More dickwaving from the KorKoms

Ma Deuce · Post by **Ma Deuce** » 2005-02-04 11:37am

N. Korea Threatens Attacks on U.S. Bases

By SANG-HUN CHOE
Associated Press Writer

February 4, 2005, 7:11 AM EST

SEOUL, South Korea -- North Korea will turn U.S. military bases in the region into a "sea of fire" if war breaks out on the Korean Peninsula, North Korean media on Friday quoted a communist officer as saying.

The North's state-run news media highlighted the comment hours after South Korea released a new defense policy paper that revealed a U.S. reinforcement plan to dispatch 690,000 troops and 2,000 warplanes if war breaks out in Korea.

North Korea's saber-rattling rhetoric comes as the isolated North is urging its military to prepare for what it calls a U.S. plan to invade. Washington and its allies say they are trying to end the North's nuclear weapons programs through multinational disarmament talks.

"If the U.S. imperialists ignite flames of war, we will first of all strike all bases of U.S. imperialist aggressors and turn them into a sea of fire," North Korea's Central Radio quoted officer Hur Ryong as saying, according to the South Korean news agency Yonhap.

Hur was also quoted as saying that the North Korean military will "thoroughly incinerate the aggressor elements that collude with the U.S. imperialists," in an apparent reference to South Korea and Japan, both of which host U.S. military bases.

Hur made his comment on Wednesday during a debate in Pyongyang on leader Kim Jong Il's "army-first" policy that stresses military strength.

Earlier Friday, South Korea released its new defense white paper that mirrored its efforts to redefine half-century-old confrontation with the communist North as well as adjust its alliance with the United States.

The white paper, which has been updated for the first time in four years, removes 10-year-old references to North Korea being the South's "main enemy," though it still calls the North a "direct military threat."

The removal of the "main enemy" term is largely symbolic but reflects South Korea's efforts at fostering reconciliation with North Korea.

The commitment of U.S. troops in the event of war appears aimed at easing concerns that Washington's plan to use U.S. troops in South Korea as rapid regional redeployments could create a security vacuum in the world's last remaining Cold War flash point.

"The reinforcement plan reflects a strong U.S. commitment to defending South Korea," the South Korean white paper said.

North Korea, which accuses the United States and South Korea of preparing to invade over its nuclear weapons programs, has added more artillery pieces and missiles to its Korean People's Army, already the world's fifth largest, it said. The number of North Korean troops remained unchanged at 1.17 million.

Already armed with large stockpiles of chemical and biological weapons, the North is resisting U.S. pressure to give up its nuclear weapons programs. Three rounds of six-nation talks aimed at ending the programs produced no breakthroughs.

The United States, the two Koreas, China, Japan and Russia are struggling to schedule a new round of talks.

Seoul and Washington forged their alliance during the 1950-53 Korean War, when American troops led U.N. forces to defend South Korea from communist invaders. The war ended in a truce, not a peace treaty, leaving the peninsula still technically at war.

Copyright © 2005, The Associated Press

Falkenhayn · Post by **Falkenhayn** » 2005-02-04 12:23pm

Is it pure Jong Il inspired insanity that makes them believe one sea of fire wouldn't deserve another?

The paranoid, maybe rational part of me can't help but think that the North Koreans are actually Mole men living a mile below the earth, and Kim Jong-Il is simply their emperor in a Korean suit.

Chmee · Post by **Chmee** » 2005-02-04 12:33pm

... revealed a U.S. reinforcement plan to dispatch 690,000 troops and 2,000 warplanes if war breaks out in Korea.

Do we have 690,000 troops to deploy without pulling out of Iraq?

Justforfun000 · Post by **Justforfun000** » 2005-02-04 12:35pm

How come every time they make a comment like this I never see anything in the story saying

{George Bush responded with "We'll kick yore ass from here to penguin-land if you launch so much as a firecracker"}

Or any responses?

Col. Crackpot · Post by **Col. Crackpot** » 2005-02-04 12:36pm

What i don't get is how the South keeps trying to appease the North with a steady stream of policy changes... the main enemy bit. Not only that, but just who in the fuck is antagonizing the North anyway?

