Is this a possibility?

[freeandfun1]

Fair. I can accept that.

Seems as if I am not the only one throwing out concerns though...

From the Chosun-Ilbo we have THIS ARTICLE TODAY

Can an anxious nation trust that this government’s policy toward the U.S. and its alliances is the result of deep consideration concerning Korea’s path and strategies for defense?

Eventually all these issues come down to the question of how this government evaluates the meaning of the alliance between Korea and the United States. The alliance with the U.S. is the only alliance we have. Accordingly, changes in the Korea-U.S. alliance or amendments in the track will directly influence, of course, the “axis of diplomacy” and the “axis of national defense” that has been supporting independence and prosperity of Korea since our independence in 1945. It is evident that it will also influence the future path of the country.

Such suspicions and anxiety of the nation cannot be comforted with rhetoric like “independent crack military forces” or “cooperative autonomous national defense,” nor can the security gap resulting from qualitative changes in the alliance be hidden with empty rhetoric saying “alliance defensive abilities will be strengthened with close cooperation between Korea and the U.S.” by the ones who are in charge.

This government should boldly state its diplomatic paths and security direction and truthfully respond to the nation’s doubts. One thing to be emphasized at this point is that those in charge of this government should not think that a five-years term in office grants them the right to change and shift the diplomatic, defensive, and economic bases that were the pivots of Korea for the past 50 years for political reasons without the agreement of the people. What the people truly wish to hear is the government’s position about these criticisms.

So I guess the Koreans are also wrong for "wondering" outloud?

 

[freeandfun1]

And, in the Financial Times this morning, we have:

South Korean officials said Washington would leave enough forces to maintain the country's security. But North Korea could view the withdrawal as a sign of US military weakness at a time when the countries are engaged in a stand off over Pyongyang's development of nuclear weapons.

Since some means at least more than one, I guess I am not the only one wondering about this.....

 

[dmp]

North Korea - hell, even SOUTH korea does not work in our planning offices. North Korea has been huffing and puffing for a generation about how they are on the verge of attack.

Nobody, not even the NK's are stupid enough to initiate a war like you are suggesting. It doesn't pass the common sense test.

 

[freeandfun1]

Originally posted by -=d=- North Korea - hell, even SOUTH korea does not work in our planning offices.

So we are now planning the defence of Korea without consulting the Koreans. . . . WOW!

The US is also partner in the operations of the ROK/US Combined Forces Command (CFC), an integrated headquarters established in 1978, and is responsible for planning for the defense of the Republic of Korea.

Combined Forces Command

Dude, you DON'T know what you are talking about

 

[freeandfun1]

Originally posted by -=d=-
Nobody, not even the NK's are stupid enough to initiate a war like you are suggesting. It doesn't pass the common sense test.

Did flying planes into the WTC pass the common sense test? Did NK's blowing up a plane over the Gulf of Thailand in 1988 pass the common sense test? Does NK's attempts to build nukes pass the common sense test?

 

[dilloduck]

Hey potman --No one is trying to take your fear away--Keep it because you have a right to it

 

[dmp]

Originally posted by freeandfun1
So we are now planning the defence of Korea without consulting the Koreans. . . . WOW!



Combined Forces Command

Dude, you DON'T know what you are talking about

You're dumb. Really.

wow.

Thickheaded.


(sigh).

 

[freeandfun1]

Originally posted by dilloduck
Hey potman --No one is trying to take your fear away--Keep it because you have a right to it

Hey, I never said that I expect the scenario that I posed to happen. I just asked is it possible.

Perhaps I do worry because my wife's family all still live in Seoul and I know that they (as many of my friends there) are worried.

Perhaps I offered this up just as a point of discussion (which is what I did).

I am just attempting to create topics to discuss. For any one person, me or -=d=-, to think they have the exclusive knowledge on any one subject is idiotic.

I posed a concern that is out there by many not just myself. Do I think NK will attack tomorrow? NO! Do I think they will attack someday? Maybe. It really depends on a lot of variables.

Again, I was just proffering a scenario for DISCUSSION. -=d=- seems to be the only one that has a difficult time with that. He must have a severe ego problem.

