Korean Situation.

fontanalis

Forgive me if this is a stupid question but is the North fairly impoverished and if a massive war starts would food production be a big factor?

monosharp

fontanalis wrote: »

Forgive me if this is a stupid question but is the North fairly impoverished and if a massive war starts would food production be a big factor?

Well until 3 years ago they got a lot of free rice from the SK government. Food productions not an issue for the Army, for the ordinary citizens perhaps, but not for the army. Army first is the NK policy. Any supplies goes to the army first, then some is stored and a little makes it to the ordinary NK citizen.

OS119

Iwasfrozen wrote: »

Actually, no. Not nearly as big as the North anyway.

but almost certainly vastly more effective.

NK can make a mess of SK, but SK can turn NK's miltary from a thundering herd into an aimless mass of refugees.

NK may be heavy in the things that look scary - Artillery, Armour and masses of conscripts - but they are light years behind any SK/Japanese/US/Australian force in their ability to dominate the air and deny the enemy its communications and control.

all land battles are won or lost in the Air - and if you wish to waste an hour of your life, you can google for an example of any Air Force using Soviet/Chinese aircraft and doctrine denying an Air Force using western aircraft and doctrine air superiority and then air supremacy.

i remember a war where we were told that the 'fourth largest army in the world' - one with thousands of tanks and enough artillery to sink a continent - would tear apart a western force and piss on its technology. and i remember its starving, terrified soldiers surrendering to our helicopters...

i remember another war where NATO air forces faced 'the most sophisticated air defence network in the world' and its aircraft would be shot down in their hundreds. and i remember that that country is now 1/5th the size it used to be, that its capital still has bomb damage, and that NATO lost more aircraft to birdstrikes than it did to Yugoslav air defences...

dlofnep

Tea drinker wrote: »

happened before (massive wars), we are not so learned since then either

Maybe so, but it's still posturing.

Iwasfrozen

OS119 wrote: »

i remember a war where we were told that the 'fourth largest army in the world' - one with thousands of tanks and enough artillery to sink a continent - would tear apart a western force and piss on its technology. and i remember its starving, terrified soldiers surrendering to our helicopters...

i remember another war where NATO air forces faced 'the most sophisticated air defence network in the world' and its aircraft would be shot down in their hundreds. and i remember that that country is now 1/5th the size it used to be, that its capital still has bomb damage, and that NATO lost more aircraft to birdstrikes than it did to Yugoslav air defences...

Don't these wars have names? Only joking but names would be nice.

OS119 wrote: »

all land battles are won or lost in the Air

Actually I don't agree with this. Russia almost single handedly defeated the Germans despite the German air superiority under the idea of blitzkreig, because it could pump out millions of tonnes of Armour.

dlofnep

Iwasfrozen wrote: »

Actually I don't agree with this. Russia almost single handedly defeated the Germans despite the German air superiority under the idea of blitzkreig, because it could pump out millions of tonnes of Armour.

Russia also had nearly an infinite amount of soldiers, with little or no consideration for their lives. That helps. I should know, I play Command & Conquer all the time!

Iwasfrozen

dlofnep wrote: »

Russia also had nearly an infinite amount of soldiers, with little or no consideration for their lives. That helps. I should know, I play Command & Conquer all the time!

It wasn't nearly infinite. And the North Koreans have no consideration for lives either.

dlofnep

Iwasfrozen wrote: »

It wasn't nearly infinite. And the North Koreans have no consideration for lives either.

The Soviet Union lost more troops than any other nation.

amacachi

dlofnep wrote: »

The Soviet Union lost more troops than any other nation.

Yup, by a massive margin. The North wouldn't have the same kind of advantage in troop numbers to all be fodder and still have enough to win in any real sense.

Iwasfrozen

dlofnep wrote: »

The Soviet Union lost more troops than any other nation.

Yes they did. But they won despite not having air majority.

dlofnep

Iwasfrozen wrote: »

Yes they did. But they won despite not having air majority.

I never said anything about an air majority. They had great power in their numbers.

drakshug

Iwasfrozen wrote: »

Yes they did. But they won despite not having air majority.

They did have air majority after Kursk. They also had shorter supply lines, Wider tank tracks and General winter on their side.
As for N Korea. Without China, they won't do anything and China have their own agenda which doesn't involve upsetting any apple carts at the moment.

northwest100

China will use NK as a bargaining chip.
Russia are using the sale of ancient S-300 missile system to Iran.

S-300 is ancient system compared with latest Russian technology..but it does allow Iran to defend itself from the playground bullies, the tyrannical regimes that are the US and Isreal.

If Iran receive the S-300 system, Isreal will have their F16 fighter jets blown out of the sky...Israel and US know this.

So why has the US allowed the sale of S-300 missile system to Iran?

The US are no longer in any position to bully countries when China are their biggest creditor, that's the main issue here.

Iran will get their nuclear energy, China will tame North Korea and no war will break out with either country.

