The Norks are Suspected of Sinking South Korean Shipping.

[Sea Skimmer]

The North Koreans will probably use chemical or nuclear weapons to blast a hole in the DMZ defenses and clear a path to Seoul, their ace will be capturing Seoul's population alive and using them as a shield against UN NBC retaliation.

Wouldn't matter if they could use several nukes along the DMZ. North Korea's utter lack of modern armor, and the absurdly dense urban terrain with numerous fixed anti tank barriers along all the (very few, just four really and only two are any good) possible invasion corridors would stop an invasion dead in its tracks. They'd be lucky to advance more then 10km now; and maneuvering through a fallout zone and around nuclear craters is not going to help. An encirclement of Seoul was a threat through the 1970s and 1980s when the ROKA was all light infantry and had no modern tanks or artillery either. But now the ROKA is a much more modern mechanized force... while North Korea's military has gained almost no new equipment at all and what they had in the 1980s was already obsolete. They also just don't have enough fuel or food to use all the forces they have, an attack would have to be carried out with only the best troops greatly reducing the Norths human sea advantage.

Of course, since the North used nukes first, the invasion force would be wiped out within hours anyway. Even if the US nuclear weapons stored in South Korea were lost to a North Korean first strike, nuclear bombers from CONUS could arrive in under a day. Even if all ROK defense collapsed one line after another, the North Koreans would just not be able to drive tanks fast enough down the highways to encircle Seoul before that could happen. Plus the US could always fire ICBMs.

The real invasion risk to the South is about zero now, the ROK doesn't even take that to be the main national threat anymore, which is why they've put so much money into naval and air power recently. This is also a major reason why the Norks are so troublesome, they know they can't threaten invasion anymore and they don't like it, so they feel they MUST have nuclear weapons to restore the balance of terror. Since the nukes aren't working right yet, they've got nothing and that is a very unhappy situation.

[AniThyng]

Does your fantasy extend as far as to include what you'd say to the people of Seoul who are under the NORK artillery?

If however deterrence does fail -- about 5,000 to 9,000 people will probably die in the initial Nork barriage --

So casual. It's amusing to contrast this with 9/11, a "mere" 3000 people was it, and America wept with total national mourning and lashed out with "righteous" fury.

[open_sketchbook]

But those were 3000 Americans!, and everyone knows that 1 Americans! = 1000 others. This is basic math! Why do you hate our country! These colours don't run! They took our jorbs! Spartamericafreedom etc.

As terrible as it sounds, this is a situation where South Korea just has to keep a stiff upper lip about it and do nothing. There are no more means of escalating short of open warfare and that will get hundreds of thousands, or millions, killed. North Korea has spent the last half-century doing everything they can to make themselves into a fortress that cannot be cracked using any but the most extreme methods, internal or external.

There is a part of me that says that steps should be taken to actively destabilize North Korea's government before they can get their nukes going, but open war is off the table, because there are only two ways a war with North Korea will go; a protracted ground war that takes years and kills millions, or a carpet nuking that essentially murders an entire country of 24 million people. I dunno, most of us like to stop short of nuclear holocaust when it comes to international relations.

[hongi]

For all the understandable reluctance of South Koreans to go to war, I don't think most of them realise that they've got one of the most powerful militaries in Asia. They're going to eat NK alive if it comes to war, it's just that they've got a pathological fear of fighting that terrible war over again with gazillions of casualties and devastation of their society. I'm sure many are just thinking: "We'll send you the damn aid, just STFU and go back to whatever it is you do, we'll go back to Starcraft."

[AniThyng]

For all the understandable reluctance of South Koreans to go to war, I don't think most of them realise that they've got one of the most powerful militaries in Asia. They're going to eat NK alive if it comes to war, it's just that they've got a pathological fear of fighting that terrible war over again with gazillions of casualties and devastation of their society. I'm sure many are just thinking: "We'll send you the damn aid, just STFU and go back to whatever it is you do, we'll go back to Starcraft."

I think ultimately distance is a factor - it's one thing to send your powerful military 1000 miles overseas to fight a war of revenge, it's quite another to do it a couple dozen miles from one of the biggest metro areas in Asia. It does make one wonder how SK would react if Seoul were all the way down south where say, Pusan is and the only things in range of NK arty is a couple of hamlets.

[weemadando]

If that was the case, then the war would probably have been decisively fought the first time - that kind of geographic shift would mean that the capital wouldn't have been nearly as threatened for the second half of the war and there would have been less pressure to come to terms with the Norks/Chinese.

[Prannon]

Personally, I think the South Koreans and the United States are counting on this having longer term repercussions, and they may be hinting at that to the North Koreans. Let's face it. The North Koreans have nothing to gain by doing this, unless we take recent succession drama and rogue military officials jockeying for power among the elite. The North Koreans need aid from South Korea and China to stay alive. If that aid is pulled...well, they can gas and virus all of the region for what they care, but that has the unpleasant consequence of ending their power. Permanently. And it's not going to be the "well, we'll go into exile and live comfortably for the rest of our lives." No, it's going to be certain death as the system collapses around them and they'll either go to prison or they'll disappear when an angry crowd of starving North Koreans show up.

