It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

Bush's Next War - North Korea: A War Scenario

page: 5
0
<< 2  3  4    6  7  8 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Apr, 15 2005 @ 10:31 AM
link   

Originally posted by sweatmonicaIdo

Originally posted by American Mad Man
On another note, the fact that this thread is still going on is just sad. It is a joke, a bad one at that, and anyone with any kind of unbiased view can see that. Just read the first post.


And yet it's people like yourself that perpetuate and fan the flames of ignorance and the "joke."

Unbiased view? Are YOU actually saying that?


listen Sweat, what did I say that was biased oh wise one?

I said this thread was a joke. It is. I said that the US would kick North Koreas arse. We would.

Do you dissagree? Or are you just trying to dissagree with me for the sake of an argument?




posted on Apr, 15 2005 @ 11:18 AM
link   

Originally posted by Odium
If America invaded North Korea from the South, with Japan, etc, in my view and from my studies a number of things would happen:
If America tried to capture the Yule River, China would get involved. (Korean War).

Originally posted by The Vagabond
China didn't have nearly as great an economic stake in peace with America in 1951. Although it's possible, I really think that China would do all they could to get America to compromise and America would be happy to oblige.


That's why I mentioned the Yule River, which is the Yalu river. That actually belongs to China not North Korea, little known fact, and it also supplies power to China. A lot of the North Korean Power Stations are actually owned by the Chinese Government and they need them. Also China has admitted they'd set their economy back 20-to-30 years to stop America gaining dominance of the region and to take control of Taiwan.


Originally posted by OdiumThsi could be the chance for Russia to regain dominance, as a large military loss for America would be a major set back.


Originally posted by The Vagabond
Russias military dominance for the forseeable future hinges on four crucial factors, listed below in order of importance.
1. The decline of American power.
2. Good relations with China.
3. The continued complacency of European militaries
4. The loyalty of Iran, especially once Iran obtains nukes and gradually begins to acquire more modern weaponry.

Russia would have to be at the top of their game to have a chance against America in most conflcts.
If China decides they want Russia's Eastern coast (and a lot more) they can have it on a whim unless Russia goes nuclear on them.
Europe, although not particularly favored by geography, does have the economic ability to support a major militarization that would threaten Russian security and demand that they not overextend themselves militarily.
I know this is out there, but I honestly believe that Iran plans to stab Russia in the back in the future. It is not inconcievable that Iran could end up in control of half the Caspian Sea and maybe even Turkey (and therefore the Black Sea) in the distant future IF they both play their cards PERFECTLY and have sufficient ambition.


I agree with what you put above, although I don't see it as Iran by more the Muslim Countries joining together, sort of like the E.U. and then them trying to gain dominance.

Also, with America cutting funding to its Air Force and Navy, and putting that money into the Intelligance Agencies, I see them loosing their dominance with both China and India putting more money into their Navy and Air Forces.


Originally posted by OdiumChina would now be able to invade Taiwan.
China would now be able to do a large scale attack on Japan to get 'revenge' after WW2.

Originally posted by The Vagabond
I strongly doubt it. China would not come out of a major war with America with any significant naval or air power. Their chances of launching a successful amphibious opertaion of any kind would be slim to none. Plus they'll have a major insurgency on their hands if they try to occupy the Koreas after the war. Those are proud people- you don't stay independent for all this time on a tiny peninsula between China and Japan without acquiring a certain ingrained toughness.


Not China trying to land, but to cripple Japan. If China is to become the one main power in that region Japan needs to weaken a lot and a weak America could give them the chance to bomb Japan, especially since Japan doesn't have any missile defence systems in place.

Also, I actually think the Korean People might be glad to have the war over. Granted I don't see South Korea having as large a Nation if one at all if the war happens, but China is smart. They have a way of giving a Country back control but as a state of their own Nation. And if it meant that there were no longer bombing and the draft a lot of people would be happy. After all I think the war would last 3-7years in which time a lot of the Korean people would be hurt and badly at that.