You can stop stocking up on rice and tinned fish for now, but consider looking at ways to be self-sufficient.

Maybe a return to farming is in order.

Baralis1

Going back to the military possibilities of this dispute. South Korea would have absolutely no problem dealing with the North on its own if it put a foot across the border, without US help. South Korea has one of the most advanced armies in the world, 650000 odd fulltime soldiers, with a good airforce and decent navy to boot. It is also a very wealthy country with huge buying power for a war effort. In contrast, the North has 1.2million, poorly trained, very poorly equipped, and most likely undernourished soldiers. It also has thousands of poorly maintained Soviet era tanks and military pieces, in reality, a hugh junk yard. Its has an obsolete Soviet era airforce and weak navy made up mostly of small missile boats and midget subs. It also has practically no money, is on the verge of famine, and has chronic fuel and power shortages.
As for its nukes, it currently has no way of delivering them short of flying a plane over and dropping one after avoiding the Souths airforce. I doubt they even have the technology to create a transportable nuke.
The only threat the North poses is that because of Seouls proximity to the border, they could probably do quite a bit of damage with artillery and missiles before the South's airforce completely wipe them out.

As for the political end of it, they will both spend a few months shaping up, maybe have a few border skirmishes and small naval skirmishes and that will be it. I think China is embarrased by the Norths antics and probably won't support militarily if the North did attack, which is extremely unlikely. Kim Jong Il is no fool.

Manic Moran

all land battles are won or lost in the Air - and if you wish to waste an hour of your life, you can google for an example of any Air Force using Soviet/Chinese aircraft and doctrine denying an Air Force using western aircraft and doctrine air superiority and then air supremacy

You can argue that the North Vietnamese won Vietnam despite the US having air superiority. It is also worth pointing out that NATO never claimed air superiority over Yugoslavia at under 15,000 feet.

After the 1991 war, an Iraqi Brigade commander was reported as saying something akin to "After two weeks of air bombardment I lost 5% of my tanks. After two minutes fighting against American tanks, I lost all my tanks"

Korea v1.5 would be fought and won by artillery, infantry, and ground vehicles, in that order. Air power would be a factor, but not the deciding one.

NTM

jank

Manic Moran wrote: »

You can argue that the North Vietnamese won Vietnam despite the US having air superiority. It is also worth pointing out that NATO never claimed air superiority over Yugoslavia at under 15,000 feet.

After the 1991 war, an Iraqi Brigade commander was reported as saying something akin to "After two weeks of air bombardment I lost 5% of my tanks. After two minutes fighting against American tanks, I lost all my tanks"

Korea v1.5 would be fought and won by artillery, infantry, and ground vehicles, in that order. Air power would be a factor, but not the deciding one.

NTM

How would you see it go?
I have heard that NK have 10,000 artillery peices aimed at Seoul...

gandalf

North Korea ramping up the retoric.

North Korea scraps South Korea military safeguard pact

North Korean soldiers patrol the banks of the Yalu River, opposite the Chinese border city of Dandong, 25 May 2010 Bilateral tensions have been mounting since the Cheonan sinking in March

North Korea has announced it will scrap an agreement aimed at preventing accidental naval clashes with South Korea, amid rising tensions over the sinking of a South Korean warship.

http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/world/asia_pacific/10170019.stm

I believe the US are going to be engaging in training exercises soon. That will probably prompt more bluster from NK as well. Lets just hope this is all just hot air from Pyongyang.

BluePlanet

You'd have to wonder what genius in South Korea thought it'd be a neat idea to put an armed naval vessel up North Korea's nose.

OS119

BluePlanet wrote: »

You'd have to wonder what genius in South Korea thought it'd be a neat idea to put an armed naval vessel up North Korea's nose.

the vessel was, and had been in South Korean territorial waters.

i take it you'd be happy for the Irish Naval Service not to patrol - and therefore assert Irish sovereignty over - Irish territorial waters that abutted UK territoral waters, just incase it inflamed the Royal Navy?

or is that different?

BluePlanet

OS119 wrote: »

the vessel was, and had been in South Korean territorial waters.

i take it you'd be happy for the Irish Naval Service not to patrol - and therefore assert Irish sovereignty over - Irish territorial waters that abutted UK territoral waters, just incase it inflamed the Royal Navy?

or is that different?

Yes, it's different because the area is disputed.
Therefore it is a signal of aggression to put an warship there.

From wikipedia:

Baengnyeong Island is a South Korean island in the Yellow Sea, off the Ongjin peninsula in North Korea. It lies less than 10 miles (16 km) from the North Korean coast, and is over 100 miles (160 km) from the South Korean mainland. The island is to the west of the Northern Limit Line, the de facto boundary dividing South Korea (ROK) from North Korea (DPRK). The area is the site of considerable tension between the two states; although it was provided in the armistice agreement for the stalemate of the Korean war that the islands themselves belonged to the South, the sea boundary was not covered by the armistice, and the sea is claimed by the North

monosharp

Manic Moran wrote: »

Korea v1.5 would be fought and won by artillery, infantry, and ground vehicles, in that order. Air power would be a factor, but not the deciding one.

