Well...it's more realistic than there last plan.
http://joongangdaily.joins.com/article/view.asp?aid=2919725
QuoteNorth adopts new war invasion strategy: source
April 27, 2010
The North Korean military has recently altered its wartime contingency plans against South Korea to concentrate on attacking the Seoul metropolitan region, a military source said yesterday. South Korean commanders will meet next month to discuss the change and their response to it.
According to the high-ranking source, the North's military recently decided to do away with the so-called "Five-to-Seven" plans dating from the 1980s to adopt a new plan in which it would occupy only a part of South Korea and start negotiating a cease-fire.
"We believe the North made the change to better deal with the upgraded weapons systems of the U.S. and South Korean forces," the source explained.
In the previous plan, the numerals five and seven refer to the number of days North Korea believed it would take to occupy all of South Korea. Under that plan, the North's frontline mechanized units would bulldoze through the South for about a week before gaining control of the country.
With the new plan, the North would concentrate its early fire on Seoul and neighboring areas, where most of South Korea's social and economic infrastructure is located.
"North Korea would try to occupy Seoul early," the source said. "And from there, it could either try to go farther south, or try to negotiate [for a cease-fire] from an advantageous position."
A military expert who requested anonymity said the North took cues from the Gulf War in 1991 and Iraq War in 2003. Iraqi forces had armored vehicles similar to the North's, but they were destroyed by the U.S. military's precision strike weapons. North Korea, in other words, has concluded that if its mechanized units engaged in old-fashioned combat without extra help, they would be no match for the more sophisticated U.S. weapons systems.
As part of the change, North Korea has bolstered its frontline mechanized corps with extra mechanized divisions, the military source said. Also, the frontline corps have each received an extra light infantry division, and light infantry battalions on the front have been expanded to regiments.
The South Korean military also believes the North has bolstered its torpedo and sea mine capabilities against a possible U.S.-South Korea joint rear landing and has traded submarines with Iran for the latest torpedoes.
South Korean military commanders will gather early next month to discuss how to stay prepared for combat amid increasing tension with North Korea. Defense Ministry spokesman Won Tae-jae said, "Their meeting will serve as an opportunity for us to review problems surrounding the Cheonan sinking, to discuss strengthening combat preparedness on western islands and to tighten discipline for the entire armed forces."
By Kim Min-seok, Yoo Jee-ho [[email protected]]
http://www.freekorea.us/2010/04/27/new-north-korean-war-plan-grab-seoul-negotiate/
QuoteNew North Korean War Plan: Grab Seoul, Negotiate
Posted by Joshua Stanton on April 27, 2010 at 6:34 am · Filed under NK Military, ROK Military
Via the Joongang Ilbo, North Korea's on-the-shelf invasion oplan no longer calls for invading all of South Korea, but in recognition of stronger U.S. and South Korean military capabilities, now calls for quickly occupying Seoul and then negotiating favorable terms.
With the new plan, the North would concentrate its early fire on Seoul and neighboring areas, where most of South Korea's social and economic infrastructure is located.
"North Korea would try to occupy Seoul early," the source said. "And from there, it could either try to go farther south, or try to negotiate [for a cease-fire] from an advantageous position."
I'm sure Selig Harrison would call this progress.
A military expert who requested anonymity said the North took cues from the Gulf War in 1991 and Iraq War in 2003. Iraqi forces had armored vehicles similar to the North's, but they were destroyed by the U.S. military's precision strike weapons. North Korea, in other words, has concluded that if its mechanized units engaged in old-fashioned combat without extra help, they would be no match for the more sophisticated U.S. weapons systems.
As part of the change, North Korea has bolstered its frontline mechanized corps with extra mechanized divisions, the military source said. Also, the frontline corps have each received an extra light infantry division, and light infantry battalions on the front have been expanded to regiments.
There may also be a recognition here of North Korea's logistical limitations — that is, its general inability to sustain an invasion with long, exposed supply lines.
I certainly don't claim to be a military expert, but I've studied enough history to know how other armies have beaten back similar attacks from Kursk, to the Seelow Heights, to An Loc, to Grozny, even when badly outnumbered by their attackers. History shows that these blitzkrieg tactics bog down quickly when thrown into restricted terrain with well-prepared defenses held by a well-trained, well-armed opponent. That's particularly true when the defender holds air supremacy. Thus, even the reduced expectations seem unrealistic. North Korea could probably do severe damage to Seoul on Day One, but by Day Two, most of its longer-range artillery capable of hitting Seoul would be silenced, and allied air power would be seeking out North Korea's more numerous, shorter-range tactical artillery sites and its more elusive and dangerous short-range ballistic missile launchers.
It's one thing to damage a city, another thing to take it. If this report is accurate, the North Korean strategy still depends on the use of mechanized and motorized conventional forces, which would have to cover 40 miles of highly obstructed terrain with no air cover and under assault from American and South Korean air power. North Korea has few heavily armored main battle tanks, and even these stood up poorly to such light infantry weapons as the RPG-7 in Afghanistan and Chechnya. The majority of North Korea's tanks are lighter amphibious models designed for the easy fording of rivers, but with such light armor protection that even .50 caliber machine guns would grind them up.
Again, assuming that this report is accurate, it suggests that South Korea ought to accelerate long-delayed plans to upgrade its helicopter gunships, the most efficient way to destroy vehicles in crowded urban areas. It also suggests that the ROK should invest in a large number of inexpensive anti-tank weapons for its infantry and plenty of close-quarter training in their use.
With all that said, even if the new report is a case of a new hypervigilance, that's certainly a healthier attitude than the dreamy complacency that has dominated South Korea recently. I take for granted that a North Korean invasion could be stopped before it reached Seoul, but whether it would be — and with a minimum of casualties — depends on how well the ROK army trains and equips itself.
The K1A1 is still >> than any North Korean tank.
North Korea has also been focusing on guerrilla and terrorist tactics (IEDs, etc) - well, that's always been a big part of the communist battle doctrine, but it's something they appear to have taken a renewed interest in.
QuoteThe majority of North Korea's tanks are lighter amphibious models designed for the easy fording of rivers, but with such light armor protection that even .50 caliber machine guns would grind them up.
