Skip to comments.Army Chief: U.S. Can Fight North Korea If Necessary (What happened to the "stretched thin" debate?)
Posted on 05/28/2009 6:59:42 PM PDT by tobyhill
The United States could fight an old-fashioned war against North Korea if necessary, even while newer forms of conflict against terrorists and extremists continue, the Army's top officer said Thursday.
Asked whether the United States would be prepared to fight if war broke out between South Korea and North Korea, Gen. George Casey replied, "The short answer is yes," then added that "it would probably take us a little bit longer to shift gears" away from the type of counterinsurgency fighting that now occupies the Army.
Casey said his usual rubric for how long it would take the Army to gear up for a new "conventional" war is about 90 days. That doesn't mean it would take 90 days for the U.S. to effectively fight the North's million-man army, he said.
"We'd move forces as rapidly as we could get them prepared," Casey said during an appearance at the Center for Strategic and International Studies.
(Excerpt) Read more at foxnews.com ...
He’s the Army Chief of Staff. What else do you expect him to say?
90 days? Do you think we should be saying that in public?
Mr Kim has 90 days to take Seoul if he wants to keep it?
or that we will have to use nukes?
Uh, doesn’t the south have an army with guns and things? Just wondering.
There’s a new set of rules on the playground. Obama’s in charge and he can do whatever he wants, say whatever he wants. Everything the Dems have said in the past four years is now null and void. bass turds
Hiroshima redux for Pyongyang?
So that music video U2 made of Katrina showing the army that would be available if only they were not in Iraq ...is BS. Troops are available. Enough to even fight Korea according to Obamas own general.
BTW-There are more combined troops in Iraq/Afghanistan now than under Bush.
Yes, they do. However, a conventional war will be very bloody even if the South eventually prevails. And NK has nukes now. So that changes the equation some—actually a lot. We should have taken out their nuclear capability back in ‘94—would have been a lot cleaner then.
We should have taken out their nuclear capability back in 94would have been a lot cleaner then.
“Uh, doesnt the south have an army with guns and things? Just wondering.”
Yes they do....and the ROKs, the ROK Marines in particular and not a group to be trifled with.
If North Korea attacked across the DMZ, South Korea would have to do most of the heavy lifting.
The General’s statement is posturing. We are stretched really, really thin.
fight them for what?
First, read what he said. He didn’t say we wouldn’t do anything for 90 days. Second, do you think that the North Koreans think that we can move enough soldiers and more importantly, equipment, to Korea in a few weeks?
> I should addClintons fault.
And don’t forget Jimmuh Carter going to NK while Bush was president, WITHOUT AUTHORIZATION.
They should have invalidated his passport and stranded him with his nuke-you-lah friends in NK.
With all due respect, how do you know this? Do you have any data to support this, or is this just your own wild guess? Clearly soldiers have spent a lot of time fighting wars and war should be the last resort, but I still think you are wrong.
We could air-support SK real darn quick. We could kick NK’s skinny arse real darn quick. Only problem is having about a 10 million Chinese troops in there real darn quick, and them not buying our debt real darn quick.
IIRC, Jimmeh pulled that stunt during the Clinton administration.
He went over without permission, negotiated a settlement without instructions or a portfolio...and presented President Clinton with a deal.
It gets worse; Clinton agreed to the fait accompli.
This would be fought the way we’ve fought everything since Gulf I. Airforces pound artillery emplacements and completely destroy anything moving out in the open. Then, ground forces move in when overwhelming force is in place.
In this case, the main problem would be the collapse of what’s left of the NK government, and millions of starving refugees streaming over all the borders. This did not turn out to be a problem in Gulf I & II, but the Chi-Coms have everyone convinced that it would be here.
The O Administration will fall all over themselves allowing the Chi-Coms to broker a “deal” on this, that will put the rest of the planet at a major disadvantage.
>and not a group to be trifled with.
Perhaps They do have a large armed forces the size of which is maintained by ... conscription.