South Korea: "You are no longer our enemy."
North Korea: "Stop your agression, or we will kill you and destroy your imperialist American overlords."
South Korea: "Freind, let us unite in peaceful brotehrhood!"
North Korea: "You will be immoliated in a cloud of nuclear hellfire if you continue to antagonize us!"
United States: "We will reduce the number of troops on your border, let us negotiate."
North Korea: "A-HA! The agressor speaks! We have warned you, continue down the path of imperialist agression and we burn you from the face of the earth!"

frigidmagi · Post by **frigidmagi** » 2005-02-04 12:37pm

Chmee you know we only got 135,000 troops in Iraq right?

We got quite a few troops in Japan, Australia and South Korea. More than we have in Iraq all togather last I checked.

Chmee · Post by **Chmee** » 2005-02-04 12:40pm

frigidmagi wrote:Chmee you know we only got 135,000 troops in Iraq right?

We got quite a few troops in Japan, Australia and South Korea. More than we have in Iraq all togather last I checked.

I guess I could have asked the question in a more complex manner .... even with the existing overseas assets that we have, can we deploy 690,000 troops at full combat strength to a new theater without seriously weakening our Iraq deployment? Given the way they're scooping up Reserve and Guard units and extending rotations, the Iraqi campaign doesn't give the general impression that we're at a manpower surplus at the moment when it comes to frontline combat units.

Falkenhayn · Post by **Falkenhayn** » 2005-02-04 01:06pm

Chmee wrote:
frigidmagi wrote:Chmee you know we only got 135,000 troops in Iraq right?

We got quite a few troops in Japan, Australia and South Korea. More than we have in Iraq all togather last I checked.
I guess I could have asked the question in a more complex manner .... even with the existing overseas assets that we have, can we deploy 690,000 troops at full combat strength to a new theater without seriously weakening our Iraq deployment? Given the way they're scooping up Reserve and Guard units and extending rotations, the Iraqi campaign doesn't give the general impression that we're at a manpower surplus at the moment when it comes to frontline combat units.

The Army
482,400 Active Duty
350,000 National Guard
205,000 Reserve

The Marine Corps
175,000 Active Duty
39,600 Reserve

135,000 In Iraq+690,000 man Committment/1,469,400= 56.1% of the US ground combat arms.

http://www.globalsecurity.org/military/ ... rength.htm

I suspect that a full moblization and draft would be required to provide replacements at the rate the US is going to need them.

The greater implication is just how is "Transformation" going to behave against an enemy that possesses the quantity of men and materiel that North Korea does, but couples it with motivation and discipline that the worst case assumption must include?

Admiral Valdemar · Post by **Admiral Valdemar** » 2005-02-04 02:00pm

A war against the DPRK is the last thing we need right now, avoiding the fact that we'd need to seriously reorganise the military forces and end up losing Seoul and Tokyo to atomic fireballs. Let them whine. They're all talk.

Post by **Sea Skimmer** » 2005-02-04 02:22pm

Everyone just ignore the 690,000 men, 2000 plane figure. The plan in question from which those numbers come from dates to the 1970's.

Now a days not only is such a commitment is impossible, even if the manpower existed we simply could not ship it into South Korea before the war was decided and the South was fully mobilized (a process which gives it a numerical superiority over the north of several million). A ground war on the Korean peninsula could only end in the total defeat of North Korean forces, and before they could even encircle Seoul. 690,000 troops reflects a totally different balance of power (not to mention very different ways and technological means of fighting) between the two countries and the US at a time when a Northern invasion could potentially overrun all of the South. Today the North Koreans would run out of gas before they could do that, all else aside.

CJvR · Post by **CJvR** » 2005-02-04 05:03pm

The SoKs don't really need help anymore, the vast bulk of the NK military is on the 1940-50 level. Armed with Soviet WWII surplus and a few "moders" things they would be massacred against the reasonably modern SoKs, provided they didn't panic during the initial chock.