|
Korean Job Discussion Forums
"The Internet's Meeting Place for ESL/EFL Teachers from Around the World!"
|
If the U.S. military were to pull out of the ROK, I'd...
Goto page Previous 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10 Next
|
| View previous topic :: View next topic |
| If the U.S. military were to pull out of the ROK, I'd... |
| Drop everything and get the next plane out myself. |
|
14% |
[ 8 ] |
| Prepare for a slow but orderly withdrawal soon. |
|
17% |
[ 10 ] |
| Stay, but would move to Busan |
|
3% |
[ 2 ] |
| Stay, but be much more ready to evacuate. |
|
7% |
[ 4 ] |
| Stay, nothing would change. |
|
52% |
[ 30 ] |
| Stay, but move to Paju for front row seats. |
|
5% |
[ 3 ] |
|
| Total Votes : 57 |
|
| Author |
Message |
Died By Bear
Joined: 13 Jul 2010
Location: On the big lake they call Gitche Gumee
|
 Posted: Fri Mar 08, 2013 6:36 am Post subject: |
 |
|
| diver wrote: |
| Well, IF there is a war, it will probably end before the argument in this thread does. |
You're wrong. Where are your links? What in God's name do you have in that brain of yours to back up those ridiculous statements? Or are you just bored silly?
 |
|
| Back to top |
|
 |
Steelrails
Joined: 12 Mar 2009
Location: Earth, Solar System
|
| Posted: Fri Mar 08, 2013 2:55 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| Quote: |
| But if any one is silly enough to believe that a South korean army could stand up to a Chinese backed North korean army , lets see what happened in Vietnam. the U.s. trained, U.s. equipped armey lasted a few weeks after the u.s. forces left. Advanced Soviet and Chinese equipment and hardened North Vietmanese troops crushed the South Vietnamese. |
The U.S. trained, U.S. equipped army in Saudi Arabia has NOT been overrun since they closed up shop.
You're also ignoring the fact that unlike S. Vietnam, the ROK force is decades ahead of the Norks in terms of technology and has twice the population and 40 times the economy.
And thus coming across as serious ill-informed.
| Quote: |
Cheap victory for the Chinese they gain strategic superioity in North Asia. of course it would mean a large larger war since neither japan or Russia would want the Chinese to have the upper hand. See Russo-japanese war that was fought over korea.
No one comes to help, look at AFghanistan when the Soviets invaded. Not a peep from Europe not even a protest march. Same for other nations. Even when the Soviets had butchered about a million Afghans and still not a peep. pakistan, Saudi and the U.S. did help but no troops and they let the Afghans do the dying.
korea you have a springboard to Japan and can control Japanese shipping lanes and of course you have airbases that can dominate Japan. of course you can totally isolate Vladivostock cut the shipping there. |
rollo, it's not 1920. "Dominate the sea lanes?" What the heck, are you about to talk about John Paul Jones and Barbary pirates? It's the 21st century. China has equal access to the world's sea lanes and we have equal access to theirs. This is so we can trade with each other. If they started cutting Japan's sea lanes, this would cripple their export driven economy (that was also dependent on imported petroleum).
| Quote: |
Who would embaro China if North Korea with Chinese assistance invaded South Korea.
Who??? No one. When russians were using poison gas on civilians in Afghanistan Europes trade with the U.S.S.R. increased.
A little closer to home. After the rape of Nanjing. when Japanese papers ran photos of headless corpses and front page stories of troops raping thousands of women. Trade with Britain increased by about 14%
There was no trade embargo when China had 300,000 troops in North Vietnam and when the Soviets were sending hundreds of ships amonth full of weapons.
No, life would go one. the South would start weakening civilain casualies would be high. Southern units would start to desert or mutiny.
ugly stuff. Many letters would be sent to the U.N. A few months the SOuth's factories are back up and running, just with a new boss. |
If China is truly aiming to close the sea lanes of Japan and isolate Vladivostok, you can bet there would be a global embargo. China invading Korea, would not be the equivalent of the Soviet invasion of Afghanistan, it would be the equivalent of Hitler attacking Poland, minus Molotov-Von Ribbentrop, and with no allies.
Russia fought a war against tiny Georgia and still didn't annex it because of the new global order and economy.
rollo, did it ever occur to you that you are woefully ignorant about modern international relations, the 21st century economy, and what constitutes rational policy making? Did it ever occur to you that there's a reason Mongolia hasn't been invaded and that China isn't running around Xinjiang shooting every Uighur in sight? Same with Kazakhstan.