Your severely underestimating the North.

Yes their equipment is outdated, its also mostly very well maintained.
Yes numbers are not that important in modern warfare, but they are certainly an advantage.
North Korea may well be a third world country, but the Army get fed and trained at the cost of everything else.
They're also a country that has developed homegrown missile technology to a standard good enough to be sold to other countries like Iran.
The Norths intelligence network is one of the best in the world, one of the Souths major concerns now is they believe there are numerous NK spies in the south.

Add in the complete and total fanaticism and this is very far from a foregone conclusion. North Korea is most definitely not Iraq.

This is one of the major reasons the US does not want a conflict here, it would cost them so much in lives, money and time that it could very likely end up been a loss for them.

tubos

Just stumbled across this thread, I was speaking with a Korean colleague of mine who is a bit wary of the information we are receiving regarding the recent sinking of the vessel, he believes that with the upcoming elections in the south on June 2nd, this situation is playing into the hands of the current government who have been unpopular until now.

Wolfe Tone

tubos wrote: »

Just stumbled across this thread, I was speaking with a Korean colleague of mine who is a bit wary of the information we are receiving regarding the recent sinking of the vessel, he believes that with the upcoming elections in the south on June 2nd, this situation is playing into the hands of the current government who have been unpopular until now.

Personally I think the information we have received is accurate. I mean the SK govt took their time over this, waited for the results of a lengthy international investigation before acting,when it was pretty apparent after a day or so that the North was involved.

monosharp

tubos wrote: »

Just stumbled across this thread, I was speaking with a Korean colleague of mine who is a bit wary of the information we are receiving regarding the recent sinking of the vessel, he believes that with the upcoming elections in the south on June 2nd, this situation is playing into the hands of the current government who have been unpopular until now.

Yeah elections are on wednesday and people were expecting a backlash against the current administration, the current president (whose election is separate but whose party will be involved in the election on wed) is not liked, for good reason.

I wouldn't put it past them (the government) but I don't think they'd do this far either.

BluePlanet

I'm not sure how accurate the information is.

But in my opinion the media have not been informing people that the North claim the waters where the incident occured.
They also haven't been informing us of the history of such incidences in this disputed area.

They also have failed to inform us that the warship was part of:

what the Pentagon has called "one of the world's largest simulated exercises" was underway. This war exercise, known as "Key Resolve/Foal Eagle" was launched on March 8 and was slated to continue until April 30.[16][17]

The Key Resolve/Foal Eagle exercise on the West Sea near the Northern Limit Line (NLL) was aimed at keeping a more watchful eye on North Korea as well as training for the destruction of weapons of mass destruction in the North. It involved scores of ultra-modern US and South Korean warships equipped with the latest technology

They didn't really tell us that

Early reports also suggested that South Korean Navy units shot at an unidentified ship heading towards North Korea.

A defense official later said that this target may have been a flock of birds that were misidentified on radar :rolleyes:

So we have a large "military exercise" taking place in disputed waters where previous incidences have occured. Add in a paranoid and trigger happy megolmanical leader in the North and some manner of skirmish where shots are fired by one side and wouldn't you just know it, we got a result.

gandalf

monosharp wrote: »

Yeah elections are on wednesday and people were expecting a backlash against the current administration, the current president (whose election is separate but whose party will be involved in the election on wed) is not liked, for good reason.

I wouldn't put it past them (the government) but I don't think they'd do this far either.

Given how erratic the character in charge is across the border can be it could be a very very dangerous gamble.

I am sure they are now milking it for everything they can get out of it but I don't think they would sink one of their own ships and kill 40+ of their own sailors.

gandalf

Blueplanet every report I have read about this has said that the waters are disputed and that there have been numerous incidents in them over the years.

BluePlanet

deadtiger wrote: »

Blueplanet every report I have read about this has said that the waters are disputed and that there have been numerous incidents in them over the years.

Really.
I'm surprised to hear that.
I guess i don't understand then how posters could come on here and claim things like this.

monosharp

BluePlanet wrote: »

Really.
I'm surprised to hear that.
I guess i don't understand then how posters could come on here and claim things like this.

Yeah it is 'disputed' kind of. As in the rest of the world (perhaps not china) recognises the Souths claim.

Its strange because off the Korean East coast there are some islands that are quite far North. The people on these islands choose to join the South after the war so the islands themselves are South Korean territory and North Korea doesn't claim otherwise. But they do claim the waters surrounding these islands (to an extent) are theirs.

Heres an image that might explain it better.



Above the red line is what the North claims to be the border (not the islands, notice the weird shaping border drawn with the red line.)
The black dotted line is what the South claim.

ARGINITE

North Korea will do nothing, they are just saber rattling as normal.
Last year while I was there I was worried about the North and there nuclear tests, the Korean's I worked with told me not to worry it is normal for the North to do things like that.