That 40 mile dash would be a bitch, considering the hundreds of Vulcan mini-guns in established hard points the ROK installed in the mid-90s. Every inch of that western DMZ line is one big concentric field of fire, chock full of heady CIWS goodness.
I don't understand the strategy. Even in the very unlikely event it worked and they momentarily captured Seoul, what terms would they then expect the South to agree to?
Quote from: Pitiful Pathos on April 28, 2010, 04:09:16 AM
I don't understand the strategy. Even in the very unlikely event it worked and they momentarily captured Seoul, what terms would they then expect the South to agree to?
All ROK Presidents must follow Dear Leader's Fashion Wisdom (http://blogs.abcnews.com/theworldnewser/2010/04/kim-jong-il-global-fashion-icon.html)!
Wow, N.Korea being sensible.
But how do we know this?
I was going to say something about "NK is crazy, we'd never agree to a cease-fire until we roll up to the Yalu river"....but MacArthur is long dead.
Quote from: Tonitrus on April 28, 2010, 05:30:04 AM
I was going to say something about "NK is crazy, we'd never agree to a cease-fire until we roll up to the Yalu river"....but MacArthur is long dead.
Uh, no he isn't. :huh:
"Old soldiers never die, the just fade away"
He's in cryogenic storage in B5 of the Pentagon, ready to be revived when the Japs or Chicommies get uppity.
Quote from: Caliga on April 28, 2010, 06:24:05 AM
Quote from: Tyr on April 28, 2010, 05:27:12 AM
Wow, N.Korea being sensible.
:huh:
Consider the source.
Blitzkrieg without air superiority into a massive urban area... what could
possibly go wrong?
Quote from: Pitiful Pathos on April 28, 2010, 04:09:16 AM
I don't understand the strategy. Even in the very unlikely event it worked and they momentarily captured Seoul, what terms would they then expect the South to agree to?
North Korea's new plan skips phase one and two and goes straight to the profit!
I hope a commando team is tasked to kick Tim in the nuts.
Quote from: grumbler on April 28, 2010, 06:46:24 AM
Quote from: Caliga on April 28, 2010, 06:24:05 AM
Quote from: Tyr on April 28, 2010, 05:27:12 AM
Wow, N.Korea being sensible.
:huh:
Consider the source.
Blitzkrieg without air superiority into a massive urban area... what could possibly go wrong?
The North Koreans might believe that the West has lost the will to exploit their air superiority in urban/civilian settings...probably thinking we won't use significant amounts of ordinance at risk of whatever Seoul civilians cannot make it out; and that their blitzkriegers would be mostly safe from the air.
Though a new Korean War will probably give a big kick to the balls of the military doctrine we've been using for the last decade.
Quote from: Caliga on April 28, 2010, 06:24:05 AM
Quote from: Tyr on April 28, 2010, 05:27:12 AM
Wow, N.Korea being sensible.
:huh:
You don't think so?
Old way: 'We will occupy the country which is in every way our superior (not to mention its ally which isn't just in a different league to us but isn't even playing the same sport) in a week! Mwa ha ha!'
New way: '....yeah...if war with the South comes we're screwed. We're a rogue state though...And you know how developed nations are about civilian casualties. Rather than waging war in the traditional fashion we should take hostages!'
Quote from: Tonitrus on April 28, 2010, 07:30:10 AM
Quote from: grumbler on April 28, 2010, 06:46:24 AM
Quote from: Caliga on April 28, 2010, 06:24:05 AM
Quote from: Tyr on April 28, 2010, 05:27:12 AM
Wow, N.Korea being sensible.
:huh:
Consider the source.
Blitzkrieg without air superiority into a massive urban area... what could possibly go wrong?
The North Koreans might believe that the West has lost the will to exploit their air superiority in urban/civilian settings...probably thinking we won't use significant amounts of ordinance at risk of whatever Seoul civilians cannot make it out; and that their blitzkriegers would be mostly safe from the air.
Har. they in for a big supplies!
Quote from: Caliga on April 28, 2010, 06:24:05 AM
Quote from: Tyr on April 28, 2010, 05:27:12 AM
Wow, N.Korea being sensible.
:huh:
Certainly more reasonable than "we'll overrun the peninsula in a week.
Crazy and Nearly Impossible > Laughably Impossible
By the way, HMBob, have you seen any of those mourning pagoda things they've put up? I was in Suwon tonight, and they had one outside the AK Plaza, the giant mall/subway/train station. It's an open tent pagoda style thing run by the military with pictures of all 46 sailors KIA, martial/somber music and a wall to write well wishes on. I wish I could have taken a photo, but I didn't want to be disrespectful, so I just added my thoughts to the wall.
Quote from: jimmy olsen on April 28, 2010, 09:01:59 AM
Quote from: Caliga on April 28, 2010, 06:24:05 AM
Quote from: Tyr on April 28, 2010, 05:27:12 AM
Wow, N.Korea being sensible.
:huh:
Certainly more reasonable than "we'll overrun the peninsula in a week.
Crazy and Nearly Impossible > Laughably Impossible
By the way, HMBob, have you seen any of those mourning pagoda things they've put up? I was in Suwon tonight, and they had one outside the AK Plaza, the giant mall/subway/train station. It's an open tent pagoda style thing run by the military with pictures of all 46 sailors KIA, martial/somber music and a wall to write well wishes on. I wish I could have taken a photo, but I didn't want to be disrespectful, so I just added my thoughts to the wall.
No, but I haven't been outside my rat hole district all week, as usual. They did give us little black ribbons to wear for the mourning period - they're for all the public employees, which includes school teachers too.
Given that NK can't even feed its people, nor supply electrical power to most of the nation outside of the Capital and some major cities, and lacks most vestiges of normal, modern civilization, should we think it even possible for the NK military to actually be able to sustain the logistics of invading SK and lasting very long before they run out of supplies of all kinds?
Quote from: HisMajestyBOB on April 28, 2010, 09:08:10 AM
Quote from: jimmy olsen on April 28, 2010, 09:01:59 AM
Quote from: Caliga on April 28, 2010, 06:24:05 AM
Quote from: Tyr on April 28, 2010, 05:27:12 AM
Wow, N.Korea being sensible.
