Site Search:
 
Speak Korean Now!
Teach English Abroad and Get Paid to see the World!
Korean Job Discussion Forums Forum Index Korean Job Discussion Forums
"The Internet's Meeting Place for ESL/EFL Teachers from Around the World!"
 
 FAQFAQ   SearchSearch   MemberlistMemberlist   UsergroupsUsergroups   RegisterRegister 
 ProfileProfile   Log in to check your private messagesLog in to check your private messages   Log inLog in 

Why is the US army still in Korea?
Goto page Previous  1, 2, 3, 4, 5  Next
 
Post new topic   Reply to topic    Korean Job Discussion Forums Forum Index -> Off-Topic Forum
View previous topic :: View next topic  
Author Message
Morton



Joined: 06 Mar 2007

PostPosted: Mon Jun 18, 2007 11:06 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

You guys certainly know your stuff.

Is China really a threat? They don't have that many nukes do they? Surely America could show them who's boss?

I read that China has under 200 nukes. The UK has more than China.

And who's side would Japan be on if the poop hits the fan?
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
darkhorse_NZ



Joined: 20 Feb 2007
Location: South Korea

PostPosted: Mon Jun 18, 2007 11:22 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Yeh, China's a threat, because anyone who isn't a firm and trusted ally is. I'm not sure if China has sophisticated delivery systems for its nukes yet though. Though it has been engaged in a lot of force modernisation and huge increases in military budget including a lot of under the table expenditure.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
dmbfan



Joined: 09 Mar 2006

PostPosted: Mon Jun 18, 2007 11:23 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Quote:
Aus/NZ SAS



Thats right....(sorry, I was not purposely ignoring NZ).

From what I hear, the SAS is pretty hard core.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
darkhorse_NZ



Joined: 20 Feb 2007
Location: South Korea

PostPosted: Mon Jun 18, 2007 11:30 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

dmbfan wrote:
Quote:
Aus/NZ SAS



Thats right....(sorry, I was not purposely ignoring NZ).

From what I hear, the SAS is pretty hard core.


no offence taken, man. Very little people know that there was any Allied help for the States in Vietnam as it is. Let alone a NZ Army contingent under Australian command. Laughing

i do believe other significant contributers were the ROK obviously and Thailand correct me if I lie...
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
ajgeddes



Joined: 28 Apr 2004
Location: Yongsan

PostPosted: Mon Jun 18, 2007 11:32 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Morton wrote:
You guys certainly know your stuff.


Actually, I would argue some of the people on this thread don't know much, but are just projecting their dislike for Korea.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Send e-mail
Morton



Joined: 06 Mar 2007

PostPosted: Mon Jun 18, 2007 11:43 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Would you like to expand on that ajgeddes?
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
dmbfan



Joined: 09 Mar 2006

PostPosted: Mon Jun 18, 2007 11:47 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Quote:
Actually, I would argue some of the people on this thread don't know much, but are just projecting their dislike for Korea.


Rolling Eyes

Nooooooo.......just speaking on the reality of the situation.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
The Perfect Cup of Coffee



Joined: 17 Jun 2007

PostPosted: Tue Jun 19, 2007 12:10 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

kingtout wrote:
The Perfect Cup of Coffee wrote:
The Nork army would probably lose half their soldiers out of pure mutiny. Sure Seoul would take some serious damage, but 2 days of air strikes on the Nork frontlines, and you'd have mass defections and surrenders.


Not much a student of history, eh? Know what happened last time, with only a year or so of Commie brainwashing? The South all but surrendered until US gunships staved off the Norks from more or less massacring those inside the Busan Perimeter. Key Military leaders (when strength was relatively even) INVITED the North to take over as long as they agreed to spare certain people.

Now factor 50+ years of brainwashing. Sure, a few % of Norks are smart enough to overcome the brainwashing, but you really don't seem to have a grasp of what Commie propaganda and daily leader worship can truly do.


Too bad your analysis is 50 years out-of-date. You may have a hard-core element that'll fight on, but the majority of the Nork infantry will melt away after a few days of hard bombing and airstrikes.

The Nork forces are basically a paper tiger with a nuclear bomb. Still dangerous, no doubt, but they're basically on defensives footing. One good punch, they'd collapse. I'm in no way saying invasion is good. As it stands, the armistice works in a twisted kind of way.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
kingtout



Joined: 03 May 2007
Location: ROK...again...

PostPosted: Tue Jun 19, 2007 1:23 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

The Perfect Cup of Coffee wrote:
kingtout wrote:
The Perfect Cup of Coffee wrote:
The Nork army would probably lose half their soldiers out of pure mutiny. Sure Seoul would take some serious damage, but 2 days of air strikes on the Nork frontlines, and you'd have mass defections and surrenders.