You do realize rollo, that if you said such things to any defense or diplomatic analyst that they'd laugh in your face, right?
| Quote: |
| Ok, let me try to explain because you are drawing a lot of strange conclusions from what I am telling you. It is not that I am ignoring military science, it is that when you are dealing with a bizarre country like N Korea it's good to be open to the possibility that THEY will ignore military science. |
You are confusing unconventional and asymmetrical with ignoring military science. An example would be the North engaging in a conflict with the South, more than a single incident, but less than full on war, and in that conflict, deploying comparatively few conventional resources over the disputed area, but engaging in significant attacks on something like, say shipping, or perhaps cyber attacks on financial sectors.
While unconventional, such attacks still follow military principles and are also within the capability of the DPRK forces.
Things like having a battalion of soldiers surrendering and then magically turning into a Dirty Dozen behind the lines commando unit and overpowering their sleeping guards is not military science, nor unconventional, it is imagination and Hollywood.
| Quote: |
| Given the massive amount of unknowns in N Korea, it's good to take the time to think of the worst possible scenario as far as their equipment goes and plan accordingly. |
First, remember your phrase "worst possible scenario" still contains the word possible.
Second, what the heck constitutes worst possible?
Third, if in trying to plan for the 'worst possible scenario' you severely hamper your ability to operate in the 'most likely scenario' you actually doing more harm to your military and you are being wasteful with your soldier's lives.
| Quote: |
| N Korea destroys or occupies Seoul |
Again, destroying Seoul, is virtually impossible. Occupying Seoul by large conventional units without securing the surrounding area would be an incredibly bad idea for the DPRK. To occupy Seoul would take probably an entire Army sized unit limiting its capacity to operate on other fronts. If this wasn't done in conjunction as part of a broader offensive, the ROK forces could simply contain and bypass the Army and proceed Northward to Pyeongyang, or it could choose to encircle and destroy the army.
| Quote: |
Now be open to the possibility that you are wrong, and listen to other people and the weird stuff they come up with.
|
I would, if their weird stuff actually had any basis in logic and capability and if they sounded like they knew what in the world they were talking about. But if you can't write about any potential Nork surprise operations in an informed manner, then don't expect me to take them seriously.
Someone like CentralCali or fermentation could mention something or completely contradict me and I'd listen to what they'd have to say because you can tell from how they write about the military and military operations, that they actually have an idea of what they're talking about. When the poster WorldTraveler called the Cheonan a battleship, you have to take his 'scenarios', scrunch them up, and throw them in the waste basket.
Some of these other posters you can tell are imagining and not analyzing.
So no, not all user-posted theories on this are created equal and deserve to be considered equally valid. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
rollo
Joined: 10 May 2006
Location: China
|
| Posted: Fri Mar 08, 2013 3:41 pm Post subject: |
|
|
North korea with Chinese backing is invading Saudi Arabia????
Again, stop thinking that South Korea without a resupply of U.s. weapons could stand up to a north korea armed and easily supplied by land with the latest chinese and Russian weapons would hold out more than a month. This MYTH that the North would be fighting with antiquated weapons, lets stop that we are rational!! China would arm them with the best they have and the best they could buy.
No I am not ignorant. ut if you think Australia, or new Zealand France etc.is going to send resources troops to help the South you have some issues. One they cant they have no means to do so. They would not want to anger the Chinese. Only the U.S. and Britian to some extent have the ability to project force that far away from home well the Russians to some extent.. They couldnt if they wanted to. Understand.
Embargo the Chinese???? Ha . Please explain why the WEst would destroy their own economies. The West depends on China having a strong economy. The U.s. sold China almost 2 trillion in goods last year. Europe the same. Not only cheap goods but the largest markt in the world. NO One is going to thow that away for South korea. NO One.
Again their would be speeches at the U.n and some letters sent but in the end korea would be united. A strong leader in Charge who takes orders from Beijing. Some "criminals" would have to be dealt with wages would drop a lot, korean made goods would be cheaper and that would thrill everyone. A couple of P.L.A. bases. A few large camps to help redecate the criminal fascist. easy as one two three.
