from "those al Queda nutters are giving islam a bad name" to "they are our only hope to stop the evil Americans killing us all"

 

[waht]

From Wiki

According to the U.S. Department of State, North Korea has the fifth-largest army in the world, at an estimated 1.21 million armed personnel, with about 20% of men aged 17–54 in the regular armed forces.[64]

North Korea has the highest percentage of military personnel per capita of any nation in the world, with approximately 1 enlisted soldier for every 25 citizens.[65] Military strategy is designed for insertion of agents and sabotage behind enemy lines in wartime,[64] with much of the KPA's forces deployed along the heavily fortified Korean Demilitarized Zone. The Korean People's Army operates a very large amount of equipment, including 4,060 tanks, 2,500 APCs, 17,900 artillery pieces (incl. mortars), 11,000 air defence guns in the Ground force; at least 915 vessels in the Navy and 1,748 aircraft in the Air Force,[66] as well as some 10,000 MANPADS and anti-tank guided missiles.[67] The equipment is a mixture of World War II vintage vehicles and small arms, widely proliferated Cold War technology, and more modern Soviet weapons. According to official North Korean media, planned military expenditures for 2009 are 15.8% of GDP.[68]

North Korea has nuclear and ballistic missile weapons programs and has been subject to United Nations Security Council resolutions 1695 of July 2006, 1718 of October 2006, and 1874 of June 2009, for carrying out both missile and nuclear tests. North Korea probably has fissile material for up to 9 nuclear weapons,[69] and has the capability to deploy nuclear warheads on intermediate-range ballistic missiles.[70]

 

[mgb_phys]

North Korea has nuclear and ballistic missile weapons programs and has been subject to United Nations Security Council resolutions 1695 of July 2006, 1718 of October 2006, and 1874 of June 2009, for carrying out both missile and nuclear tests. North Korea probably has fissile material for up to 9 nuclear weapons,[69] and has the capability to deploy nuclear warheads on intermediate-range ballistic missiles.[70]

It tested one underground device that was a partial fizzle, it's a long way from an Ivy mike type test to something that can be used on an ICBM.
As we have seen UN reports on 'rouge states' military capability can owe more to political expediency than technical accuracy.

 

[waht]

It tested one underground device that was a partial fizzle, it's a long way from an Ivy mike type test to something that can be used on an ICBM.
As we have seen UN reports on 'rouge states' military capability can owe more to political expediency than technical accuracy.

I don't think they would care about an ICBM at this point. All they have to do it drop one over Seoul which is close to border, or drop one close to US/Korean navy ships.

 

[zomgwtf]

It tested one underground device that was a partial fizzle, it's a long way from an Ivy mike type test to something that can be used on an ICBM.
As we have seen UN reports on 'rouge states' military capability can owe more to political expediency than technical accuracy.

I highly doubt it matters to South Korea that NK doesn't have ICBMs . I honestly hate when people use that logic.

I would say a war with NK is highly unlikely however if it DOES occur and America got involved I feel safe in saying that it doesn't matter if NK had the world's largest army, they would still get stomped. They may over spend on their military and they might have a crap-load of people in the military but it's still peanuts compared to what a developed nation spends on its military.

 

[cristo]

I would say a war with NK is highly unlikely however if it DOES occur and America got involved I feel safe in saying that it doesn't matter if NK had the world's largest army, they would still get stomped. They may over spend on their military and they might have a crap-load of people in the military but it's still peanuts compared to what a developed nation spends on its military.

I recall another war in recent history that the US entered into with that philosophy...

 

[zomgwtf]

I recall another war in recent history that the US entered into with that philosophy...

Which?

 

[Pattonias]

I seriously doubt that North Korea would have the military support of China to fight on their side this time. I think the Chinese would allow the regime to fall and then insist the the US stop interfering.

The US's ability to fight conventional wars has never been in doubt. It's the unconventional that gives us problems. Without China fighting for them they would lose badly. Especially if they decide to use nuclear arms.