:huh:
Certainly more reasonable than "we'll overrun the peninsula in a week.
Crazy and Nearly Impossible > Laughably Impossible
By the way, HMBob, have you seen any of those mourning pagoda things they've put up? I was in Suwon tonight, and they had one outside the AK Plaza, the giant mall/subway/train station. It's an open tent pagoda style thing run by the military with pictures of all 46 sailors KIA, martial/somber music and a wall to write well wishes on. I wish I could have taken a photo, but I didn't want to be disrespectful, so I just added my thoughts to the wall.
No, but I haven't been outside my rat hole district all week, as usual. They did give us little black ribbons to wear for the mourning period - they're for all the public employees, which includes school teachers too.
I didn't get any ribbon. <_<
Quote from: KRonn on April 28, 2010, 09:11:39 AM
Given that NK can't even feed its people, nor supply electrical power to most of the nation outside of the Capital and some major cities, and lacks most vestiges of normal, modern civilization, should we think it even possible for the NK military to actually be able to sustain the logistics of invading SK and lasting very long before they run out of supplies of all kinds?
(https://languish.org/forums/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fmightygodking.com%2Fimages%2Fkimjong8.jpg&hash=aea472706659172a1a2a1ce9756bcbd7313934b4)
Assuming there is any truth to the story at all, maybe the thinking is, "Militarily we may be doomed, all we have is the deterrant effect that a war will totally destroy Seoul, and this plan emphasizes that to South Korea and the US."
Quote from: jimmy olsen on April 28, 2010, 09:24:00 AM
Quote from: HisMajestyBOB on April 28, 2010, 09:08:10 AM
Quote from: jimmy olsen on April 28, 2010, 09:01:59 AM
Quote from: Caliga on April 28, 2010, 06:24:05 AM
Quote from: Tyr on April 28, 2010, 05:27:12 AM
Wow, N.Korea being sensible.
:huh:
Certainly more reasonable than "we'll overrun the peninsula in a week.
Crazy and Nearly Impossible > Laughably Impossible
By the way, HMBob, have you seen any of those mourning pagoda things they've put up? I was in Suwon tonight, and they had one outside the AK Plaza, the giant mall/subway/train station. It's an open tent pagoda style thing run by the military with pictures of all 46 sailors KIA, martial/somber music and a wall to write well wishes on. I wish I could have taken a photo, but I didn't want to be disrespectful, so I just added my thoughts to the wall.
No, but I haven't been outside my rat hole district all week, as usual. They did give us little black ribbons to wear for the mourning period - they're for all the public employees, which includes school teachers too.
I didn't get any ribbon. <_<
They know your loyalty is suspect.
Commie.
Gotta love the scared look of the "scientist" here.
Quote from: CountDeMoney on April 28, 2010, 03:11:12 AM
QuoteThe majority of North Korea's tanks are lighter amphibious models designed for the easy fording of rivers, but with such light armor protection that even .50 caliber machine guns would grind them up.
That 40 mile dash would be a bitch, considering the hundreds of Vulcan mini-guns in established hard points the ROK installed in the mid-90s. Every inch of that western DMZ line is one big concentric field of fire, chock full of heady CIWS goodness.
There won't be a 40 mile dash.
They will send their tanks through their tunnels.
The wild, screaming axe men will follow.
Don't their tanks have much better armor than American tanks?
Quote from: The Brain on April 28, 2010, 01:19:50 PM
Don't their tanks have much better armor than American tanks?
Certainly.
Even American tankers hate the M1.
Quote from: Berkut on April 28, 2010, 01:28:08 PM
Quote from: The Brain on April 28, 2010, 01:19:50 PM
Don't their tanks have much better armor than American tanks?
Certainly.
Even American tankers hate the M1.
It's the Sherman of the Cold War.
Quote from: KRonn on April 28, 2010, 09:11:39 AM
Given that NK can't even feed its people, nor supply electrical power to most of the nation outside of the Capital and some major cities, and lacks most vestiges of normal, modern civilization, should we think it even possible for the NK military to actually be able to sustain the logistics of invading SK and lasting very long before they run out of supplies of all kinds?
That's probably why they had a plan to overrun the entire country in 5-7 days--they could only carry enough supplies for 5-7 days with them from the start, so the plan had to be completely executed during that time.
Assuming the nukes don't fly, a NK invasion of SK would probably be for the best for the citizens of NK.
Sure, a bunch of them would be dead, but a bunch of them die all the time, I am thinking. And at least after SK and the US took over NK, they could finally integrate and join civilization.
Actually, again assuming the nukes don't fly - how easily could SK and the US take out NK assuming we attacked them with the intent of re-unifying the country under the SK government?
Quote from: Berkut on April 28, 2010, 03:13:17 PM
Actually, again assuming the nukes don't fly - how easily could SK and the US take out NK assuming we attacked them with the intent of re-unifying the country under the SK government?
A lot of that comes down to what China does in response, I'd imagine.
A good question. How long does it take to go from an independent, totalitarian regime that governs all activities of its citizens' lives to incorporating it into a pre-existing, democratic government? Has that ever been done before? We have the example of West Germany for the transition, but that was a complete change and rebuilding of the country from the ground-up, albeit with some of the more benign institutions still in place. How do you incorporate a country where basic things like running water aren't even assumed?
Quote from: Berkut on April 28, 2010, 03:13:17 PM
Actually, again assuming the nukes don't fly - how easily could SK and the US take out NK assuming we attacked them with the intent of re-unifying the country under the SK government?
I believe it would be a slam dunk.
Let's assume that the nukes do fly.
Quote from: Jacob on April 28, 2010, 03:15:21 PM
Quote from: Berkut on April 28, 2010, 03:13:17 PM
Actually, again assuming the nukes don't fly - how easily could SK and the US take out NK assuming we attacked them with the intent of re-unifying the country under the SK government?
A lot of that comes down to what China does in response, I'd imagine.
True. Although this isn't the 50s - the gap between US and Chinese military capabilities is simply...immense.
For example, unlike in KW1, we could pretty much drop every single bridge over the Yalu river and keep them down for good.
Which doesn't mean that I think a Chinese intervention would not be problematic, but I wonder if China *would* intervene again?