You dont hav to seize Seoul, knock out power with electronic warfare. Land a few rockets in crowded areas. The stampede is on. No lights ,no subway, NO STARCRAFT Incheon is easy, Hit it with some missles and no airline would fly in or out. jam radar
No resupply, no allies coming. One month at most. Remember the North will be able to destroy the Korean armament companies but the Norths military factories will be safely tucked away in China. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Steelrails
Joined: 12 Mar 2009
Location: Earth, Solar System
|
| Posted: Fri Mar 08, 2013 5:32 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| rollo wrote: |
North korea with Chinese backing is invading Saudi Arabia????
Again, stop thinking that South Korea without a resupply of U.s. weapons could stand up to a north korea armed and easily supplied by land with the latest chinese and Russian weapons would hold out more than a month. This MYTH that the North would be fighting with antiquated weapons, lets stop that we are rational!! China would arm them with the best they have and the best they could buy.
No I am not ignorant. ut if you think Australia, or new Zealand France etc.is going to send resources troops to help the South you have some issues. One they cant they have no means to do so. They would not want to anger the Chinese. Only the U.S. and Britian to some extent have the ability to project force that far away from home well the Russians to some extent.. They couldnt if they wanted to. Understand.
Embargo the Chinese???? Ha . Please explain why the WEst would destroy their own economies. The West depends on China having a strong economy. The U.s. sold China almost 2 trillion in goods last year. Europe the same. Not only cheap goods but the largest markt in the world. NO One is going to thow that away for South korea. NO One.
Again their would be speeches at the U.n and some letters sent but in the end korea would be united. A strong leader in Charge who takes orders from Beijing. Some "criminals" would have to be dealt with wages would drop a lot, korean made goods would be cheaper and that would thrill everyone. A couple of P.L.A. bases. A few large camps to help redecate the criminal fascist. easy as one two three.
You dont hav to seize Seoul, knock out power with electronic warfare. Land a few rockets in crowded areas. The stampede is on. No lights ,no subway, NO STARCRAFT Incheon is easy, Hit it with some missles and no airline would fly in or out. jam radar
No resupply, no allies coming. One month at most. Remember the North will be able to destroy the Korean armament companies but the Norths military factories will be safely tucked away in China. |
Why don't you submit your "analysis" to a foreign policy or military journal. I'm sure you'll get an enthusiastic reply over your "analysis".
You are making a fallacy on another side- Your diplomatic and economic analysis is utter bladerdash. In order to understand things, you have to understand all of those, and if you are mentally deficient in one area, you'll end up with cockamamie analysis.
| Quote: |
| No I am not ignorant. ut if you think Australia, or new Zealand France etc.is going to send resources troops to help the South you have some issues. One they cant they have no means to do so. They would not want to anger the Chinese. Only the U.S. and Britian to some extent have the ability to project force that far away from home well the Russians to some extent.. They couldnt if they wanted to. Understand. |
Certainly not at anything beyond a brigade level, but yes, they have sent forces to Afghanistan, and such.
And again, if the US and SK did end their treaty, and China did such a thing, they'd just reactivate it.
And you do realize that there would be a drawdown, and during that time S. Korea would develop its own nuclear capability.
| Quote: |
| Embargo the Chinese???? Ha . Please explain why the WEst would destroy their own economies. The West depends on China having a strong economy. The U.s. sold China almost 2 trillion in goods last year. Europe the same. Not only cheap goods but the largest markt in the world. NO One is going to thow that away for South korea. NO One. |
And China isn't going to throw that away for S. Korea either.
Have you noticed a lot of invading and annexing taking place over the last 50 years? Lots of countries disappearing off the map as others grow larger through military means? Doesn't that suggest that your geo-political military analysis is a bit outdated?
| Quote: |
Again their would be speeches at the U.n and some letters sent but in the end korea would be united. A strong leader in Charge who takes orders from Beijing. Some "criminals" would have to be dealt with wages would drop a lot, korean made goods would be cheaper and that would thrill everyone. A couple of P.L.A. bases. A few large camps to help redecate the criminal fascist. easy as one two three.
You dont hav to seize Seoul, knock out power with electronic warfare. Land a few rockets in crowded areas. The stampede is on. No lights ,no subway, NO STARCRAFT Incheon is easy, Hit it with some missles and no airline would fly in or out. jam radar
|
Lay off the video games and thriller novels.
rollo, stop imagining and start analyzing. If Russia didn't invade and annex Georgia and replace it with a puppet regime, what makes you think China is going to do the same with S.Korea Saddam Hussein or Iran didn't invade Saudi Arabia the second the US left. If Poland withdrew from NATO do you think Russia would storm Warsaw? Why hasn't China invaded Mongolia if it is such a warmongering menace? Why not Vietnam? Why not the Philippines?