Not much a student of history, eh? Know what happened last time, with only a year or so of Commie brainwashing? The South all but surrendered until US gunships staved off the Norks from more or less massacring those inside the Busan Perimeter. Key Military leaders (when strength was relatively even) INVITED the North to take over as long as they agreed to spare certain people.

Now factor 50+ years of brainwashing. Sure, a few % of Norks are smart enough to overcome the brainwashing, but you really don't seem to have a grasp of what Commie propaganda and daily leader worship can truly do.


Too bad your analysis is 50 years out-of-date. You may have a hard-core element that'll fight on, but the majority of the Nork infantry will melt away after a few days of hard bombing and airstrikes.

The Nork forces are basically a paper tiger with a nuclear bomb. Still dangerous, no doubt, but they're basically on defensives footing. One good punch, they'd collapse. I'm in no way saying invasion is good. As it stands, the armistice works in a twisted kind of way.


20 minutes. Seoul destroyed in the time it takes US planes to get airborne. What exactly don't you understand about this? No nukes. No guided missles. Artillery, mortars, and short-range napalm and cluster-filled missles. Hundreds of thousands. Have you looked at a map lately? See that squiggly line running across the country several kilometers north of metro Seoul?
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Wangja



Joined: 17 May 2004
Location: Seoul, Yongsan

PostPosted: Tue Jun 19, 2007 2:02 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

Well, interesting to see that some put so much faith in 29,000 US forces, including non-combatants, to swing the balance and make the 685,000 of the SK swing to victory over 1,075,000 of the north.

There are many reasons for the US to remain. THe fact that the war is still technially a war, as someone said, is reason enough. The projection of US interests, many of them high-minded and laudable, is another.

Defence of SK is probably one, but not that high on the list.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
ryanbonner



Joined: 23 Aug 2006
Location: Seoul

PostPosted: Tue Jun 19, 2007 2:59 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

The only reason U.S. troops are still here is purely political. They serve only as a tripwire to force the U.S. to get involved in any military conflict between the north and south. If NK attacked, the 30,000 U.S. soldiers here now would be killed, as they are not meant to be able to really fight back facing the kind of force NK can bring. Once that happened though, the news of U.S. soldiers dead would be splashed all over the news in America, thus thrusting the U.S. immediately into another conflict.

My take is there's no point for them to be here at this point. It's all just posturing. Americans understand the deep alliance between SK and the U.S., and it doesn't matter if U.S. soldiers are killed, if NK attacks, they'd fully support the U.S. sending in its troops (although if that happened anytime soon, we might be sending over our grandparents and middle school kids).
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Send e-mail Visit poster's website AIM Address
SuperFly



Joined: 09 Jul 2003
Location: In the doghouse

PostPosted: Tue Jun 19, 2007 3:30 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

HERE'S WHY!
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Guri Guy



Joined: 07 Sep 2003
Location: Bamboo Island

PostPosted: Tue Jun 19, 2007 3:38 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

Anyone who thinks North Korea would have any chance of winning a war with South Korea is living in dreamland. Rolling Eyes

The Mythical North Korean Threat

The Korean conflict is over, but Cold War warriors refuse to accept this reality because they need a �threat.� In 1994, the Military-Industrialist worked the media and politicians into a war hysteria which almost caused President Clinton to order air strikes in North Korea. In his book �Hazardous Duty,� retired Colonel David Hackworth describes his trip to Korea in which he uncovered this phony threat. Fortunately, former President Jimmy Carter heard the war drums and flew to North Korea as a private citizen and ended the phantom crisis.

When Pentagon officials talk about the need to maintain a �two-war� capability, they often refer to Korea. This is absurd since South Korea can crush North Korea without American help. North Korea�s million-man army may look impressive on paper, but remember that Iraq had a million-man army, which also had modern equipment, combat experience, and plenty of fuel.

In contrast, North Korean soldiers suffer from malnutrition and rarely train due to a scarcity of fuel and ammo. Most North Korean soldiers could not attack because they are needed to defend the entire DMZ and coastal approaches (they remember the 1950 landing at Inchon) while entire divisions must remain throughout North Korea to fend off heliborne offensives, food riots, and probable coups.

On the other hand, the entire 700,000 man South Korean active duty army can be devoted to the defense of Seoul. The modern South Korean army is backed by over 5,000,000 well-trained reservists who can be called to duty in hours. South Korea has twice the population of the North, thirty times its economic power, and spends three times more on its military each year. South Korean military equipment is first class whereas most of the North Korean military equipment is over 30 years old and much is inoperable due to a lack of maintenance. If war broke out, South Korea has a massive industrial capacity and $94 billion in foreign currency reserves to sustain a war, while North Korea has no industry and no money. As a result, South Korea is roughly five times more powerful than North Korea.

