It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.
Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.
Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.
originally posted by: kelbtalfenek
originally posted by: BASSPLYR
a reply to: kelbtalfenek
So much that just went over your head.
Maybe you do know more, but I don't believe it unless you tell me HOW you would know more than people on the inside.
originally posted by: sg1642
I think people read far too much into this supposed artillery onslaught that would decimate the North and Seoul itself.
As soon as the bombardment began, NK would have put themselves in a situation where they couldn't use the artillery to cover the DMZ due to massive counter battery fire and air assets picking them off. Very few of NK's artillery pieces are actually within striking distance on Seoul. They have it one way or the other. Cover their southern areas where a ground breakthrough would take place or try the shock tactic by going after dense, populated areas. They don't have the capability to do both. The whole millions of casualties within days stuff just isn't true. Then consider the fact that within an hour most of SK would be underground in shelters.
Someone mentioned the troops along the front being a buffer zone who aren't there to stop an invasion and that sounds about correct. The south wouldn't leave the best or majority of its forces within harms way. One of the principals of defence is depth. You need that buffer zone where you can hide your best shots from the initial fight.
The US has the ability to take apart any standing army within weeks without landing a large force on the ground. Someone mentioned the struggle in the mountains of afghanistan? Not even close. Picking off an enemy who live among the local civilian population (an insurgent force) is a whole different ball game to taking out conventional forces. And those mountains are exactly where NK would want their artillery because that's where it would be most useful. Another reason they wouldn't risk losing it all in one go.
Before the gulf and 2003 invasion in Iraq some of these people made crazy out of this world predictions about casualty rates and they were way off. You can expect the same kind of scenario here too. By the time the air war was over the ground war would be nothing more than a mop up. The winning over of the local population would be key as they could easily turn into a fanatical force.
I'd go as far as to say landing forces in the North and South in a pincer movement would be worth the risk. It would cut off any supply chain from the North and force a diversion of forces from the South
originally posted by: elysiumfire
Kim Jong-un's false bravado arises out of his correct assumption that if he has nuclear capability, countries will think twice before attacking North Korea, and that having nuclear capability will give him leverage against the sanctions that have taken the country to an economy-collapsing state. So on the one hand, he seeks to deter, and on the other he seeks to lessen sanctions by implied threat.
We all know that China is the key to the crisis, but have engaged with it in a ham-fisted way, and now probably perceive their errors with North Korea as being a very real thorn-in-the-side, one they would much prefer would go away on its own, or just simply settle down into an uneasy peace, but it cannot do so, not with Kim Jong-un running the show.
China's position is precarious, in that it could lose its buffer zone with the West via South Korea. War would bring about a ferocious assault on North Korea, because America and its allies would have to hit the country hard and quick, in order to annihilate North Korea's ability to attack. Kim Jong-un's only leverage in any conflict is his ability to cause death and destruction on a large scale, so any response to a North Korean pre-emptive strike (or even a defensive attack response to being attacked) would necessarily require a goal to reduce and destroy that capability.
Right now, fingers are pretty much poised on the triggers and sabre-rattling is loud. A miscalculated response to a misunderstood incident is the most likely catalyst to the conflict starting. The only reason why it has not already begun is because neither party wants to be condemned for attacking first, but it would seem American tactics are seeking to draw an attack from North Korea. In essence, America or any of its allies would have a legitimate right to shoot down any test missile launched from North Korea that flew into international airspace or over international waters. The UN could sanction such a response, and it would not then be an act of war against North Korea, even if Kim Jong-un claimed it to be so.
I still think China would lose very little sleep if Kim Jong-un and his cohorts were removed, but I doubt if they would look kindly on American and South Korean troops racing up to Pyongyang. If China wants to maintain a buffer zone, it would have no choice but to enter North Korea from the north and try to reach Pyongyang before any American or South Korean forces got there.
I doubt very much that North Korea could attack the American mainland with the little nukes it has, any missile launched towards the Western coast of America would be quickly detected, tracked and shot down. However, if North Korea has managed to fit some of its missiles with nukes, I should think they would be launched towards South Korea and probably against Japan. This would probably draw a series of tactical nuclear responses upon specific targets in the capital, primarily against Kim Jong-un and his military advisers. At this point, a ceasefire would be sought in order to assess both the threat level North Korea still had, and to assess what humanitarian aid is required and where, and if it is safe to implement it?
Kim Jong-un has to be taken out. He cannot be left in place, he cannot be allowed to continue being a threat to the region's stability. China knows this, and will probably oversee the rebuilding of North Korea once he has been removed. Unfortunately, many people are going to be killed, but the aftermath should bring the North Korean people out of their brainwashed slavery.
originally posted by: cavtrooper7
a reply to: TheStalkingHorse
WE aren't RUSSIANS hoss...
Their airforce :?
First we wil EMP the CRAP out them
THEN kill their indirect.MAYBE 2 hours at the most ,if it's not underground.
China will attempt to establish a foot hold as well with little effect,WE want that artificial Island killed soon as well.
Russia will toss nasty notes as usual diplomatically,but will SIT on THEIR asses because we aren't kidding this time either.
It won't take a month.
MAYBE we'll see an underground nuke go off under an invasion,by the DPRK .
We don't really NEED nukes anymore to obliterate,we just use THERMOBARICS.
originally posted by: cavtrooper7
a reply to: TheStalkingHorse
My "HIGHLY EXAGGERATED" assessments were SUPERIOR before Desert Storm,MORE SO than the DODs ,think tanks and press.
MY EXAGGERATION was 2 weeks.
I am being quite generous and giving the Norks a week ,if China kicks in a month.
I am right 85% so far.
HUMAN wave assaults are suicide now,we MAY have to show you why you shouldn't do it to the 1st Cav..