The relationship between China and the West politically and economically is also drastically different.
Quote from: The Brain on April 28, 2010, 03:32:54 PM
Let's assume that the nukes do fly.
Then the outcome is less desirable, for pretty much everyone involved.
Quote from: Habbaku on April 28, 2010, 03:17:09 PM
A good question. How long does it take to go from an independent, totalitarian regime that governs all activities of its citizens' lives to incorporating it into a pre-existing, democratic government? Has that ever been done before?
Japan, post WW2? Although obviously Japan was a
functional society, unlike NK.
Quote from: Habbaku on April 28, 2010, 03:17:09 PM
A good question. How long does it take to go from an independent, totalitarian regime that governs all activities of its citizens' lives to incorporating it into a pre-existing, democratic government? Has that ever been done before? We have the example of West Germany for the transition, but that was a complete change and rebuilding of the country from the ground-up, albeit with some of the more benign institutions still in place. How do you incorporate a country where basic things like running water aren't even assumed?
This is pretty much the same question we were asking about Albania a coupla decades ago. Turned out that Albanians were a lot more aware of, and ready to join, the world as a whole than pretty much anyone had thought possible.
Dunno if the example is applicable to NK, but the assumption that NK is non-functional on a people level might not be true.
Quote from: The Brain on April 28, 2010, 03:32:54 PM
Let's assume that the nukes do fly.
That would be an awesome light show.
Quote from: Berkut on April 28, 2010, 03:36:52 PM
Quote from: Jacob on April 28, 2010, 03:15:21 PM
Quote from: Berkut on April 28, 2010, 03:13:17 PM
Actually, again assuming the nukes don't fly - how easily could SK and the US take out NK assuming we attacked them with the intent of re-unifying the country under the SK government?
A lot of that comes down to what China does in response, I'd imagine.
True. Although this isn't the 50s - the gap between US and Chinese military capabilities is simply...immense.
For example, unlike in KW1, we could pretty much drop every single bridge over the Yalu river and keep them down for good.
Which doesn't mean that I think a Chinese intervention would not be problematic, but I wonder if China *would* intervene again?
The relationship between China and the West politically and economically is also drastically different.
I don't have much understanding of military capabilities, but does this work both ways? Could the U.S. support forces in South Korea by sea with modern anti-ship missiles and at least some Chinese air and sea threat? And if not, would Chinese intervention effectively embargo the peninsula? My understanding is that with a few more missiles and a little better technology and coordination, Argentina would have effectively done so against the UK.
Not that this matters, I can't imagine China would intervene on the side of NK if push came to shove. China knows the future isn't with NK.
Quote from: grumbler on April 28, 2010, 03:46:23 PM
Dunno if the example is applicable to NK, but the assumption that NK is non-functional on a people level might not be true.
A lot may depend on how sincere the following of Juche really is. It might be so shallow it collapses immediately, or it might be so ingrained that some Juche Party post-unification makes Die Linke look like amateurs. That could really bring down the New Korea if it held a sizable enough chunk of support to act as a pivot.
NK has roughly half the population of SK, right?
Quote from: alfred russel on April 28, 2010, 03:59:10 PM
Quote from: Berkut on April 28, 2010, 03:36:52 PM
Quote from: Jacob on April 28, 2010, 03:15:21 PM
Quote from: Berkut on April 28, 2010, 03:13:17 PM
Actually, again assuming the nukes don't fly - how easily could SK and the US take out NK assuming we attacked them with the intent of re-unifying the country under the SK government?
A lot of that comes down to what China does in response, I'd imagine.
True. Although this isn't the 50s - the gap between US and Chinese military capabilities is simply...immense.
For example, unlike in KW1, we could pretty much drop every single bridge over the Yalu river and keep them down for good.
Which doesn't mean that I think a Chinese intervention would not be problematic, but I wonder if China *would* intervene again?
The relationship between China and the West politically and economically is also drastically different.
I don't have much understanding of military capabilities, but does this work both ways? Could the U.S. support forces in South Korea by sea with modern anti-ship missiles and at least some Chinese air and sea threat? And if not, would Chinese intervention effectively embargo the peninsula? My understanding is that with a few more missiles and a little better technology and coordination, Argentina would have effectively done so against the UK.
Not that this matters, I can't imagine China would intervene on the side of NK if push came to shove. China knows the future isn't with NK.
I agree that it's not likely that China would intervene on the side of NK under the present conditions, but as for the military balance, Argentine capabilities were relatively closer to those of the UK during the Falklands War than the capabilities of China are to those of the US today.
Frankly, I think that the Brits got lucky. Don't get me wrong, had the war gone on, they would have eventually won, but it could have been a lot longer and more costly (both financially and in terms of men and material) than it was.
Quote from: Berkut on April 28, 2010, 03:36:52 PMTrue. Although this isn't the 50s - the gap between US and Chinese military capabilities is simply...immense.
For example, unlike in KW1, we could pretty much drop every single bridge over the Yalu river and keep them down for good.
Which doesn't mean that I think a Chinese intervention would not be problematic, but I wonder if China *would* intervene again?
The relationship between China and the West politically and economically is also drastically different.
Yeah, I don't think the Chinese would want to bring their army into North Korea or otherwise fight the US directly. I don't think they'd think it was worth it, unless a nasty combination of nationalism and "incidents" put them in a position where they had to or face serious trouble at home.
I'd imagine that they'd do some sort of supply of materiel and intel, to make American and RoK losses as high as possible while obstructing peaceful resolutions for as long as possible. Basically, I figure they'd fight a proxy war with the aim being to hold as many cards when the situation finally settles down. Because I think the Chinese bottom line in any kind of NK scenario is that they don't want the US having military access to their border with Korea.
On a board game level it would probably be a good time for China to move on Taiwan. Not sure if it makes sense when looking at it realistically though.
Quote from: Habbaku on April 28, 2010, 03:17:09 PM
A good question. How long does it take to go from an independent, totalitarian regime that governs all activities of its citizens' lives to incorporating it into a pre-existing, democratic government? Has that ever been done before? We have the example of West Germany for the transition, but that was a complete change and rebuilding of the country from the ground-up, albeit with some of the more benign institutions still in place. How do you incorporate a country where basic things like running water aren't even assumed?