 

[Patriot]

Yes it is a possibility. Anything is a posibility...However your scenario about Russia wont hold up in that Russia would need EU's backing to do such a thing because its military is totally defunct and useless and many of their weapons have been sold on the black market. Their scientists have gone awol and Russia only has two key defense systems. The intimidation factor in that everyone thinks they can still kick ass. And they fact that they are psycho crazy and have small quantities of ex kgb agents willing to go terrorize for free.


Nk cant wait to use their nukes I think they have three total. on the American west coast. And yes they can reach our soil unlike you have been told. However they wont unless they feel secure thay have China backing them up when the shit really hits the fan.


So far China hasn't done what they can because economically things have been going their way. But since they have alot of top security intell un us this has been what has been keeping America at bay with their sorry asses ( remember the Whidbey Island hostages?) So for now they feel in charge and havent had a need to do anything more. Untill that time everything will remain status quo.

 

[freeandfun1]

Originally posted by Patriot
Yes it is a possibility. Anything is a posibility...However your scenario about Russia wont hold up in that Russia would need EU's backing to do such a thing because its military is totally defunct and useless and many of their weapons have been sold on the black market. Their scientists have gone awol and Russia only has two key defense systems. The intimidation factor in that everyone thinks they can still kick ass. And they fact that they are psycho crazy and have small quantities of ex kgb agents willing to go terrorize for free.


Nk cant wait to use their nukes I think they have three total. on the American west coast. And yes they can reach our soil unlike you have been told. However they wont unless they feel secure thay have China backing them up when the shit really hits the fan.


So far China hasn't done what they can because economically things have been going their way. But since they have alot of top security intell un us this has been what has been keeping America at bay with their sorry asses ( remember the Whidbey Island hostages?) So for now they feel in charge and havent had a need to do anything more. Untill that time everything will remain status quo.

Thank you for a thoughtful counter to the possibility that I threw out for discussion.

I agree that Russia would need the backing of the EU or, at least, the Iranians....

BTW: What is the size of the Iranian military??

I agree that NK is eager to use their nukes. I don't think they will unless they see an opportunity to do so or unless they truly think they are being set up for an invasion or a pre-emptive attack on their nuclear facilities (i.e. US troops withdrawing from the peninsula).

As for China, I also agree that, at the moment, things are going okay for them. But the recent shortages of steel and other products they need to continue their growth could spill over into oil very soon (Sptrately Islands....).

Only time will tell.

Again, thanks for offering something substantive.

 

[freeandfun1]

An interesting article that applies to the "possible" relationship that could be formed between Russia, the EU and China....

CLICK HERE

 

[Zhukov]

Now, you can’t tell me that both Russia and China let a NK train pass through their countries without knowing that something was onboard. Even if they did, they SHOULD have known…

Maybe they did know, tipped us off, and we destroyed that train. Though the localized amount of damage to the train, if true, would tend to refute that.

China and Russia, in cohort with NK, are passing missile technology to Syria which Syria will then combine with the WMD’s that just about everybody agrees were PROBABLY transferred from Iraq into Syria. Syria uses those weapons to attack the US forces in Iraq.

Perhaps the Syrians were transfering WMD to the North Koreans, and not the other way around. Sensing that North Korea would be next, and seeing an ally in them, the Syrians offered up Saddam's WMD to Kim.

The US then retaliates with nukes; Damascus is destroyed

I don't think we will ever detonate a nuclear bomb over a civilian center again, especially not in response to terrorists using WMD obtained from Syria (who obtained them from Saddam) on our soldiers and Iraqi civilians, which is the most likely method of attack. This is also why I don't see why the Syrians would even need missile tech from North Korea. The missiles Saddam had (in violation of UN sanctions) would be sufficient for their needs in any eventuality: a US invasion, an attack on Israel, a direct launch into Iraq.

NK, knowing that the US is tied up in the ME and knowing that US strength in Korea is much more weakened, decides to use this advantage (of course, this was all planned with China, Russia and Syria previously) to take the Republic of Korea. Simultaneously, China takes Taiwan. We are stretched too thin and can do NOTHING.

China wouldn't take Taiwan by force. I just refuse to believe they would do something that stupid. The old men in Beijing are too cautious for that.

Kim, on the other hand, is that stupid. He might think that he can take South Korea by conventional means, and then use the threat of WMD use to deter any invading force.

In that event, we could systematically destroy everything important in North Korea, or any North Korean forces in South Korea, by air.