Originally posted by OdiumIf China joined in, the large land attack would reverse. America is teh technological superior, but China will soon have a 1000 unit fleet, for its Navy, roughly 2500 (I think) for its Air Force and 2.5million men. They would throw everything they have at crippling the American attack, just through fear of America putting a large base in N.K. and on their border.

Originally posted by The Vagabond
I'm not even going to arge over who would win that war. I have suspicions that America is capable of winning, but only if we really took the gloves off, ie: mounted a risky raid of the North-Eastern mainland, to cut their supply lines and left nothing but scorched earth behind us.
I think the big issue here is that the war would be entirely too costly for either nation to fight, and Korea simply isn't a sufficient reason to go to the mat.


Problem is, America needs to get food there as well and with the new PLAN and the what 300submarines? America would have a tough time feeding their own soldiers. Especially since China supplies the food to South Korea. Also, the reason I think they would go to war is China feels backed into a corner. As I've said before they have 7 American bases on their borders, soon to be going up to 10 if America gets there way. That is a very hostile way of acting and China has spoken out against this. I think if they could force a massive loss to America and get them out of Korea it might force other bases to shut down and the Chinese Government know America at the moment can't fight a war, with so many troops locked up in Iraq and Afganistan.


Originally posted by OdiumAlso a lot of the E.U. Nations would not join in. Soon Britain will be earning 2-3% of its GDP from China alone, in 'teaching', so they can't afford to loose it.

Originally posted by The Vagabond
And how much money does China make from America, and vice versa? Like I said at the beginning, I think that China would be willing to sell Korea out on certain terms, and I think America would be happy to meet whatever terms were necessary. As I've said many times, I think that there is a better chance of China invading Korea than there is of America having to. I wouldn't be surprised if China was planning for such contingencies- maybe even gaining intelligence access to their nuclear facilities in order to neurtalize any potential threat.


China is the second largest contributor to America, it's helping them fund the deficit gap. As kind of a way to say "If we attack Taiwan and you get involved, you loose out". They also are the largest exporter of American goods and they sell more to America then any other Country. They went passed Japan in the last couple of months. But thing is, America needs to sell to China. It needs to keep these goods going there or the economy could take a major turn for the worst.


Originally posted by OdiumAs the Kroean War showed, just beacause you have better technology doesn't mean you can win the war. After all, some Chinese soldiers were using swords against armed forces and swarming the Americans.

Originally posted by The Vagabond
In all fairness, the Korean war was fought poorly, in part because of the technology of the day. Today moving a large force onto that peninsula opens up a major danger of the enemy cutting you off and denying you access to your supply lines. It's anybody's fight, and not easy for either side. Good thing it's so unlikely to happen.


But the gap now is a lot more in favour of China. China was using swords against troops with machine guns. They had no tanks, etc, and still managed to force America back.

Although it's unlikely we'll see a war in Korea as time goes on, it slowly becomes more impossible for America to hold dominance there. Slowly they'll have to start letting China take over patrolling the sea or risk a war with them. Which I do think will have to come.



posted on Apr, 15 2005 @ 04:40 PM
link   

Originally posted by sweatmonicaIdo
I was fairly constructive, thank you ver much.

[edit on 15-4-2005 by sweatmonicaIdo]


No, you weren't. Whenever a war thread comes up you show up with too little to say and too much eagerness to say it. Thanks to your post we are all a little dumber now.



posted on Apr, 15 2005 @ 06:12 PM
link   

Originally posted by American Mad Man
listen Sweat, what did I say that was biased oh wise one?

I said this thread was a joke. It is. I said that the US would kick North Koreas arse. We would.

Do you dissagree? Or are you just trying to dissagree with me for the sake of an argument?


First off, we have not fought North Korea since 1953. You also have shown very little knowledge of foreign militaries and have only thrown crap around at them. So for you to say "we would" is yet another piece of evidence of your everlasting bias.


Thus I disagree.

