Posted on 05/27/2010 9:23:00 AM PDT by fenderfeeder
(May 27) -- Tensions continue to mount on the Korean peninsula in the wake of an international investigation that concluded a North Korean submarine was responsible for sinking a South Korean navy ship in April, killing 46 sailors. In the latest chess moves, Seoul staged a big anti-submarine drill, which Pyongyang responded to by saying it will no longer honor an agreement meant to avoid accidental naval clashes between the two nations.
As the crisis escalates, an unsettling question comes into focus: What would war on the Korean peninsula look like some 50-odd years after the armistice that brought the Korean War to an end?
A North Korean Attack: Though war would be catastrophic for both countries, South Korea would suffer the most in the first days of a full-scale conflict. Its capital of Seoul lies just 50 miles south of the Demilitarized Zone (DMZ) -- as big a misnomer as you will find, since the area is one of the most heavily militarized areas on the planet. On this de facto border, North Korea has amassed about 13,000 artillery pieces, rockets, missiles and other ordinance that can reach Seoul in a matter of minutes. Seoul, a city of 1 million, could be flattened; also at risk are the 28,500 American troops stationed in the country. Additionally, North Korea could release its dams and flood much of the South, writes Christopher Hitchens. There's also its 1.2 million-member army to consider. And were North Korea to deploy nuclear and chemical weapons, the devastation would be much much worse.
South Korea's Response: South Korea is far from defenseless, however. It has a standing army of more than 500,000 and nearly 10 times that in trained reservists. It has twice the population of the North and is a First-World economic power with huge industrial capacity, while North Korea is an economic backwater where much of the population is malnourished. In any protracted conflict, these would be huge advantages. What's more, the DMZ is heavily mined, and the border area is hilly (even mountainous along the East Coast) and offers natural defensive positions.
International Actors: Alliances haven't changed much in 50 years. The U.S. backs South Korea, while China supports the North. Neither country would likely remain neutral in a Korean war, but it's unclear how involved they would be -- unless North Korea employed nuclear weapons, which would almost certainly trigger an immediate U.S. response. Since 1978, the U.S. has pledged to protect South Korea from a nuclear threat from the North. "Under the extended nuclear deterrence pledge, the U.S. military would use some of its tactical nuclear weapons, such as B-61 nuclear bombs carried by B-2/52 bombers and F-15E, F-16 and F/A-18 fighters, as well as Tomahawk cruise missiles launched from nuclear-powered submarines, to strike North Korea's nuclear facilities in retaliation for any such attack on the South," military experts told The Korea Times. China will not support North Korean nuclear aggression, though it's unlikely to sit by idly if American and South Korean forces take over the North. Meanwhile, the main U.S. tensions with China will remain over Taiwan, which could exacerbate if Taiwan used the distraction of a Korean conflict to declare independence.
The Aftermath: Were full-scale war to break out, the endgame likely would be the end of North Korea's dictatorship; the U.S. would not settle for a peace that left Kim Jong-il in power. But what would you do with his brainwashed subjects, whose leader has done everything he can to block their access to the modern outside world? Hitchens, again:
"The dirty secret here is that no neighboring power really wants the North Korean population released from its awful misery. Here are millions of stunted and unemployable people, traumatized and deformed by decades of pointless labor on the plantations of a mad despot. The South Koreans do not really want these hopeless cases on the soil of their flourishing consumer society. The Chinese, who have a Korean-speaking province that borders North Korea, are likewise unwilling to suffer the influx of desperate people that is in our future."
This reintegration project would be much more difficult than the one following the reunification of Germany, where Soviet control in the East, however draconian, never approached the cult state that is North Korea. Whatever military challenges war would bring would be dwarfed by these postwar social challenges.
Cluster bombs, daisy cutters, and guided munitions all dropped from unseen stand-off positions can dislodge even the most capable and fearsome soldiers. They wouldn't have a prayer.
I suspect you’re right. If the Japanese don’t have nukes on hand, they probably do have the components ready to put one together in a few hours.
Big 'ifs,' admittedly.
It would also help that the Koreans who put up such a good record in Vietnam and Iraq were the SOUTH Koreans, who would be on our side, and not the North Korean enemy.
Are you suggesting that we spent 50,000 lives plus 100's of thousands of casualties plus our nation's treasure and prestige with the objective to fight NVM to a stalemate?
I was told - again - hearsay - they have 12 hour window.
No, the objective was to force a halt to NVM's aggression against the South. You have no knowledge whatever of the war and its history, either political or military, if you think otherwise. When, for example, did our forces enter North Vietnam and attempt to occupy it?
We ALWAYS hear that (generally from armchair warriors) prior to the start of a conflict and we always end up in deep do-do.
The Korean war was the UN’s war. It is despicable how our troops were led and killed there.
The UN doesn’t want it solved, in fact things are just the way the UN wants them.
If there is another war, it will be again, the UN’s war.
So, how long did Saddam’s regime hold out in 2003?
You don't need to occupy in order to defeat.
We flew over 5,000,000 sorties into north Viet Nam..
I'm not sure that's the right question.
We're still there after 7 years and we've spent over $1,000,000,000,000 (as in TRILLION). So how long Saddam held out is somewhat irrelevant to me.
Well, you don't understand military history and operations then. Let me guess...you're a Libertarian, right?
“You don’t need to occupy in order to defeat.
We flew over 5,000,000 sorties into north Viet Nam..”
Where did you get that number? That would be over 1200 sorties per day for the entire period of the war, over the North, not the South, Laos, or Cambodia, ignoring periods of bad weather, and the long pause in bombing of the North from 1968-72.
“Defeat” and the collapse of the regime are two different things. To put in terms of the lefty worldview with which you are obviously familiar, did our government collapse after the defeat in Vietnam?
Please cite some facts to support your contention that our objective was to force a collapse of the NVN regime. (Strawmen and weasel words won’t do.)
The destruction of Seoul would be accomplished within 4 hours of the Norks letting all of their artillery off the leash. You really think they wont be employing NBC weapons via arty?
HA! You’re probably right on that.
see “atomic conspiracy” post, most of the tubed artillery will be at the edge of the range. NBC is a big concern, but it is not range specific to Seoul, their ballistic missiles can reach many places.
If they do employ NBC they got to realize that then even Chinese will not save them, South Koreans will then have no other choice but to try and take over the whole North and China will be shackled with images of chemical weapons devastation of Seoul and will not act to help them. I think the only targets that they will use non conventional stuff against will be US bases in Korea and Japan, perhaps Japanese cities.
Obviously my "lefty world view" tends to view "defeat" and "collapse" of a regime we're at war with as similar enough not to be that different.
OTOH, I was mistaken on the sorties flown over NVM. There was a total of 5.2 million sorties flown by our guys in the nVietnam war over the north & south.
ping
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.