Thats not to say it would be an easy win, the fighting will be terrible. They just don't have the resources to win.

 

[Andre]

On the political / grand strategic level, I agree with mgb_phys, there is little to prove and little to gain with another war. We should not seek it and inter-state conflicts With China's help it should be possible to prevent it. However there is an ally at gunpoint. South Korea, and it's not looking good.

http://www.topix.com/forum/world/south-korea/T8USE217FVKC3EKML

On the strategical level, things are not looking good for N-Korea. They appear to be rather vulnerable for a Warden III[/url] type of air strategy.

 

[Pattonias]

That is just it, the war would be against the regime. Their would be no other benefits. It would be in China's interest if they fought on the side of the South Koreans, if they want North Korea to remain Communist.

 

[magpies]

So my question is who would be in the axis of evil and who would be the axis of good this time around?

 

[zomgwtf]

So my question is who would be in the axis of evil and who would be the axis of good this time around?

Why do you continue to post at these forums. .

 

[Pattonias]

So my question is who would be in the axis of evil and who would be the axis of good this time around?

It would be more like the ocean of good and the islands of evil. (From our perspective)
I think the only country that doesn't roll their eyes when talking to North Korea is Iran.

 

[magpies]

Ya but the russians back iran/north korea to an point. Also I suspect china would side with north korea also. So if south korea and north korea go at it you could have russia and china supporting. And the US is likely to just sit it out so this could be leading to a big power play by china possibly? I'm sure china would love to get there hands on korea.

 

[Proton Soup]

got to wonder just how much food NK has stored up, and just how long they could sustain a war.

 

[Pattonias]

Ya but the russians back iran/north korea to an point. Also I suspect china would side with north korea also. So if south korea and north korea go at it you could have russia and china supporting. And the US is likely to just sit it out so this could be leading to a big power play by china possibly? I'm sure china would love to get there hands on korea.

Thats just it, I think that the Chinese are just as likely to take over in North Korea as they don't want them slinging nukes on their doorstep anymore than they want them slaughtering the South Koreans.

 

[magpies]

What makes you think china cares about the south koreans so much?

 

[Pattonias]

The new emerging lead super-power can't be seen condoning the slaughter of a peaceful people in such a public way. They would also risk open war with the United States and her allies. You would actually see a possible WW3 if China sided with a near lunatic in a war. Their best options are to either stay neutral or to aid in a regime change. If they want North Korea to reamain communist, they need to make the regime change.

 

[magpies]

Ok your right so how about the iran aspect? They might try something funny during this you think?

 

[Pattonias]

I think Iran could only help by eithr providing aid, such as food and medical supplies; or they could help militarily by declaring war and openly attacking us in the middle east. I seriously doubt they would make the second move, but they will probably render aid through non-military means.

 

[zomgwtf]

The new emerging lead super-power can't be seen condoning the slaughter of a peaceful people in such a public way. They would also risk open war with the United States and her allies. You would actually see a possible WW3 if China sided with a near lunatic in a war. Their best options are to either stay neutral or to aid in a regime change. If they want North Korea to reamain communist, they need to make the regime change.

The thing is though that, I believe, most Koreans want a reunification. I think that South Korea with American backing would be the best bet at making this happening, they would be able to provide the most support to North Korea in order to rebuild it. This however wouldn't be in the best interests of China because then it would have a pretty important border with a really free democratic country. On the other hand, if China assisted in removing the current regime and putting in place a new one they would have to deal with A LOT of refugees.

 

[Pattonias]

The thing is though that, I believe, most Koreans want a reunification. I think that South Korea with American backing would be the best bet at making this happening, they would be able to provide the most support to North Korea in order to rebuild it. This however wouldn't be in the best interests of China because then it would have a pretty important border with a really free democratic country. On the other hand, if China assisted in removing the current regime and putting in place a new one they would have to deal with A LOT of refugees.

That is where they have the advantage of being communist. They can say "if you cross this line, we will shoot"; unlike the US and the Mexican border. If they put in a puppet government, they can force the people to stay. If the people are treated better than they are now, they will have no reason to flee their country regardless.