[edit on 15-4-2005 by sweatmonicaIdo]



posted on Apr, 15 2005 @ 06:14 PM
link   
I dont think Bush will lead us to another war. I feel it will be the next elected to do so.



posted on Apr, 15 2005 @ 06:17 PM
link   

Originally posted by SpittinCobra
I dont think Bush will lead us to another war. I feel it will be the next elected to do so.


I think Bush MAY. However, I doubt it'll be North Korea. At this point, the only likely target is Iran and perhaps China, but only in the event China invades Taiwan.

It's a smart move for the U.S. government to avoid fighting North Korea. No good will ever come from it.



posted on Apr, 15 2005 @ 06:33 PM
link   

Originally posted by jawapunk



Orginally posted by Zife
The whole unification issue is one that south korea doesn't want to deal with, they rather be seprate from north Korea as they are right now. Who wants 20 million unskilled brainwashed north koreans working in one of the largest economcies on the planet.


I was answering this part of your response earlier, which is it? Do they want to reunify or don't they? I am just being argumentative, i agree with you in essence, but you should make a stand on one side or another.
[edit on 14-4-2005 by jawapunk]


South Korea wants to reunify, but I doubt they would start taking over the political government from Day 1. I doubt that north koreans would become south Korean or in this case Korean citizens with the same benefits that tax paying south koreans have been paying for.

How would you feel if you were a middle class family living in south korea and then had cousins come from the north and stay with you in the house for years and not be able to get a job because they are underskilled, and then have to pay for thier food, clothing, etc.

My stand is that South Korea and North Korea will unite, but it won't be right away after the North falls, imagine what kind of income-gap that will be, adding about 20 million poverty stricken people to your nation, especially when your nation isn't that much larger. It's costing Germany 1.7 million trillion dollars and rising to rebuilt east Germany. Now how much would it cost the south Koreans to rebuilt North Korea.

North Korea will probably have its own democractic government when the communists fall, then will receive aid and investment from a lot of nation to help rebuilt the nation, as one saw what south Koreans did with their nation that was worse off then the north after the korean war, one can not but be optimistic that the north koreans would rebuilt their nation with the same vigor that the south koreans did. Plus they will have south koreans aide's in helping them go through problems that the south koreans did in the 50s-70s.



posted on Apr, 15 2005 @ 06:34 PM
link   

Originally posted by Odium
Also China has admitted they'd set their economy back 20-to-30 years to stop America gaining dominance of the region and to take control of Taiwan.


I think I'll believe that one when I see it. They may say it, but the fact is that if China gets itself into a war that is destined to wreck their economy and result in the anhilation of the navy (and a good chunk of their airforce) while failing to completely finish off America (because they may get tens of thousands of our guys, but they can't finish the job and corner us into staying in this hemisphere) they're suddenly going to find themselves in a really uncomfortable position with Japan, possibly with Australia and certainly with America as well.
They're not just looking at getting set back 30 years- they're looking at America razing their industrial capacity to the ground with B-2s as well as the rebirth of the Japanese threat. There are really only two paths for America and China in my mind. We can be friends or we can destroy eachother. Maybe its the conspiracy theorist in me, but I wouldn't be entirely shocked if option 2 is exactly what the liberal NWO (I believe there are 2) embodied in the EU/UN wants.

For what it's worth, I absolutely agree that America would be foolish to aim for the Yalu and should reach an agreement with China to prevent such a necessity. To be frank, I would sell out Taiwan and even Korea itself in a heartbeat if that's what it took to get Kim and his nukes out of there. Of course this only works if this war really is motivated by security concerns and is not aimed at any way in profiting, because this is certainly not a profitable deal.




I agree with what you put above, although I don't see it as Iran by more the Muslim Countries joining together, sort of like the E.U. and then them trying to gain dominance.