It's not 1920 anymore, man. Give your brain some oxygen and lay off the paranoia and war fantasies. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
World Traveler
Joined: 29 May 2009
|
| Posted: Fri Mar 08, 2013 5:40 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| Steelrails wrote: |
| When the poster WorldTraveler called the Cheonan a battleship, you have to take his 'scenarios', scrunch them up, and throw them in the waste basket. |
What was the ship doing in (or near) enemy waters? I thought maybe it was an intelligence gathering ship trying to find out information about the enemy? How was this ship unable to detect the North Korean submarine? (A: Because NK has good military technology.)
I dunno, man, tell me about what a corvette is and why it's easy to sink.
| Quote: |
Modern navies began a trend in the late 20th and early 21st century towards smaller, more maneuverable surface capability. Corvettes have a displacement between 540 and 2,750 long tons (550 and 2,790 t) and measure 180�330 feet (55�100 m) in length. They are usually armed with medium- and small-caliber guns, surface-to-surface missiles, surface-to-air missiles, and anti-submarine weapons. Many can accommodate a small or medium anti-submarine warfare helicopter.
Most countries with coastlines can build corvette size ships, either as part of their commercial shipbuilding activities or in purpose built yards, however the sensors, weapons and other systems required for a surface combatant are more specialized and are around sixty percent of the total cost. |
How does what anything I wrote automatically invalidate what Time Magazine and the New York Times wrote?
(I'm gonna go ahead and say those are reputable publications.) |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
OneWayTraffic
Joined: 14 Mar 2005
|
| Posted: Fri Mar 08, 2013 7:03 pm Post subject: |
|
|
I'm with Steelrails here. Why on earth would China try to annex Korea? They are supporting the North because that means stability, which allows them to get richer.
China's leadership has long since made a tacit bargain with its people. The people give the leadership the power to lead only as long as living standards keep rising.
Why would they throw that away for South Korea? They know that it would pull the US in. Japan would quickly go nuclear, as would Taiwan.
Hitler did what he did because he was deranged. China's leadership aren't all human rights and flower power, but they aren't stupid. They aren't interested in running an empire, (especially seeing how that went for GWB et all in Iraq) all they want to do is sell us stuff, hack Western companies for secrets and stay in power.
China knows that a North-South war will end with a unified pro USA democracy on their border and aren't too keen on that idea. But the time will come when that's better than the alternative.
Not to mention the fact that the South is a unified country with strong leadership, a large armed forces with very modern equipment, more than enough men to hold a line across the penninsula, and would if history is any guide fight like a cornered tiger.
That just isn't China's style. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
slothrop
Joined: 03 Feb 2003
|
| Posted: Fri Mar 08, 2013 7:21 pm Post subject: |
|
|
edit
Last edited by slothrop on Wed Mar 20, 2013 8:01 pm; edited 1 time in total |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
fermentation
Joined: 22 Jun 2009
|
| Posted: Fri Mar 08, 2013 7:24 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| World Traveler wrote: |
What was the ship doing in (or near) enemy waters? I thought maybe it was an intelligence gathering ship trying to find out information about the enemy? How was this ship unable to detect the North Korean submarine? (A: Because NK has good military technology.)
|
Or B: submarines are really are to detect in general and the Cheonan wasn't the most state of the art vessel. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
rollo
Joined: 10 May 2006
Location: China
|
| Posted: Fri Mar 08, 2013 7:32 pm Post subject: |
|
|
Oh i dont think the north or China would actually do this . i just want to point out that if they did South korea would fall in weks.
Remember blockade. Nothing in nothing out. thats easy. So after a wek of combt operations the Souths warplane's would be running out of parts and fuel. Also armament. NO resupply from the U.s.
Sme for ground forces, every round shot , means one less round. No resupply by U.S.
No brigade from Australia no aircraft carrier from Denmark that is fantasy. Remember the Chinese navy has cut you off. No one is coming.
big problem ocean on three sides no where to manuever nowhere to retreat but plenty of places to land troops. So as the fuel runs out and the planes cant fly. ALl the coast line has to be protected a further draining away of troops.
Now China and the north are not going to do this unless they have some kind of understanding that the U.s. is not going to intervene.
When did AUstralia send troops to fight the Soviets?? I don't remember that one.