 

[turbo]

China's prosperity is tied to US trade and US-financed manufacturing. Would they risk that to support NK in a war against the South?

The US has risks in this situation, too, because we participated in trade agreements that let US manufacturers ship manufacturing jobs overseas to countries where wages are low and workers' rights are non-existent. How soon could we recover the manufacturing capacity that we had 20-25 years ago?

 

[magpies]

Now that I think about it I bet obama finds a way to screw this up if anything. Not that bush wouldn't have done worse.

 

[Pattonias]

It is a powder-keg and no one seems to be panicking just yet.

 

[Borg]

I think that South Korea has had its fill with North Korea playing the War Threat card. They appear to be seriously PO'd this time.

 

[Pattonias]

Imagine if the Iranian military purposely sank a US warship in the Persian Gulf, and killed nearly fifty of our servicemen. Would we be as patient?

 

[magpies]

Probably the US is pretty tolerant when it comes to these things... Don't get me wrong we would hit them back but not full out war.

 

[zomgwtf]

Imagine if the Iranian military purposely sank a US warship in the Persian Gulf, and killed nearly fifty of our servicemen. Would we be as patient?

Difference being of course: America can easily go to war with Iran and be victorious, can South Korea do the same? Without endangering it's own citizens? (Iran IS on the otherside of the world from America you know)

 

[magpies]

I don't think the US can go to war with iran and be victorious right now...

 

[Borg]

Imagine if the Iranian military purposely sank a US warship in the Persian Gulf, and killed nearly fifty of our servicemen. Would we be as patient?

Probably the US is pretty tolerant when it comes to these things... Don't get me wrong we would hit them back but not full out war.

Iran prefers to let others do their dirty work by supplying groups like Al Qaeda in Iraq blow up Americans one convoy at a time.

Of course, the US would never do something like that through the CIA.

 

[Proton Soup]

SK would spend a ton of money reintegrating NK, much of that spent on chinese products

 

[zomgwtf]

I don't think the US can go to war with iran and be victorious right now...

That's laughable.

 

[magpies]

ya pretty much :)

 

[Borg]

Also, the North has brainwashed its people so bad that someone would have to unscrew their heads for a long time. http://www.mirror.co.uk/news/top-st...orth-korea-you-will-love-it-115875-21394846/".

I read earlier today that the announcement to prepare for war was literally broadcast directly into people's homes. I'm guessing that isn't the only time that they've used the speakers.

http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20100525/ap_on_re_as/as_skorea_ship_sinks"
Seoul-based North Korea Intellectuals Solidarity said Tuesday that North Korean leader Kim Jong Il last week ordered his military to get ready for combat.

The group, citing unidentified sources in North Korea, said the order was broadcast last Thursday on speakers installed in each house and at major public sites throughout the country.

 

[zomgwtf]

Also, the North has brainwashed its people so bad that someone would have to unscrew their heads for a long time. http://www.mirror.co.uk/news/top-st...orth-korea-you-will-love-it-115875-21394846/".

I read earlier today that the announcement to prepare for war was literally broadcast directly into people's homes. I'm guessing that isn't the only time that they've used the speakers.

http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20100525/ap_on_re_as/as_skorea_ship_sinks"
Seoul-based North Korea Intellectuals Solidarity said Tuesday that North Korean leader Kim Jong Il last week ordered his military to get ready for combat.

The group, citing unidentified sources in North Korea, said the order was broadcast last Thursday on speakers installed in each house and at major public sites throughout the country.

Yup, I think it's quite odd that the have cut off all ties with Seoul. Probably not the smartest move for the best interests of your nation...
The claim of war isn't at all surprising though. I think North Korea goes into a fit at least once a month about going to war with its enemies. It'd be a shocker if they continue to pull of such attacks and attempts at being aggressive to the South. Surely they know if they keep it up it'll be the end of that particular communist regime?