I don't think that Iran can command the loyalty of the Sunni nations. There doesn't seem to be much leadership in the Arab world. Saddam was probably the best they had to offer (up until the war with Iran didn't go as planned. If he hadn't screwed that up he'd be a regional hegemon and our best friend.)
The way I see it, Iran might take the UAE to secure control of the gulf, but they'd probably settle for a blackmail organization whereby neighbors refuse any military assisstance or basing to outsiders in exchange for "protection". From there Iran can attack North. The caucuses and central asia should be their aim. They can build their allies to suit their needs out of the failed states there- they are broke, they'll compromise their ideals for growth. If Iran gets into Western Kazakhstan they can threaten Russian access to Chechnya.
On the outside chance that an Islamic hardline government arose in Turkey and they could bury the hatchet for their parent empires (Persia and the Ottoman Empire) then those two could one day threaten Russia's Black Sea coast.
It's really a far out proposition though. If there was ever going to be a pan-Arab empire I would have expected Egypt, Jordan, and Iraq to be at the forefront and dragged Syria along for the ride (with eventual plans to force Saudi into their organization).


Also, with America cutting funding to its Air Force and Navy, and putting that money into the Intelligance Agencies, I see them loosing their dominance with both China and India putting more money into their Navy and Air Forces.

In 10 to 20 years I would agree, but I'll hold my tongue for this on the most part because I don't know enough about military funding and their plans at this time to present a very well informed opinion.




Not China trying to land, but to cripple Japan. If China is to become the one main power in that region Japan needs to weaken a lot and a weak America could give them the chance to bomb Japan, especially since Japan doesn't have any missile defence systems in place.


Maybe by missile attack. I don't see China gaining sufficient air superiority over Japan and their American protectors in the near term, and I suspect Japan will try to arm up and pick up the slack if America withdraws.
China's best way to deal with Japan is economic. Japan needs to import resources- China is big enough to manipulate prices through demand (setting their economy back by going to war with America would hurt this though).
If China really wants to dominate the region maybe they should just keep progressing economically for another 20 years or so. They can force a Pax Sinica in the region without ever having to go to war.


I'm breaking off my reply early because I my next 12 hour work day begins in just 7 hours and I haven't slept yet. Forgive me if my points are a little scattered and contradictory (they may not be- I've been stopping and starting on this reply and haven't got the time or energy to proof read.

Hopefully I can get back to my usual quality on Sunday
. See you then.



posted on Apr, 15 2005 @ 07:31 PM
link   
If South Korea is not prepared to take over governing both countries from day one after the North falls, there will be total chaos. People will be for sure trying to stream down to the south. Actually I am fully confident that many South Koreans would move North because of space issues and the opportunities thsat will be available.

Who knows what will happen, al I know is there are plans in place for many scenarios.



posted on Apr, 16 2005 @ 10:05 AM
link   

Originally posted by sweatmonicaIdo

Originally posted by American Mad Man
listen Sweat, what did I say that was biased oh wise one?

I said this thread was a joke. It is. I said that the US would kick North Koreas arse. We would.

Do you dissagree? Or are you just trying to dissagree with me for the sake of an argument?


First off, we have not fought North Korea since 1953. You also have shown very little knowledge of foreign militaries and have only thrown crap around at them. So for you to say "we would" is yet another piece of evidence of your everlasting bias.


Thus I disagree.

[edit on 15-4-2005 by sweatmonicaIdo]


What little knowledge have I shown Sweat? Come on - making such claims I am sure you can come up with some quotes from this thread. Show me this crap I have thrown around at them Sweat.

So I guess I can quote you as saying you think the US would not beat North Korea in a war.

Now is your chance to take it back Sweat.



posted on Apr, 16 2005 @ 12:26 PM
link   

Originally posted by American Mad Man
What little knowledge have I shown Sweat? Come on - making such claims I am sure you can come up with some quotes from this thread. Show me this crap I have thrown around at them Sweat.

So I guess I can quote you as saying you think the US would not beat North Korea in a war.

Now is your chance to take it back Sweat.


Would you really like me to spend the next three hours searching for posts that will show that crap? Come on, you're not stupid. You know exactly what I'm talking about. And I'd like to leave that there.

Take it back? Why should I take it back? I don't care if I'm wrong. This is a message board, a place to discuss and learn. Being wrong is part of the learning process. Deal with it.