No way to get troops to korea naval blockade and no way to airlift them in.
China loses nothing gets cheap labor factories and shipyards and a huge strategic advantage over Russia and Japan.
With korea under Chinese control no one can cut off the shipping lanes to China's West coast or attack the West coast. That is huge. Also an unsinable aircraft carrier, and staging area 120 miles from japan would make P.L. A . generals very very happy.
None of this is likely because everyone is happy with the way it is. A divided korea helps maintain the balance in North Asia. very sad but true. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
fermentation
Joined: 22 Jun 2009
|
| Posted: Fri Mar 08, 2013 7:48 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| So you're saying one of the most powerful military forces in the world would conquer Korea with the full might of it's Air Force and Navy, but they wouldn't do that because of political realities? |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
cabeza
Joined: 29 Sep 2012
|
| Posted: Fri Mar 08, 2013 7:48 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| rollo wrote: |
Embargo the Chinese???? Ha . Please explain why the WEst would destroy their own economies. The West depends on China having a strong economy. The U.s. sold China almost 2 trillion in goods last year. Europe the same. Not only cheap goods but the largest markt in the world. NO One is going to thow that away for South korea. NO One. |
And what about the Chinese? Do you think they are going to risk their economy? If you removed, very broadly, the Western market from Chinese exports the Chinese economy would have the ass ripped out of it.
As Steelrails has been saying the current world order in regards to the massive inter-connection of trade etc. makes these kinds of scenarios, at present, a fantasy.
China has been implenting a softly, softly approach for the last 20 years pouring billions of dollars into the third world. Certainly they aren't doing that for fun, it's part of a long term view of usurping America's position in the world, or at least in Asia and the Pacific. You think they are going to throw that all away for North Korea?
If they were going to do something like that, they would have retaken Taiwan years ago. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
World Traveler
Joined: 29 May 2009
|
| Posted: Fri Mar 08, 2013 8:00 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| cabeza wrote: |
| If they were going to do something like that, they would have retaken Taiwan years ago. |
But they couldn't. The U.S. protected Taiwan by providing weapons and training. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
slothrop
Joined: 03 Feb 2003
|
| Posted: Fri Mar 08, 2013 8:17 pm Post subject: |
|
|
edit
Last edited by slothrop on Wed Mar 20, 2013 8:00 pm; edited 6 times in total |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
CentralCali
Joined: 17 May 2007
|
| Posted: Fri Mar 08, 2013 8:24 pm Post subject: |
|
|
It's long past the time China has been concerned what kind of government is in the countries on its borders. What a couple of other posters in this thread have mentioned is the real reason for China's support (such as it is now) of North Korea's lunatic rulers: stability. If the North Korean government collapses, China will be the destination of choice for those fleeing the collapse. That's simply because it's easier and safer to cross the Yalu than it is to cross through the DMZ.
Stability is the name of the game in Beijing and that's not likely to change anytime soon. It's also why China's been nagging North Korea about conducting those nuclear and missile tests. Those things do not contribute to stability. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
World Traveler
Joined: 29 May 2009
|
| Posted: Fri Mar 08, 2013 8:34 pm Post subject: |
|
|
Steelrails, I don't know all the military terms. I just read news articles.
Here's the first article that come up (at random).
http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/asia-pacific/8626710.stm
It refers to the Cheonan as:
warship
warship
naval vessel
ship
1,200-tonne navy gunboat
vessel
Not once was the word corvette used.
According to wikipedia the Cheonan was a Pohang class corvette.
http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/a/a9/PCC-783.jpg
Looks pretty big to me.
Only 24 were made and 21 are still in use. (One was sunk by the Norks, one was given to the Columbian navy, and an old one made in 1984 will be turned into a ship museum.)
| Quote: |
| The Pohang class ships are classified as Patrol Combat Corvette (PCC). The external form is similar to that of the Tonghae class, but is update in several respects, with a full loaded displacement of 1,300 tons. The primary mission is coastal patrol, and the class consists of 24 ships deployed as the main force for coastal defense. These ships meet complicated missions of modern naval warfare, anti-ship, anti-submarine and anti-aircraft warfare with its compact design for cost effectiveness in operation as well as in acquisition. These ships have a multi- role capability with all the weapons and sensors for attack, ASW and self defense mission. |
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
|
|
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
|
|
FAQ
Search
Memberlist
Usergroups
Register
Profile
Log in to check your private messages
Log in