That makes it somewhat suspect, but the IDF uses universal conscription and it is pretty good.
It would be an interesting fight, to be sure.
Yep. There are no good or easy answers.
I would think the 30,000 troops in the Korean DMZ have been expecting and training for a conventional war along the border for 50 odd years.
No we aren’t.
We are fighting this war on a semi-peacetime footing. Most miltary personnel are actually in the US, not deployed, and the vast majority of the National Guard and Reserves are home as well. These are the people who could be mobilized and shipped to Korea in 90 days. Something like 80% of all combat units are in the US right now.
A new Korean war would require a mobilization on a real war footing, all available personnel and units called up for the duration, no rotations - well probably not that much would be required.
During much of the 1950’s Korean war there was only one US Division that was not either in Korea or Europe.
If we really wanted to we could have the 82th and 101th on the way in a few days, plus the afloat equipment from Diego. Depending on airlift the striker brigade could go too. Everyone else would suck hind-tit for a long time. Say maybe 2 weeks for 3 light inventry divions, some Marines and 1 heavy brigade with cost being no object and Fedex, UPS and America airlines handling all they can. That would be a max effort lift with everything throw out the window.
I understand that because of pre-positioned equipment a fully equipped heavy Division could be assembled in Korea in less than a week, plus some light infantry.
More would require shipment of heavy equipment across the Pacific.
Hell yeah they are stretched thin. And fight North Korea? Yeah. But if the Chinese were to take North Korea’s side, that would be a challenge.
How long did it take to gear up for OEF or OIF?
1991 ? about 4 months.
2003 it was about 2-3 months, but there was a lot of pre-positioned equipment in Kuwait.
The units in the Pusan perimeter weren’t National Guard, they were regular Army (badly trained and ill equipped, true), mostly initially from the garrison in Japan.
The NK army is way obsolete (1950’s-1960’s vintage for the most part) and their heavy weapons haven’t gotten much in the way of spares from the Soviet stocks since 1990. Their tanks and artillery would be massacred by the South Koreans if they tried to attack.
SK forces aren’t the semi-policemen they were in 1950.
If North Korea attacked across the DMZ, South Korea would have to do most of the heavy lifting.
The Generals statement is posturing. We are stretched really, really thin.
IIRC NK can rain arty/rockets/etc. on the south for 3-4 days
(mite last a week)
of heavy fire,,,they/most are in tunnels north of the “Z”,,,
I don’t think they can take the ROK Army,,,
Tear up Seoul ?,,,yes,,,
Will lil’kim try this ?,,,
If NK tries to cross the “Z” (2.5mi.) it’s BloodBathTime,,,
Same if we tried to go north,,,
How far will China let him go ?...:0/
And let’s not forget the Japanese Self Defense Forces would certainly want a piece of Lil’ Kim. The JDSF didn’t even exist then. Right now they’re actually a very large and well equiped military on the world stage. Expect the Japs to take it to the Norks by air and sea, hard.
It won’t be June of 1950 all over again.
Ships and Submarines
Deployable Battle Force Ships: 283
Ships Underway (away from homeport): 134 ships (47 % of total)
On deployment: 115 ships (41 % of total)
Attack submarines underway (away from homeport): 32 submarines (59%)
On deployment: 22 submarines (40%)
USS Nimitz (CVN 68) - Pacific Ocean
USS Dwight D. Eisenhower (CVN 69) - 5th Fleet
USS George Washington (CVN 73) - East China Sea
USS Ronald Reagan (CVN 76) - Pacific Ocean
USS George Bush (CVN 77) - Atlantic Ocean
Amphibious Warfare Ships:
USS Boxer (LHD 4) - 5th Fleet
USS Iwo Jima (LHD 7) - Atlantic Ocean
CVN 73 is now in range to smoke lil kim’s Fat Butt!...;0)
But we don’t want Europe to hate us again do we??????
So with a war on the Korean peninsula and Iran acting up..we end up with WWIII.