Yeah, the post war situation would be pretty intense; especially if NK had managed to inflict heavy civilian SoK casualties beforehand. I think it's a lot harder to welcome you long lost countrymen and pay for fixing their country when they've just killed a bunch of your friends, family and neighbours.
Quote from: alfred russel on April 28, 2010, 03:59:10 PM
Quote from: Berkut on April 28, 2010, 03:36:52 PM
Quote from: Jacob on April 28, 2010, 03:15:21 PM
Quote from: Berkut on April 28, 2010, 03:13:17 PM
Actually, again assuming the nukes don't fly - how easily could SK and the US take out NK assuming we attacked them with the intent of re-unifying the country under the SK government?
A lot of that comes down to what China does in response, I'd imagine.
True. Although this isn't the 50s - the gap between US and Chinese military capabilities is simply...immense.
For example, unlike in KW1, we could pretty much drop every single bridge over the Yalu river and keep them down for good.
Which doesn't mean that I think a Chinese intervention would not be problematic, but I wonder if China *would* intervene again?
The relationship between China and the West politically and economically is also drastically different.
I don't have much understanding of military capabilities, but does this work both ways? Could the U.S. support forces in South Korea by sea with modern anti-ship missiles and at least some Chinese air and sea threat? And if not, would Chinese intervention effectively embargo the peninsula? My understanding is that with a few more missiles and a little better technology and coordination, Argentina would have effectively done so against the UK.
Not that this matters, I can't imagine China would intervene on the side of NK if push came to shove. China knows the future isn't with NK.
That would be an interesting wargame project - could China interdict the US Navy and its support for US Army forces in North Korea?
I am guessing they would have a lot of trouble doing so. They couldn't do it in the first round, and I rather doubt they could do it now. And if it came down to it, and the Chinese seriously attacked US merchant shipping, resulting in an all out naval conflict, the end result is going to be that China has no navy anymore - at all.
I could imagine that if their close ashore capability is as good as some people say that the fighting could be a little bloody for the Americans, but I don't think the result would be in question.
Quote from: Jacob on April 28, 2010, 04:11:45 PM
Quote from: Berkut on April 28, 2010, 03:36:52 PMTrue. Although this isn't the 50s - the gap between US and Chinese military capabilities is simply...immense.
For example, unlike in KW1, we could pretty much drop every single bridge over the Yalu river and keep them down for good.
Which doesn't mean that I think a Chinese intervention would not be problematic, but I wonder if China *would* intervene again?
The relationship between China and the West politically and economically is also drastically different.
Yeah, I don't think the Chinese would want to bring their army into North Korea or otherwise fight the US directly. I don't think they'd think it was worth it, unless a nasty combination of nationalism and "incidents" put them in a position where they had to or face serious trouble at home.
I'd imagine that they'd do some sort of supply of materiel and intel, to make American and RoK losses as high as possible while obstructing peaceful resolutions for as long as possible. Basically, I figure they'd fight a proxy war with the aim being to hold as many cards when the situation finally settles down. Because I think the Chinese bottom line in any kind of NK scenario is that they don't want the US having military access to their border with Korea.
Indeed, which is why I think it would be pretty straightforward for the US to assure China that post-war there would not be any US bases closer to Chinese territory than there is currently, or possibly even negotiate those away as well.
After all, a westernized Korea could defend itself from China just fine without needing US forces on the ground. Probably could just have a US base in the southern end somewhere, and that would be adequate.
Lastly, a Korea on the border of China that is wealthy and such would be a economic boon to the Chinese, wouldn't it? Another close market for Chinese goods.
Quote from: Berkut on April 28, 2010, 03:13:17 PM
Actually, again assuming the nukes don't fly - how easily could SK and the US take out NK assuming we attacked them with the intent of re-unifying the country under the SK government?
I'm not qualified to comment on the military aspect, but the real challenge would be the post-war unification and pacification - as in Iraq and Afghanistan. If everything goes perfectly on a military front (few civilian casualties, China gets some sort of quid pro quo so they don't interfere) I think it'd be a big challenge, but primarily for the North Koreans. If, on the other hand, there are lot of civilian deaths on both sides, Seoul and other infrastructure is seriously damaged and the Chinese stir the pot as much as they can it could get pretty ugly.
In any kind of war scenario my worries, on a strategic level, would be:
1. Escalation and conflagration of fighting to pit US vs China (I don't think it's high risk, but the consequences are dire if it does come to pass).
2. Damage to Seoul and South Korean infrastructure, as well as massive civilian deaths, making post war unification more difficult.
3. The degree to which North Korea could turn into some sort of quagmire. I have no idea to what degree NK would collapse like a house of cards on one hand or turn quagmire after the conventional forces were taken care of on the other, nor how much ability China has to influence it in either direction; but that would be high on my list of things to worry about. I don't think the conventional war is that big of a problem in the end (beyond 2 above) - it's the aftermath I'd worry about.
I don't think there would be much risk of this "quagmire". As far as I know there isn't any religious element to NK craziness, so I think all the "Juche" bullshit would disappear almost immediately. In fact, I would bet dollars to donuts that most people even in NK don't truly buy into it anyway. Just what must be parroted to keep from getting shipped off to some prison camp somewhere.
I think post war unification would be economically difficult and very expensive. Emotionally, I think it would be pretty straightforward. I think, from what I have seen, most Koreans think of themselves as "Korean", not "South Korean", for example, and would pretty much just blame all the bad parts on the idiotic NK regime, rather than hold any particular animosity towards the NK people.
If anything, I think the biggest cultural issue might be that SKians just look down on their poor bumpkin country cousins from the North.
Quote from: Berkut on April 28, 2010, 04:22:01 PMIndeed, which is why I think it would be pretty straightforward for the US to assure China that post-war there would not be any US bases closer to Chinese territory than there is currently, or possibly even negotiate those away as well.
After all, a westernized Korea could defend itself from China just fine without needing US forces on the ground. Probably could just have a US base in the southern end somewhere, and that would be adequate.
Lastly, a Korea on the border of China that is wealthy and such would be a economic boon to the Chinese, wouldn't it? Another close market for Chinese goods.