If North Korea insanely attacked, the South Koreans would fight on mountainous and urban terrain which heavily favors defense, and complete air superiority would shoot up anything the North Koreans put on the road. Assuming the North Koreans could start up a thousand of their old tanks and armored vehicles, they cannot advance through the mountainous DMZ. The South Koreans have fortified, mined, and physically blocked all avenues through these mountains, and it would take North Korean infantry and engineers weeks to clear road paths while under fire.

The North Korean military could gain a few thousand meters with human wave assaults into minefields and concrete fortifications. However, these attacks would bog down from heavy casualties, and a lack of food and ammo resupply. Fighting would be bloody as thousands of South Korean and American troops and civilians suffer from North Korean artillery and commando attacks. Nevertheless, the North Korean army would be unable to breakthrough or move supplies forward. Even if North Korea magically broke through, all military analysts scoff at the idea that the North Koreans could bridge large rivers or move tons of supplies forward while under attack from American airpower.

It is important to remember that the last Korean war involved Chinese forces supported by North Koreans with the latest Soviet equipment and supplies. China and Russia no longer aid North Korea and trade openly with South Korea. Thousands of Chinese soldiers guard the Yalu River to prevent crossings by starving North Koreans. North Korean soldiers no longer train for war, but spend most hours harvesting crops, while their old aircraft and ancient tanks sit idle from a lack of fuel and parts. In 1999, Lt. Gen. Patrick Hughes, head of the Defense Intelligence Agency, told Congress that discipline in the North Korean army had collapsed, and that refugees report soldiers stealing food at gun point. Nighttime satellite pictures reveal few lights in the North because of a lack of electricity.

http://www.g2mil.com/korea.htm

North Korea has less than a 2 day fuel supply to wage war. Certainly they could devastate Seoul but that would be about it. Any chance of military victory that requires the looting of food and fuel in order to sustain their offensive is bound to fail. South Korea is more than capable of defending itself and winning a war versus North Korea.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message MSN Messenger
riley



Joined: 08 Feb 2003
Location: where creditors can find me

PostPosted: Tue Jun 19, 2007 4:03 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

ajgeddes wrote:

Quote:
Actually, I would argue some of the people on this thread don't know much, but are just projecting their dislike for Korea.


I don't believe I was projecting my dislike for Korea; or more accurately putting down Korea, as all in all I like Korea more than dislike; but, I could see how a reader could think that.

I believe that the ROK military would have a difficulty in fighting the Norks simply because of their thinking about war and how high the morale may be for the average soldier. The ROK army is a conscription based army. That doesn't always lead to highly motivated soldiers, unlike the U.S. which until recently with the endless unconventional war in Iraq, was highly motivated. Looking at the culture of Korea, do we see people who are rewarded for original ideas or thinking in different ways? I don't see it, so I assume (I may be wrong) that the general staff (soldiers who have been promoted up through the ranks partly based on who they know; a common feature in many armies) as older men who probably reflect this thinking, though I'm sure many have gone through American military colleges.

On the other hand, the U.S. military has shown that they can think of new ways of fighting a conventional war, as shown by the Gulf War and the Iraqi invasion. In the first war, the Iraqis had nearly top of the line equipment unlike the Norks. We beat them quickly. In the second, (the invasion) we did it even faster and in a completely different way.

As for the artillery stationed in North Korea aimed at Seoul. How long will they be able to fire on Seoul? Both ROK military and U.S. artillery are undoubtedly zeroed on them or at least roughly on them, so it will take very little time for return strikes on them. The Norks know this, so it would be more practical for them to fire on opposing artillery, not the civilians. The military boys just like to make teachers crap their pants, that's all.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
horang



Joined: 16 Jun 2007
Location: Seoul

PostPosted: Tue Jun 19, 2007 4:08 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

1. The presense of the US Army makes Kim Jung Il and the North think twice before they invade the South, and of course makes us feel very safe.

2. Behind N.K. is China, buidling up the strongest military in the world and threatening the neighboring countries like S.K. and Japan. The US army plays a key role in balancing the power in far east.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Display posts from previous:   
Post new topic   Reply to topic    Korean Job Discussion Forums Forum Index -> Off-Topic Forum All times are GMT - 8 Hours
Goto page Previous  1, 2, 3, 4, 5  Next
Page 4 of 5

 
Jump to:  
You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot vote in polls in this forum


This page is maintained by the one and only Dave Sperling.
Contact Dave's ESL Cafe
Copyright © 2018 Dave Sperling. All Rights Reserved.

Powered by phpBB © 2001, 2002 phpBB Group

TEFL International Supports Dave's ESL Cafe
TEFL Courses, TESOL Course, English Teaching Jobs - TEFL International