Posted on 12/13/2010 7:43:43 AM PST by Reaganite Republican
We need more of your type here, weighing in with insight, rather than holding back and lurking.
I trust you have read us for some time?,
Again, welcome.....
Thanks.
I didn’t lurk all that long... six months or so, maybe less.
Thanks
Like the post says, no southern government can survive just sitting there like last time, and they need to at least provide some small deterrent
THEN get the Chinese on this... it’s certainly in their own interest to put a lid on the Kims, if not remove them- do a deal with the army, whatever
But just absorbing hits has the public up in arms...and it is a democracy
BTW, I agree with everything you say except for the Norks have nothing to lose... the Kims have everything lose, and would promptly in any large scale war
I feel they would not scale up a conflict unless forced
This should provide liberals with the wet-dream of weakening the security of the US and the globe, while giving the rest of us stuck on this train to hell some level of satisfaction that the nukes might actually be put to good use after all.
Domalais - no offense intended, but I believe you (and many others) greatly over-estimate the numbers and effect of the DPRK’s long range artillery.
I am not exactly sure how far north you would draw the boundary of the GSMA, but for arguments sake, the numbers below are based upon how much artillery the DPRK can bring to bear on downtown Seoul (financial/highrise district).
Contrary to popular belief, not all of the DPRK’s approx 10,000 artillery tubes positioned north of the DMZ have the range to reach downtown Seoul. In fact, the estimates I have seen are more like only 250-500 artillery pieces (and the higher #s only come into play if you include their 240mm MLRS systems).
The only DPRK arty with range to hit dt Seoul from behind the DMZ are the M-1985/M-1991 240mm MLRS systems and the M-1978/M-1989 170mm howitzer.
The DPRK is estimated to have only 200 of these 240mm MLRS systems and 200 170mm howitzers down by the DMZ. That’s not to make light of the situation because a signifcant amount of shells could still be layed down on Seoul, but a few hundred artillery tubes firing on downtown Seoul is ALOT different than 10,000 tubes.
http://www.globalsecurity.org/military/world/dprk/m-1985-mrl.htm
Also, the ROK military has recently expressed confidence that in all likelihood it would be able to detect if the DPRK was preparing to launch its long range arty on Seoul and would be able to pre-emptively knock out a number of those tubes. Not to mention whatever surviving long range batteries are going to be priority for counter-battery fire.
http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/2637356/posts
I believe the real threat to Seoul are the DPRK’s SRBMs (SCUDs and FROGs). I suppose the other big threat would be if the DPRK staged an invasion and advanced 10-20 miles on the western side of the DMZ they could wheel forward some of those other 10,000 shorter range arty tubes.
On the other hand, next provocation may be of different kind. High on the list of likely scenario is the infiltration by their special force inside S. Korea and carry out some serious sabotage operation. With no artillery sites or missile base to hit, the retaliation may not be directly reciprocal: NK could knock out some strategic target(not necessarily military,) and SK may have to retaliate by knocking out some NK's military installation, which is not a source of attack.
It is worth monitoring pro-North leftwing elements in SK. When things heat up on military front, they will also create political or social chaos in SK. In commie playbook, two go in tandem. So level of their activity can serve as another indicator. If they suddenly create political turmoil on several fronts simultaneously, it will tell you that things are getting ominous. This will be matched by non-stop belligerent rhetoric from North.
Unfortunately, this is a subject that I cannot discuss in detail.
Just consider that the direct effects of artillery would be only a small part of the effects on Seoul. A city that size deprived of power, water, and food would be a disaster management nightmare.
You are correct that the SRBMs are potentially a greater threat than conventional long range artillery. This is partially because of the wide variety of WMD payloads that could be delivered. How much destruction Seoul would receive depends on how those SRBMs are allocated between military targets and civilian targets. Traditional military planning would assume that most of those would be used against ROK and US military targets which are beyond the range of NK artillery. That assumes that NK actually thinks they can win a conventional war. I would be more inclined to assume that NK would inflict as much damage against civilian targets as possible to force an agreement that would ensure that survival of KJI and his regime.
I think China would shelter KJI if he could in any way spin that ROKUS aggression forced him to do whatever he did.
Perfectly understand not being able to discuss this as I am sure it involves plenty of classified information not available open source.
I guess my point was that it is not a foregone conclusion that Seoul would look like Dresden after a NORK attack. 200-400 tubes even if only firing for a couple hours would make a mess of Seoul and knock out alot of civilian infrastructure to bring the city to its knees, but it could recover. But if 10,000 tubes were firing issues like power grid failure, water and food supply interruptions would be moot becuase there wouldn’t be any buildings standing nor many inhabitants left alive to complain.
Granted, the Dresden option does come into play if the NORKs can make a push south of the DMZ or if Kim can manage to strap a crude nuke on an A2 . . .
+1 on the inclination that Kim would focus his targeting on civies
What strikes me as ominous is the tone of Gates, Mullen, Blair and Sharp.
Almost in chorus, these guys are all saying things are going to get dicey on the peninsula
I think nukes are less likely than simple dirty bombs.
It’s expected that NK would make it south of the DMZ.
Thanks for an extremely enlightening post- much obliged, sir
Only thing I would add is tough to take out the ones they do have within range, my understanding is many of the artillery pieces are on tracks and pull right back into a mountainside cave once fired and their position betrayed.
Could a pre-emptive strike on these positions with, say, cruise missiles throw cold water on the Norks’ plans, tho...?
IMHO Norks huge army might bog down in the face of US/SK air superiority, I don’t think they would get far into the south as they cannot control the airspace south of the DMZ
And the US has already pledged F-22s
Right on, Theo
This SALT “deal” must have The Gipper turning in his grave at 10,000rpm
Utterly appaling
They probably won’t react at all to any ‘provocation’ by the South. It’s not their modus operandi. In all the past Nork aggression, they always wait until they can strike without any significant retaliation.
The Chonan sinking was a classic example. Was it a torpedo, or a leftover sea-mine from the Korean war? At the time, no one really knew, so the South waited until they knew... months later.
Far too late to react.
Which doesn’t mean that the Norks won’t remember this and then stage more aggression a few months from now.
Considering the mountainous terrain of North Korea, small tactical nukes used near ground level would work wonders, as the radiation would be contained on all sides by the mountain ranges.
Thanks jhpigott. From earlier in the month.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.