How about this. The U.S. can beat North Korea. North Korea can beat the U.S. And I'll leave it at that.

[edit on 16-4-2005 by sweatmonicaIdo]



posted on Apr, 16 2005 @ 03:13 PM
link   
It is unfortunately true that the U.S military is spread thinly in many areas of the globe. Currently, if NK and/or china attacked South Korea and/or Taiwan they would succeed. A U.S-Japan-Australia coalition could probably be able to drive china from taiwan and nk from the south if they devoted all their resources in doing so. It is time for America to wake up. China is weaker then America right now but all of their power is concentrated in southeast asia.They are also building alliances with Russia,India and even South American nations. The U.S needs to secure at least one powerful alliance to remain a superpower this century.Perhaps with the E.U or maybe some powerful south american nations(Brazil,Argentina,Chile) and maybe Mexico. Regarding the current Nk crisis the U.S should try to work with as many allies as possible and pull out of the middle east to be able to deal with the Sino/nk threat in asia



posted on Apr, 16 2005 @ 03:33 PM
link   

Originally posted by rockonchucktown
It is unfortunately true that the U.S military is spread thinly in many areas of the globe. Currently, if NK and/or china attacked South Korea and/or Taiwan they would succeed. A U.S-Japan-Australia coalition could probably be able to drive china from taiwan and nk from the south if they devoted all their resources in doing so. It is time for America to wake up. China is weaker then America right now but all of their power is concentrated in southeast asia.They are also building alliances with Russia,India and even South American nations. The U.S needs to secure at least one powerful alliance to remain a superpower this century.Perhaps with the E.U or maybe some powerful south american nations(Brazil,Argentina,Chile) and maybe Mexico. Regarding the current Nk crisis the U.S should try to work with as many allies as possible and pull out of the middle east to be able to deal with the Sino/nk threat in asia


This is what America's 57-year-old obsession with the Middle East has come to.


China may annex Taiwan easily, but I believe that America can liberate and defend Taiwan. If anything, America's chances of success in Asia eclipse that of success in the Middle East. I see only more destruction and a downhill course for America as long as it's in the Middle East.



posted on Apr, 16 2005 @ 04:48 PM
link   
Congratulations SweetMonicaIdo (I'm assuming that you didn't really mean for your name to instruct Monica to sweat) you just made my ignore list.

I don't always agree with AmericanMadMan, but he generally brings a hell of a lot more to the table for these discussions that you do. As the Good Book says, "First remove the plank from your own eye, then remove the speck from your brother's."

I wouldn't grace him with anymore responses if I were you madman.



posted on Apr, 16 2005 @ 05:12 PM
link   
I only read the first page of posts, but I want to get down some thoughts before I forget them....

Obviously a Soeul-Japan-U.S. alliance would destroy North Korea. The only question is how long would it take, and at what cost.

There are a few things that should be considered.

1) Will the North Koreans fight? This a big one. Iraq was a pretty easy invasion because most either decided that an occupied Iraq was better than one under Hussein, or they decided to "hide-out" and fight as a resistance, or bide their time so they can fight once the Americans leave.

I don't know a lot about Korean culture, or the current morale of the military there. If they are like Kim, they likely believe that they are the most powerful nation on the planet. If that is the case, then a war with North Korea could be a dog fight. Not to mention that the "home" side always has an advantage the no technology can ever compensate assuming that the locals choose to fight.

2) Will China just sit back a do nothing? While China doesn't specifically like Kim, they would still despise not being the super-power in what they consider their sphere of influence. I hoenstly don't think that China would be neutral in a war scenerio like this.

3) Do Japanese and South Koreans have the will to see out such a war? Since WWII (for obvious reasons), Japan has adopted a pacifist approach. If thousands of Japanese people are being killed while in a foreigners land, will it cause turmoil at home? Not to mention the strong possibility that N.Korea would attack Japanese land. Japan's economy is already at it's limits. What would an attack on their territory do to domestic and foreign investment?