That sounds like a best case scenario, and one to hope for should something like this come to pass. The questions are, I guess, whether the Chinese will see it that way, whether the US will see it that way and if they feel they can trust each other.
I guess for the Chinese, the ideal outcome with a unified Korea would be one where Korea is politically closer to and more dependent on China than on the US; especially if this could be combined with chips to be used elsewhere, like Taiwan. If China could be made to believe that to be the like outcome of a war like that, they could probably be brought on board.
Quote from: Berkut on April 28, 2010, 04:28:09 PM
I don't think there would be much risk of this "quagmire". As far as I know there isn't any religious element to NK craziness, so I think all the "Juche" bullshit would disappear almost immediately. In fact, I would bet dollars to donuts that most people even in NK don't truly buy into it anyway. Just what must be parroted to keep from getting shipped off to some prison camp somewhere.
I honestly don't know. What's the terrain like in NK? I'm under the impression that it's pretty mountainous.
I mean, to be honest, I'd expect (and hope) that the North Koreans would be happy to get rid of the Juche despot, but I just don't know. It's another risk factor.
QuoteI think post war unification would be economically difficult and very expensive. Emotionally, I think it would be pretty straightforward. I think, from what I have seen, most Koreans think of themselves as "Korean", not "South Korean", for example, and would pretty much just blame all the bad parts on the idiotic NK regime, rather than hold any particular animosity towards the NK people.
I think you're right that they see themselves as Korean, but I'm not sure they'd be reasonable and blame everything on the idiotic NK regime. I'm sure that'd be the initial response, but if Seoul took a hard enough pounding and enough peoples' friends and relatives were killed and their economic aspirations pulverized, the South Koreans might start seriously resenting the country bumpkins of the North.
QuoteIf anything, I think the biggest cultural issue might be that SKians just look down on their poor bumpkin country cousins from the North.
If that's the biggest issue, then things have gone pretty well in this hypothetical scenario, I think.
Quote from: MadImmortalMan on April 28, 2010, 04:03:50 PM
Quote from: grumbler on April 28, 2010, 03:46:23 PM
Dunno if the example is applicable to NK, but the assumption that NK is non-functional on a people level might not be true.
A lot may depend on how sincere the following of Juche really is. It might be so shallow it collapses immediately, or it might be so ingrained that some Juche Party post-unification makes Die Linke look like amateurs. That could really bring down the New Korea if it held a sizable enough chunk of support to act as a pivot.
Not sure if it needs to be sincere or not. By 1945 I doubt many Germans were die-hard Nazis, but they were either afraid of the ones who were, or were afraid of what allied justice would do to them (and for good reason). While I don't really see Juche partisans taking to the hills, I an imagine NK putting up very stiff resistance.
Quote from: Berkut on April 28, 2010, 04:19:05 PM
That would be an interesting wargame project - could China interdict the US Navy and its support for US Army forces in North Korea?
I am guessing they would have a lot of trouble doing so. They couldn't do it in the first round, and I rather doubt they could do it now. And if it came down to it, and the Chinese seriously attacked US merchant shipping, resulting in an all out naval conflict, the end result is going to be that China has no navy anymore - at all.
I could imagine that if their close ashore capability is as good as some people say that the fighting could be a little bloody for the Americans, but I don't think the result would be in question.
Does the first round matter? The early 1950s was shortly after WWII, and the Chinese were bombing the US with biplanes (pre WWII technology). Even in WWII, to sink an aircraft carrier you basically needed to get a bunch of bombers or torpedo planes to point blank range of the carrier, and even then the results were mixed. My assumption is that now all you need to do is get a plane to within a couple dozen miles (not sure the range) with an anti ship missile and the ship is going to have a big problem. Plus, modern radar is going to make it difficult for a ship to hide.
I think I asked the question a while back on whether aircraft carriers would be survivable in a major modern war, and the answer seemed to be probably not.
Quote from: grumbler on April 28, 2010, 03:46:23 PM
Quote from: Habbaku on April 28, 2010, 03:17:09 PM
A good question. How long does it take to go from an independent, totalitarian regime that governs all activities of its citizens' lives to incorporating it into a pre-existing, democratic government? Has that ever been done before? We have the example of West Germany for the transition, but that was a complete change and rebuilding of the country from the ground-up, albeit with some of the more benign institutions still in place. How do you incorporate a country where basic things like running water aren't even assumed?
This is pretty much the same question we were asking about Albania a coupla decades ago. Turned out that Albanians were a lot more aware of, and ready to join, the world as a whole than pretty much anyone had thought possible.
Dunno if the example is applicable to NK, but the assumption that NK is non-functional on a people level might not be true.
When did Albania join the modern world?
Will N.Koreans be: The Albanians of Asia? :ph34r:
Quote from: grumbler on April 28, 2010, 03:46:23 PMThis is pretty much the same question we were asking about Albania a coupla decades ago. Turned out that Albanians were a lot more aware of, and ready to join, the world as a whole than pretty much anyone had thought possible.
That's a good point.
QuoteDunno if the example is applicable to NK, but the assumption that NK is non-functional on a people level might not be true.
Let's hope it's not.
Quote from: Tyr on April 28, 2010, 05:21:22 PM
When did Albania join the modern world?
It was around 6:00 PM UCT on a Tuesday, if I recall correctly.
Quote from: Tyr on April 28, 2010, 05:21:22 PM
When did Albania join the modern world?
Will N.Koreans be: The Albanians of Asia? :ph34r:
January 2003
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Accession_of_Albania_to_the_European_Union
Quote from: MadImmortalMan on April 28, 2010, 04:03:50 PM
Quote from: grumbler on April 28, 2010, 03:46:23 PM
Dunno if the example is applicable to NK, but the assumption that NK is non-functional on a people level might not be true.
A lot may depend on how sincere the following of Juche really is. It might be so shallow it collapses immediately, or it might be so ingrained that some Juche Party post-unification makes Die Linke look like amateurs. That could really bring down the New Korea if it held a sizable enough chunk of support to act as a pivot.
NK has roughly half the population of SK, right?
No one follows Juche, the regime is built on the rock of Korean nationalism and racial superiority. And the people do believe in that.