Nobody wants this, least of all the North Koreans. China, the US, and South Korea don't really want it either, because the current North Korean regime is the only thing keeping a relative lid on what could be an enormous humanitarian crisis. It's very much a nasty Catch-22.

Still, there are boundaries. You could argue that North Korea already crossed it by destroying the Cheon-an, but it would appear that boundary hasn't quite been crossed yet. If I were the US and South Korea, I would sternly reprimand the North, and then point out to them that it's not just the West that's wringing their hands over this matter. Even though the Chinese have been rather quiet on this affair, you gotta know that they are increasingly frustrated with their neighbors for inciting what would otherwise be very accommodating business partners. They most likely don't want the other powers in the region to be on a war footing as much as they don't want a major capitalist power, friendly to the US, on their border. I'd point out that this sort of behavior will have a long term consequence with the US, South Korea, and China, and should another internal crisis arise...we may not be so willing to help. Mayhaps I'm just naive to think that kind of message would work.

[MKSheppard]

So casual.

What do you expect me to say? That only 40 to 400 people will die? It certainly won't be the apocalyptic doomsday predictions of certian people, who simply take the population of Seoul and then kill like half of them for the hell of it -- but it won't be pretty.

It's amusing to contrast this with 9/11, a "mere" 3000 people was it, and America wept with total national mourning and lashed out with "righteous" fury.

You're a stupid hatfucker. I remember on 9/11 that there was much chaos and FUD going around -- estimates of the casualties were going around the 10,000 to 20,000 mark -- because about 50,000 people worked in the towers and about 200,000 visitors passed through on a typical weekday.

It wasn't until several days after 9/11 that we managed to get a clear accounting of the casualties; and they were much lower than they could have been, due to ahappy set of coincidences that lined up in our favor.

[MKSheppard]

Besides, the US and South Korea can schedule Operation NORTH KOREAN FREEDOM to begin on 0300 hours local on a weekday -- when just about everyone in Seoul is asleep or in a building; to minimize casualties -- and launch everything we have to orbit over the north korean side of the border loaded up with JDAMs to plink artillery bunkers as they find them.

This probably would help lower civilian casualties considerably; but it's still going to be high due to the sheer number of guns.

[Shroom Man 777]

To Shep innocent casualties numbering in the thousands can be written off easily if it achieves some kind of great strategic advantages. Dead human beings to him don't matter if the numbers are within (his) tolerable limits.

[recon20011]

Even though the Chinese have been rather quiet on this affair, you gotta know that they are increasingly frustrated with their neighbors for inciting what would otherwise be very accommodating business partners. They most likely don't want the other powers in the region to be on a war footing as much as they don't want a major capitalist power, friendly to the US, on their border. I'd point out that this sort of behavior will have a long term consequence with the US, South Korea, and China, and should another internal crisis arise...we may not be so willing to help. Mayhaps I'm just naive to think that kind of message would work.

You could also believe that China may finally be realizing that now that the balance of power on the Korean Peninsula has changed, and South Korea and Allies will ultimately win unless she (China) steps in on the NK's side once more. This would make the existence of North Korea and its heavy militarization no longer necessary for China's strategic interests in the region because the North Korean threat is providing South Korea with an excuse to maintain a powerful military. And if China wishes to expand its interests in the region (regardless of the actual use[/] of military force) a well-armed South Korea with committed allies is not going to be cowed very easily. Thus China may see that now a deescalation as being favorable to them, since it would entail the South Korean military getting smaller. And also South Korea would be heavily involved in any reconstruction efforts in North Korea, thus distracting the SK government.

[Master of Ossus]

Woah, damn.

Seoul, South Korea (CNN) -- South Korean President Lee Myung-bak announced Monday his country is suspending trade with North Korea, closing its waters to the North's ships and adopting a newly aggressive military posture after the sinking of a South Korean warship.

"We have always tolerated North Korea's brutality, time and again," Lee said. "We did so because we have always had a genuine longing for peace on the Korean Peninsula. But now things are different."

"North Korea will pay a price corresponding to its provocative acts," he said, according to an English translation of the speech provided by Lee's office. "I will continue to take stern measures to hold the North accountable."

South Korean military officials on Thursday announced the results of an official investigation into the sinking of the ship, the Cheonan, which concluded that North Korea fired a torpedo that cut the vessel in half.

North Korea has denied that it sunk the warship, which went down on March 26, killing 46 sailors.

In the nationally televised speech Monday morning, Lee said his country was adopting a posture of "proactive deterrence" toward the North, announcing that "combat capabilities will be reinforced drastically" and that he will focus on improving national security readiness and military discipline.

"If our territorial waters, airspace or territory are violated, we will immediately exercise our right of self-defense," Lee said.