Russia then makes a move on the Persian Gulf in an attempt to better position themselves as a major superpower. The EU sides with Russia as they just want to get the USA out of the area.

Russia already posseses some of the world's largest untappped oil reserves. There is no need, nor would it be advisable, for them to become engaged in fighting with any middle eastern countries.

If they are going to meddle in the affairs of any other nations, it'll be the former Soviet republics (and oil rich nations) Kazakstan, Uzbekistan, et cetera, and it'll be behind the scenes.

China, seeing this, feels betrayed. A 200,000,000 man Army marches from China to the ME through Afganistan and Iraq to confront the EU and Russia. 1/3 of the armies are destroyed.

If they have to go throught Afghanistan they'll have to go through us. That is something I doubt very seriously they would do.

It is also unlikely that they would deploy that many soldiers with India right next door, not that India would neccesarily do anything. But the old men of the Chinese politburo would probably be too cautious again.

 

[freeandfun1]

Thanks for a thoughtful counter.

Originally posted by Zhukov
Maybe they did know, tipped us off, and we destroyed that train. Though the localized amount of damage to the train, if true, would tend to refute that.

If you read everything I wrote, you will see I also covered that possibility.

Perhaps the Syrians were transfering WMD to the North Koreans, and not the other way around. Sensing that North Korea would be next, and seeing an ally in them, the Syrians offered up Saddam's WMD to Kim.

True. The Syrian "engineers" were supposedly from their WMD research center.

I don't think we will ever detonate a nuclear bomb over a civilian center again, especially not in response to terrorists using WMD obtained from Syria (who obtained them from Saddam) on our soldiers and Iraqi civilians, which is the most likely method of attack. This is also why I don't see why the Syrians would even need missile tech from North Korea. The missiles Saddam had (in violation of UN sanctions) would be sufficient for their needs in any eventuality: a US invasion, an attack on Israel, a direct launch into Iraq.

Fair enough. Good analysis.

China wouldn't take Taiwan by force. I just refuse to believe they would do something that stupid. The old men in Beijing are too cautious for that.

Not sure if I totally agree. Pride might trump reason. Also, the cash/gold reserves of Taiwan are huge and China might want that. But your point is well taken.

Kim, on the other hand, is that stupid. He might think that he can take South Korea by conventional means, and then use the threat of WMD use to deter any invading force.

I totally agree with you on this point.

In that event, we could systematically destroy everything important in North Korea, or any North Korean forces in South Korea, by air.

I agree, but what if NK were to use the few nukes they have to "neutralize" our air forces stationed in Japan and elsewhere.... just a thought.

Russia already posseses some of the world's largest untappped oil reserves. There is no need, nor would it be advisable, for them to become engaged in fighting with any middle eastern countries.

Yes, but if they controlled the ME oil too, they basically control the world's supply (minus Canada, S. Amer, Mexico) and therefore, the world.... food for thought.....

If they are going to meddle in the affairs of any other nations, it'll be the former Soviet republics (and oil rich nations) Kazakstan, Uzbekistan, et cetera, and it'll be behind the scenes.

True, but I think Russia "feels" they have control there now. I might be wrong though. I just threw all this out for the fun of discussion.

If they have to go throught Afghanistan they'll have to go through us. That is something I doubt very seriously they would do.

Well, true, but our forces there would be NO match for an army as big as China's (unless we use non-conventional means). Plus, based on the scenario I threw out, they would not care. Taking Taiwan would automatically put us at war with China based on our treaties with Taiwan.

It is also unlikely that they would deploy that many soldiers with India right next door, not that India would neccesarily do anything. But the old men of the Chinese politburo would probably be too cautious again.

Perhaps.

Again, thanks for contributing to the DISCUSSION!

 

[Zhukov]

Originally posted by freeandfun1
Not sure if I totally agree. Pride might trump reason. Also, the cash/gold reserves of Taiwan are huge and China might want that. But your point is well taken.

Here's the question though: Would Taiwan be more of an economic gem for the Chinese if they had to take it by force as opposed to milking it like they are doing now?

I agree, but what if NK were to use the few nukes they have to "neutralize" our air forces stationed in Japan and elsewhere.... just a thought.

Then North Korea would cease to exist. My previous statement concerning nuclear bombs and civilian centers would no longer apply.

Besides, we have aircraft carriers.