Quote from: alfred russel on April 28, 2010, 05:13:37 PM
Quote from: Berkut on April 28, 2010, 04:19:05 PM
That would be an interesting wargame project - could China interdict the US Navy and its support for US Army forces in North Korea?
I am guessing they would have a lot of trouble doing so. They couldn't do it in the first round, and I rather doubt they could do it now. And if it came down to it, and the Chinese seriously attacked US merchant shipping, resulting in an all out naval conflict, the end result is going to be that China has no navy anymore - at all.
I could imagine that if their close ashore capability is as good as some people say that the fighting could be a little bloody for the Americans, but I don't think the result would be in question.
Does the first round matter? The early 1950s was shortly after WWII, and the Chinese were bombing the US with biplanes (pre WWII technology). Even in WWII, to sink an aircraft carrier you basically needed to get a bunch of bombers or torpedo planes to point blank range of the carrier, and even then the results were mixed. My assumption is that now all you need to do is get a plane to within a couple dozen miles (not sure the range) with an anti ship missile and the ship is going to have a big problem. Plus, modern radar is going to make it difficult for a ship to hide.
I think I asked the question a while back on whether aircraft carriers would be survivable in a major modern war, and the answer seemed to be probably not.
Busan is hundreds of kilometers from the Chinese coast. Unless the Chinese send out their Navy they have no chance of do anything to the US navy/supply effort in Korea.
QuoteI think post war unification would be economically difficult and very expensive. Emotionally, I think it would be pretty straightforward. I think, from what I have seen, most Koreans think of themselves as "Korean", not "South Korean", for example, and would pretty much just blame all the bad parts on the idiotic NK regime, rather than hold any particular animosity towards the NK people.
If anything, I think the biggest cultural issue might be that SKians just look down on their poor bumpkin country cousins from the North.
I think you're right on the money here.
There's still officially hosted family reunions between divided families, and I've spoken with a few Koreans who's parents or grandparents were refugees from the North during the war.
The current plan for reunification, from what I've read, is to put a provisional regime in place in the North, so that you don't have a quick and sudden unification. Possibly the divided Gangwon and Gyeonggi provinces will be the first to be integrated into the South, maybe right away. Then you spend the time and money to bring the North up to select benchmarks - what those are, probably no one will know until after the Kim government collapses.
One thing that the South hasn't done yet is to set up a North Korean "government in exile" that can be put into place relatively quickly. I'm not sure if its a) because there's a lack of qualified Northern defectors (though I know there's several mid- to high-ranking ones), b) they don't want to do that because it might be an implicit recognition two Korean independent states (like the One-China issue), or c) it does exist, but they're keeping it under wraps to prevent North Korean infiltration, or assassination of key members of said G-i-E.
It may not so much what China will do to directly hamper the US, as much as what they may try to demand(unofficially) for turning a blind eye. Like Taiwan.
Quote from: Tonitrus on April 28, 2010, 07:54:21 PM
It may not so much what China will do to directly hamper the US, as much as what they may try to demand(unofficially) for turning a blind eye. Like Taiwan.
It's not like the US could just give Taiwan to China.
I think the "war strategy" should really be called "PR strategy". Even they must know that their chance of winning a conventional war is zero. This "strategy" is just their attempt in demonstrating to the NK population that there is some chance of victory. Kinda like Hitler's miracle weapons. Besides, why disclose the strategy? Military plans should be top secret. The fact that NK allows this to be leaked is further evidence that this is just PR.
Quote from: Monoriu on April 28, 2010, 10:58:25 PM
I think the "war strategy" should really be called "PR strategy". Even they must know that their chance of winning a conventional war is zero. This "strategy" is just their attempt in demonstrating to the NK population that there is some chance of victory. Kinda like Hitler's miracle weapons. Besides, why disclose the strategy? Military plans should be top secret. The fact that NK allows this to be leaked is further evidence that this is just PR.
How do you know this was leaked on purpose? A sweeping change in the strategic plan like this would be disseminated to hundreds if not thousands of officers.
Quote from: jimmy olsen on April 28, 2010, 11:01:43 PM
Quote from: Monoriu on April 28, 2010, 10:58:25 PM
I think the "war strategy" should really be called "PR strategy". Even they must know that their chance of winning a conventional war is zero. This "strategy" is just their attempt in demonstrating to the NK population that there is some chance of victory. Kinda like Hitler's miracle weapons. Besides, why disclose the strategy? Military plans should be top secret. The fact that NK allows this to be leaked is further evidence that this is just PR.
How do you know this was leaked on purpose? A sweeping change in the strategic plan like this would be disseminated to hundreds if not thousands of officers.
I don't know, of course. But consider the possibilities. Either this is leaked accidentally, or deliberately. Which is more likely? We're talking about one of the most secretive police states in the world. We're talking about military plans, which should be top secret in any country. And why do they need to tell thousands of officers? Only the top need to know. Considering the circumstances, my bet is: this is leaked on purpose.
Quote from: grumbler on April 28, 2010, 03:46:23 PM
Quote from: Habbaku on April 28, 2010, 03:17:09 PM
A good question. How long does it take to go from an independent, totalitarian regime that governs all activities of its citizens' lives to incorporating it into a pre-existing, democratic government? Has that ever been done before? We have the example of West Germany for the transition, but that was a complete change and rebuilding of the country from the ground-up, albeit with some of the more benign institutions still in place. How do you incorporate a country where basic things like running water aren't even assumed?
This is pretty much the same question we were asking about Albania a coupla decades ago. Turned out that Albanians were a lot more aware of, and ready to join, the world as a whole than pretty much anyone had thought possible.
I dunno...white slavery, heroin and counterfeit Adidas track suits don't exactly scream joining the world in a positive way.
Quote from: Berkut on April 28, 2010, 04:28:09 PM
I don't think there would be much risk of this "quagmire". As far as I know there isn't any religious element to NK craziness, so I think all the "Juche" bullshit would disappear almost immediately.
Clearly nothing could go wrong once we've had a Mission Accomplished moment. These people have no nationalism. They'd embrace the foreign occupiers with open arms.