It's kinda weird they have those speaker systems installed in the homes of the citizens though. Imagine your just watching TV and suddenly the speaker over in the corner of your home, which never makes a sound, just suddenly starts broadcasting to prepare for war. Quite 1984ish.

 

[magpies]

Ya but in this case they would be watching the speakers as they probably don't have tv.

 

[Borg]

Yup, I think it's quite odd that the have cut off all ties with Seoul. Probably not the smartest move for the best interests of your nation...
The claim of war isn't at all surprising though. I think North Korea goes into a fit at least once a month about going to war with its enemies. It'd be a shocker if they continue to pull of such attacks and attempts at being aggressive to the South. Surely they know if they keep it up it'll be the end of that particular communist regime?

It's kinda weird they have those speaker systems installed in the homes of the citizens though. Imagine your just watching TV and suddenly the speaker over in the corner of your home, which never makes a sound, just suddenly starts broadcasting to prepare for war. Quite 1984ish.

What's really scary is that they seem to believe some outrageous stuff.

People look at you with a straight face and explain that a double rainbow greeted Kim Jong Il's birth, along with birds that sang in human voices.

I'll bet that even Tiger Woods wishes that he could golf this good (#2):

http://www.11points.com/News-Politics/11_Craziest_Kim_Jong-Il_Moments"

 

[mheslep]

Given the post tangents (non-existent Korean jungles, US job exports, CIA did it, etc) maybe the OP should have included background on the proximate cause of the recent heightened state of hostilities in Korea:

On http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2010/04/25/AR2010042503113.html" forty-six S. Korean naval personnel were killed when its naval vessel Cheonan was torpedoed and split in half while it was cruising in S. Korean waters. Since then S. Korea has slowly, methodically and publicly invited experts from all over the world to participate in the forensics which proved the torpedo was N. Korean.

After ~two months S. Korea has very reasonably, in my view, http://online.wsj.com/public/resour...=653&h=401&title=WSJ.COM&thePubDate=20100524"

 

[zomgwtf]

Given the post tangents (non-existent Korean jungles, US job exports, CIA did it, etc) maybe the OP should have included background on the proximate cause of the recent heightened state of hostilities in Korea:

On http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2010/04/25/AR2010042503113.html" forty-six S. Korean naval personnel were killed when its naval vessel Cheonan was torpedoed and split in half while it was cruising in S. Korean waters. Since then S. Korea has slowly, methodically and publicly invited experts from all over the world to participate in the forensics which proved the torpedo was N. Korean.

After ~two months S. Korea has very reasonably, in my view, cut all trade with the North and denied transit of S. Korean waters by N.K. vessels.

As well for more background information back in November of last year I believe there were small 'skirmishes' in the same area, spouting from claims that South Korean ships went into North Korean territorial waters. However, the Cheonan was not in North Korean waters and I'm pretty sure it never was. I feel however this played a pretty important part in the attack that took place in March.

 

[mheslep]

Imagine if the Iranian military purposely sank a US warship in the Persian Gulf, and killed nearly fifty of our servicemen. Would we be as patient?

The analogy would be not in the Persian gulf, but off the US coast line. The Cheonan was in S. Korean waters.

 

[zomgwtf]

I think right now would be the perfect time for China to flex some of it's political muscles and tell NK to calm the heck down... or else.

 

[mheslep]

As well for more background information back in November of last year I believe there were small 'skirmishes' in the same area, spouting from claims that South Korean ships went into North Korean territorial waters.

That was 10 November and it took place in 'disputed territorial waters' per this WSJ source. Two patrol boats exchanged gun fire for some two minutes, damaging both vessels but with no reported injury to the crews. That was the first exchange of fire in seven years.
http://online.wsj.com/article/SB125782605421040551.html

 

[mheslep]

I think right now would be the perfect time for China to flex some of it's political muscles and tell NK to calm the heck down... or else.