Please tell me you don'treally believe this? Every Army, AirForce, Marine, and Naval base is LOADED with troops! Stretched really, really thin? Not at all. I'm tryin really, really hard not to call you ignorant, but I think I just lost that battle.
Maybe the fed should order some new printing presses just in case.
USS George Washington CVN 73
seems to me that one nuclear sub with 36 warheads could finish off North Korean in an hour...why waste American soldier’s lives against this totally corrupt regime and it’s crackpot leader...where’s Team America when you need ‘em.
Against who ?
These guys are pipsqeaks.
If the Chinese go insane and join in, then you will have a nasty regional war with nuclear risks, but thats still not WWIII.
probably, if we still have runways and air superiorty we can land planes full of troops, airliners if need be.
There is a problem here -
North Korea is not just a nasty dictator and his friends, it is also @20 million mostly innocent people. Call it @ 500,000 genuine enemies and 21 million hostages (1 million being the South Koreans and Japanese the NK’s could realistically threaten to kill).
If it came to such a war, and there was no MAD-style nuclear risk a la the old Soviets, ALL means must be tried before nuclear attacks, even if it risks high casualties to US and South Korean forces.
I certainly understand that - but the realization is the little whacko would not hesitate to turn Seoul into a Hiroshima - but hey, Obama will solve it all and diplomatically wipe him off the face of the earth...he’s all powerful you know - :)
The ROK army is about 500-600 k and posssses modern though not state of the art weaponry. The US has 2ID in country and either a Marine div or brigade size force in Okinawa. If the norks come and don't use the nukes they will suffer enormous losses but they will take Seoul and inflict severe damage to our side, not to mention the losses to several millions of ROK civvies in and around the capital.
2nd infantry could lose more people in a week than we did in Iraq in 5 years. I don't think America is ready for that kind of carnage and I KNOW Obama and his minions aren't.
Not only would we have Chinese troops in there, we would also have Russian troops and support forces. Both of them have anti-Stealth technology and Russia may already have 5th generation fighter aircraft.
The North Koreans have plenty of artillery tubes, true, to be shot from fixed positions without observation. They can’t be moved without being destroyed en masse by allied artillery and aircraft. These would (or could, I think the condition of this stuff at this point is questionable) create a terrific unaimed bombardment along the DMZ which allied units, being mobile, can avoid.
How could the Norks reach Seoul ? They can’t come out of their holes without getting massacred. The South Koreans possess plenty of armor far superior to what the Norks have, and plenty of artillery that is mobile, has excellent observation and targeting, and can be used effectively to destroy any unit in motion. And then there is US and Korean airpower. And these can also be used with precision in the dark and bad weather. Its not 1950 anymore. Any North Korean attack would be exterminated before it begins.
The ROK army is several million strong when mobilized, 500-600K is just the peacetime figure, mostly the regular cadre plus those doing their military service. That is plenty to hold a impenetrable line across the penninsula given absolute air supremacy and modern technology.
2ID is now based in the US. There is I think still a brigade on 2ID in Korea plus service units, and pre-positioned equipment for the whole division and maybe one other, I don’t recall.
Er, there are no Russian troops coming. What for ?
And they don’t really have anything they didn’t have in 1991. All hat, no cattle that bunch.
And I doubt any Chinese either, unless they go mad.
“It would be an interesting fight, to be sure.”
I work with some retired Army folks who lived many years in Korea.
They said that of NK was going to invade SK that they’d have to do it in Winter before the rivers and paddys thaw...
Otherwise they’d never get thru the back ups on the roads around Seoul let alone out fight the kimchis.
Of course we can. We have 300 million people and the largest economy (and manufacturing base) in the world. All that would be required is diverting the $11 trillion to defense instead of pork projects. H3!!, for $11 trillion, we should be able to pretty much do as we please.
You don’t realize how bloody a shooting war could be in Korea.....thousands dead. North Korea would throw everything at us including nukes. Kim and his generals know once shooting starts its the regimes death sentence.
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.