Quote from: Berkut on April 28, 2010, 04:22:01 PM
Indeed, which is why I think it would be pretty straightforward for the US to assure China that post-war there would not be any US bases closer to Chinese territory than there is currently, or possibly even negotiate those away as well.
Never assure or negotiate anything with those little yellow bastards. Ever.
China's best bet is to help in taking down N.Korea.
The North are a liability, they're certainly going to lose, so it just makes sense to make the war as quick and painless as possible and get a say in the future country.
Hopefully it won't end up like the game Mercenaries.
All the US would have to do to get Chinese help I think is to sign a deal about a neutral Korea after the war- which many of the S.Koreans from what I've read would like anyway, even with the north.
Post-war....
I'm torn.
On the one hand there's the whole East/West Germany thing and the gap being bigger.
However....With East Germany the West was trying to incorporate many aspects of the old system. They were trying to keep the same rights for the people there, recognising the same jobs and all that sort of thing in the East. Properly incoporating the DDR into the west.
With N.Korea meanwhile you can essentially start with a completely blank slate. In many ways things could go better there as you get to start from the ground up and do things properly and in a way fitting for a poorer country.
I think the best bet is an immediate Korean Federation- to the outside world there is one Korea. Korean sports teams, Korean foreign policy, etc... internally though there are very much two countries. They've a lot of preferential agreements with each other and all sorts of tight ties but northerners can't just move to the south on a whim. As time goes by things become ever tighter between the two until, finally, we can get a proper united Korea.
How long for N.Korea to be fixed....Well as I said its starting from scratch so in some ways its easier than eastern Europe. Just look to Russia under Stalin and before. It managed to do some crazily fast industrialisation even with a nutter randomly killing people in power. Under a more sane hand...?
On the other hand look at Albania. A horrible backwards shithole. Only now its one whose population likes to go abroad and be horrible and backwards there.
And Africa/S.America....They've had all the time in the world but nought.
Quote from: Tyr on April 29, 2010, 06:03:10 AM
On the other hand look at Albania. A horrible backwards shithole. Only now its one whose population likes to go abroad and be horrible and backwards there.
And Africa/S.America....They've had all the time in the world but nought.
Albanians are muslims. What did you expect, really.
Africa is teh white man fault.
South America is catholic. They have nothing of the protestant working and business ethics. Corruption is part of the stablishment, and they have no sense of citizenship, of belonging and having a common future with your fellow citizens. Plus they hate joos.
Quote from: Siege on April 29, 2010, 08:47:08 AM
South America is catholic. They have nothing of the protestant working and business ethics. Corruption is part of the stablishment, and they have no sense of citizenship, of belonging and having a common future with your fellow citizens. Plus they hate joos.
I'll be damned-- you got some of that right.
The chinese are not going to help take down north korea unless north korea fucks it up too much. The chinese probably have significant paranoia stemming from a (ROK) 700,000 western equipped army on their border. The Koreans can eat shit (or in this case rocks) and die as far as the CCP is concerned, they just want the buffer.
Quote from: Monoriu on April 28, 2010, 11:12:28 PMI don't know, of course. But consider the possibilities. Either this is leaked accidentally, or deliberately. Which is more likely? We're talking about one of the most secretive police states in the world. We're talking about military plans, which should be top secret in any country. And why do they need to tell thousands of officers? Only the top need to know. Considering the circumstances, my bet is: this is leaked on purpose.
Yeah, it's not unreasonable to think the information was deliberately released by the NK regime. I mean, how often do we get information they don't want released except through defectors? And this information wasn't from a defector, right?
Quote from: Viking on April 29, 2010, 09:25:13 AM
The chinese are not going to help take down north korea unless north korea fucks it up too much. The chinese probably have significant paranoia stemming from a (ROK) 700,000 western equipped army on their border. The Koreans can eat shit (or in this case rocks) and die as far as the CCP is concerned, they just want the buffer.
This.
China has good and improving relations with the South. China - South Korean commercial relationships are far more important than N Korea. They have good strategic reasons for keeping N Korea afloat, but it is only worth so much in the way of Chinese resources to do that. And the last thing they want is a few million starving refugees cramming the border. If it looks like NK may be going down, China is probably better off the faster and cleaner it goes down.
Quote from: The Minsky Moment on April 29, 2010, 02:59:33 PM
China has good and improving relations with the South. China - South Korean commercial relationships are far more important than N Korea. They have good strategic reasons for keeping N Korea afloat, but it is only worth so much in the way of Chinese resources to do that. And the last thing they want is a few million starving refugees cramming the border. If it looks like NK may be going down, China is probably better off the faster and cleaner it goes down.
This. The PRC doesn't want to be seen choping down the North, but if they can see a way to help it happen quickly and easily, they will do it.
They don't fear an invasion by South Korea, IMO. The South Koreans have no reason to invade, and many not to. The buffer state idea was valid when SK was pretty much a US puppet, but not any longer.
Quote from: Berkut on April 29, 2010, 01:07:09 PM
Quote from: Viking on April 29, 2010, 09:25:13 AM
The chinese are not going to help take down north korea unless north korea fucks it up too much. The chinese probably have significant paranoia stemming from a (ROK) 700,000 western equipped army on their border. The Koreans can eat shit (or in this case rocks) and die as far as the CCP is concerned, they just want the buffer.
This.
I suspect they also see value in NK being a foreign policy distraction for the US, as well as NK making Red China look so great by comparison, no matter what the latter does.
Quote from: derspiess on April 29, 2010, 03:20:01 PM
Quote from: Berkut on April 29, 2010, 01:07:09 PM
Quote from: Viking on April 29, 2010, 09:25:13 AM
The chinese are not going to help take down north korea unless north korea fucks it up too much. The chinese probably have significant paranoia stemming from a (ROK) 700,000 western equipped army on their border. The Koreans can eat shit (or in this case rocks) and die as far as the CCP is concerned, they just want the buffer.
This.
I suspect they also see value in NK being a foreign policy distraction for the US, as well as NK making Red China look so great by comparison, no matter what the latter does.
That is probably also the reason Chavez and Mugabe both seem to support Iranian Nukes.
Why would China care how many troops a united Korea has on their border? The only way that Korea could ever pose a threat to China is if the Chinese forget that they have The Bomb.