Again, I am not Korean so anyone who is, please correct me if I am wrong.... but I would imagine that many Koreans in South Korea may also not want to support such a drastic move against people who they are related to. Maybe at first it would be supported to bring them "liberty", but once the horrible images start coming out of the war, would they have the will to keep it going?

I don't know what the answers are, but IMO, there are enough wild cards in this scenerio that should make the U.S., Japan, and S. Korea think twice.


[edit on 16-4-2005 by Hajduk]



posted on Apr, 16 2005 @ 11:02 PM
link   
If China succeeds in taking Taiwan, there will be no effort to liberate. Taiwan is not Kuwait, and China is a far superior enemy than Iraq. If China takes Taiwan, that will be the end of the story, there would be too much riding on an invasion of Taiwan by the US, economic and militarily speaking.

I don't understand why people ignore just because they don't like what they are hearing. He wasn't slamming anybody necessarily, unless there are serious personal attacks there is no need to ignore, really you are taking out the fun of debate which should be the essence of these boards.



posted on Apr, 17 2005 @ 12:32 AM
link   

Originally posted by jawapunk
If China succeeds in taking Taiwan, there will be no effort to liberate. Taiwan is not Kuwait, and China is a far superior enemy than Iraq. If China takes Taiwan, that will be the end of the story, there would be too much riding on an invasion of Taiwan by the US, economic and militarily speaking.

I don't understand why people ignore just because they don't like what they are hearing. He wasn't slamming anybody necessarily, unless there are serious personal attacks there is no need to ignore, really you are taking out the fun of debate which should be the essence of these boards.


I'm glad I made his ignore list. I didn't want to talk with a guy like that anyway.


Are you sure America wouldn't liberate Taiwan? How would that look, we promise to defend Taiwan, we preach all this rhetoric of "good vs. evil," yet we let China annex Taiwan? I think a liberation of Taiwan is possible, but then we'd be stuck on an eternal (figuratively speaking) defensive campaign against China.

I realize this thread is supposed to be about North Korea, but the liklier scenario is China-Taiwan. Plus we'll get murdered in North Korea.



posted on Apr, 17 2005 @ 01:03 AM
link   

Originally posted by sweatmonicaIdo
Would you really like me to spend the next three hours searching for posts that will show that crap? Come on, you're not stupid. You know exactly what I'm talking about. And I'd like to leave that there.


Yeah - I would like to see you find all of this crap. I had 2 posts before you jumped in and made your normal shot at arguing with me. If you are going to say I am saying stuff that is not true, you sure as hell better be able to back it up chump.


Take it back? Why should I take it back? I don't care if I'm wrong. This is a message board, a place to discuss and learn. Being wrong is part of the learning process. Deal with it.


Hey - you don't have to take it back, but we both know you are wrong. As much as you may want NK to have a chance against the US, they simply do not. It's not even close.


On anther note, there is a very simple reason why it would take a very extreme situation for the US to get into a fight with NK, and that is the amount of SK civilian casualties that would result from the artillery bombardment.

Simply put, the US most likely will not make the first move with NK, but if we did, it would be over in about 6 weeks.



posted on Apr, 17 2005 @ 11:02 AM
link   

Originally posted by American Mad Man
Hey - you don't have to take it back, but we both know you are wrong. As much as you may want NK to have a chance against the US, they simply do not. It's not even close.


Well, there's one bit of proof right there. Who wants to talk to someone who loves to read himself saying "but we both know you are wrong?" That's not the first time you've said something like that. If you can't keep an open mind about things and learn to discuss the issue without having to unleash your fury of enlightenment, then I don't know what you're doing here.

As I said, it's comments like that that perpetuate what you refer to as a "joke." Not to mention it's rather unusual that despite the fact you think the thread is a joke, you ARE STILL POSTING HERE! Figure that one out!



posted on Apr, 22 2005 @ 05:53 AM
link   
Interesting thread, keep posting



new topics

top topics



 
0
<< 2  3  4    6  7  8 >>

log in

join