Yes, but if they controlled the ME oil too, they basically control the world's supply (minus Canada, S. Amer, Mexico) and therefore, the world.... food for thought.....

Yes, but could they control the ME? They can't even control Chechnya, and they know it. That's why a foray into the middle east would be unwise.

Well, true, but our forces there would be NO match for an army as big as China's (unless we use non-conventional means). Plus, based on the scenario I threw out, they would not care. Taking Taiwan would automatically put us at war with China based on our treaties with Taiwan.

No, it isn't a matter of us putting up a significant resistance, it's a matter of China attacking us. But yes, as you stated, in your scenario, we are already at war with them because of Taiwan.

 

[freeandfun1]

Here's the question though: Would Taiwan be more of an economic gem for the Chinese if they had to take it by force as opposed to milking it like they are doing now?

My experience in the region on business is that it is the Taiwan Chinese that are milking the mainlanders.... not the other way around.

I pretty much agree with you on the other points. But I do think as a nation we are starting to rely on technology WAY too much.

When I say that Russia would control the ME, I don't really mean it as militarily, etc. I just mean it in the sense that we do today (through influence, etc.).

If things do not improve in the region the USA is going to lose its position in the ME as the power broker there. That is going to open the door for the Russians and the EU or a combination of the two.

I posted a link to an article earlier in this thread that covers that possibility. Many are already starting to worry about such an alliance being formed if for no other reason than squashing the US' influence in the world.

 

[Zhukov]

I don't think it is likely that the Bush Administration would sign away it's dominance in Iraq to the UN in a humiliating fashion. A U.N. Resolution would be nice, if it suited our needs, but ultimately it isn't important enough to grovel before the international community for it.

If the French, Russians, and Chinese want to send in soldiers to stabilize Iraq, they are welcome to it. That is something I doubt they would do, and we are not going to continue to shoulder the burden while we let others get the credit.

With specific respect to Russia, Putin really has a lot of work on his hands before he starts looking around for external opportunities. His position is not as stable as it might outwardly appear. Sure, popular opinion for his Presidency remains high, but that could change in an instant. Putin needs to worry about maintaining economic growth and the moderninzing of Russian industry and infrastructure so fewer people are unemployed and discontent, and so he has the economic capital to make Russia a first rate power again.

Superseding our influence in the middle east could only be done with gold or blood. They haven't the gold, and the Russian people are not willing to spare the blood. Not yet at least, but that too could change.

 

[freeandfun1]

Noted. Thanks!

 

[dilloduck]

The russians also have thier hands full with a war on terrorism. Chechnya is a nightmare for them. I would guess they would like to get the rebellion under control before taking on new aggressive actions.

 

[freeandfun1]

Originally posted by dilloduck
The russians also have thier hands full with a war on terrorism. Chechnya is a nightmare for them. I would guess they would like to get the rebellion under control before taking on new aggressive actions.

So true. But a truce with the Muslims, in an attempt to "backdoor" the USA could get them two birds with one stone.....

Peace in Chechnya and influence in the ME.

But then again, this all just speculation for the hell of it!

 

[nbdysfu]

[qoute]The stretched to thin argument is, well, thin. I agree that our technology gives us a heads up, but that is about it. Once a 200,000,000 Army is deployed, the only technology that is going to stop that is nukes and if we resort to using enough nukes to stop both China and Russia, we might as well just kiss mother earth and her inhabitants goodbye.

Frankly, I feel that Americans have become too infatuated with technology and that causes us to overlook reality. JMHO [/QUOTE]

Nah.

a) Hitler lost at Stalingrad because the russians fought through sheer attrition and managed to keep his bogged tanks from overrunning the city. Untold numbers of russians were marched willingly and unwillingly to their death in that battle. Napoleon lost against a meager russian force at Moscow because they retreated and left no city to overrun and his overstretched supply lines could not supply his troops or cavalry. In the end of the pacific theatre, the United States likely avoided a battle of attrition by staying home and taking cities out one by one with nukes, rather than confronting the army.

b) In a nuclear war people or even soldiers are not the best target. They are control centers, morale centers and missile silos. Hence the development of precision nukes for fortified defenses and moabs for large fielded armies.

c) Could china really supply an army of 200,000,000? Five bullets each would equal 1,000,000,000 bullets. Sounds impractical. More likely they would strive for nuclear parity, which they have made much progress in thanks to B.C.