Perfect time for S. Korea perhaps. Just the opposite for China. China clearly enjoys using N. Korea as thorn in the entire E. Asian theater. N. Korea threatens S.K, Japan and everyone else in the area, and nobody can (easily) stop it without China's acquiescence. Thus if the West threatens tough trade agreements or pushes China to stop biasing its currency, oops, Pyongyang launches another three stage 'test'.

 

[mheslep]

Family members of deceased sailors, April 30th

 

[zomgwtf]

Perfect time for S. Korea perhaps. Just the opposite for China. China clearly enjoys using N. Korea as thorn in the entire E. Asian theater. N. Korea threatens S.K, Japan and everyone else in the area, and nobody can (easily) stop it without China's acquiescence. Thus if the West threatens tough trade agreements or pushes China to stop biasing its currency, oops, Pyongyang launches another three stage 'test'.

While this is true, surely an actual escalation to the point of war in the area will not do good for China, who I am confident will be a large part of the clean up process and will have damaged the public image it's been generating.

EDIT: As an aside I heard that the Navy vessel had aboard Navy students which in my mind makes it all the more tragic.

 

[zomgwtf]

That was 10 November and it took place in 'disputed territorial waters' per this WSJ source. Two patrol boats exchanged gun fire for some two minutes, damaging both vessels but with no reported injury to the crews. That was the first exchange of fire in seven years.
http://online.wsj.com/article/SB125782605421040551.html

Yup, that's the one I'm talking about.

 

[mheslep]

While this is true, surely an actual escalation to the point of war in the area will not do good for China, who I am confident will be a large part of the clean up process and will have damaged the public image it's been generating.

If China does nothing other than issue the same useless 'lets all get along' public platitudes that its already been doing, how does doing nothing harm them in any way? They may well want a limited war, in which they can come to the defense of a poor N.K. at the last minute just as they did fifty years ago. This time they could show off their substantial naval power, maybe make the US back down from defending Taiwan.

 

[zomgwtf]

If China does nothing other than issue the same useless 'lets all get along' public platitudes that its already been doing, how does doing nothing harm them in any way? They may well want a limited war, in which they can come to the defense of a poor N.K. at the last minute just as they did fifty years ago. This time they could show off their substantial naval power, maybe make the US back down from defending Taiwan.

This isn't China and NK 50 years ago. This is China today, and NK today... situation is quite different. I think China has shown time and again that if NK gets too out of hand with it's antics it will take decisive measures to push back.

Sure sometimes NK acts favorably for China, it maintains a distance between China and American soldiers and democracy but that doesn't mean everything it does is favorable to China. A war in that area will be one of those things that probably will not shape up too well for China. I do not believe in a war China will support NK and take on America/South Korea and whoever else decides to join. When NK loses the war and reunification occurs China will have a border with an extremely free democracy and be right next door to tens of thousands of American soldiers... hardly pleasant. AND China will most definitely be involved in a clean up of that area after a war as well as taking care of all the refugees that will pour into the country.

IF however China flexes its muscles as it did in 2005 (remember cutting off the oil pipes?) NK will stop its crazy antics, no ill-effect to China. China can then concentrate on the next communist government that will head up North Korea after Kims death, which is supposedly not too far away. This will work most in favour for China because it will increase it's 'favourable' view to the world, it will get exactly what it wants out of the Koreas and it won't have to deal with American soldiers.

Why do you suggest it would want to show of its military strength? I highly doubt any nation doubts the military prowess of China. It knows this and it has no reason to show off, let alone anything to gain from it. China wants to be seen as a powerfull, yet 'stabilizing' nation. Not only that but South Korea and China are pretty major trading partners.

EDIT: personally I think that China is not supporting the West/South Korea simply out of fear of North Korea. It doesn't want a nation with a capable military which is nuclear, AND has a crazed/erratic dictator at its border who thinks China is against them. However China should understand that any action from North Korea will be met by the world and not just by it's nation. As well, I feel that the North Korean military power is far less than that of China making the potential threat negligible. An attack on China from North Korea will also spell certain doom for the nation as it is dependent on China for it's mere existence.