Addressing the alleged attack, Lee said, "Once again, North Korea violently shattered our peace. The sinking of the Cheonan constitutes a military provocation against the Republic of Korea by North Korea."

Lee also admonished his own people, saying that until the attack " we had been forgetting the reality that the nation faces the most belligerent regime in the world."

South Korea's leader called on the North to apologize for the alleged attack and to punish those responsible for carrying it out.

Lee said the alleged attack violated armistice and nonaggression agreements between the two countries. He said he will refer the incident to the U.N. Security Council "so that the international community can join us in holding the North accountable."

Tensions between the nations have escalated since the South released its report on the sinking.

Addressing the alleged attack, Lee said, "Once again, North Korea violently shattered our peace. The sinking of the Cheonan constitutes a military provocation against the Republic of Korea by North Korea."

Lee also admonished his own people, saying that until the attack " we had been forgetting the reality that the nation faces the most belligerent regime in the world."

South Korea's leader called on the North to apologize for the alleged attack and to punish those responsible for carrying it out.

Lee said the alleged attack violated armistice and nonaggression agreements between the two countries. He said he will refer the incident to the U.N. Security Council "so that the international community can join us in holding the North accountable."

Tensions between the nations have escalated since the South released its report on the sinking.

Didn't see this coming.

[Sea Skimmer]

What did you expect then, because this is as weak as can be. Almost all of the few trade ties have already been suspended, and nothing else being said is anything new. Go to the security council... which will do nothing, oppose North Korean line of control violations... which is already policy. This just reinforces the point that the world has about nothing it can do, except an all out military attack.

[recon20011]

Came out yesterday

North Korea 2009 Trade Shrank 9.7% on Sanctions, S. Korea Says
May 23, 2010, 6:22 PM EDT

By Seonjin Cha

May 24 (Bloomberg) -- North Korea’s international trade shrank 9.7 percent last year amid United Nations sanctions, a state-run South Korean agency said.

The value of the communist country’s trade dropped to $5.09 billion in 2009, the Korea Trade-Investment Promotion Agency said in a report today. North Korea doesn’t release official trade data.

China, North Korea’s biggest trading partner, accounted for 53 percent of the total at $2.68 billion, the report said. Excluding shipments across the North-South border, commerce with China was 78.5 percent of North Korea’s trade.

North Korea’s trade may deteriorate further this year as the United Nations may toughen sanctions against the country, said the South Korean agency. The North is already under UN sanctions following its second nuclear test in 2009. Trade dependency on China should also increase, the agency said.

An international panel said it found “conclusive” proof of North Korea’s role in the March 26 sinking of a South Korean warship, which killed 46 sailors. The UN Command said in Seoul yesterday it convened an investigative team to review whether the incident is a violation of the armistice that ended combat in the Korean War, and will report its findings to U.N.

Trade between the two Koreas totaled $1.68 billion last year, 7.8 percent less than in 2008 and comprising 33 percent of North’s commerce, today’s report said. North Korea had a 2009 trade deficit of $1.1 billion as exports slid 3.2 percent and imports dropped 13 percent from a year earlier, it said.

Suspension of the North-South trade is not quite as insignificant as you might think. Losing roughly one-third of your trade stings badly.

[Uraniun235]

What did you expect then, because this is as weak as can be.

Not quite; they could have buried the report and called it an 'unfortunate incident'.

[The Romulan Republic]

There is a part of me that says that steps should be taken to actively destabilize North Korea's government before they can get their nukes going, but open war is off the table, because there are only two ways a war with North Korea will go; a protracted ground war that takes years and kills millions, or a carpet nuking that essentially murders an entire country of 24 million people. I dunno, most of us like to stop short of nuclear holocaust when it comes to international relations.

And even if one were sufficiently ruthless to write off those 24 million North Korean civilians as acceptable losses, and commit one of the largest mass-murders in history, wouldn't the fallout from a carpet-bombing of North Korea fuck over people in South Korea (allies) and China (major trading partner) to some extent?

[thejester]

What did you expect then, because this is as weak as can be.

Not quite; they could have buried the report and called it an 'unfortunate incident'.

Lol, how on earth were they going to bury the report? The ship's sinking was very public, the salvage operation was very public, and the public anger was very real. Any censoring the report itself was going to struggle given the presence of international investigators and all the shots of the wreck.

[recon20011]

There is a part of me that says that steps should be taken to actively destabilize North Korea's government before they can get their nukes going, but open war is off the table, because there are only two ways a war with North Korea will go; a protracted ground war that takes years and kills millions, or a carpet nuking that essentially murders an entire country of 24 million people. I dunno, most of us like to stop short of nuclear holocaust when it comes to international relations.

And even if one were sufficiently ruthless to write off those 24 million North Korean civilians as acceptable losses, and commit one of the largest mass-murders in history, wouldn't the fallout from a carpet-bombing of North Korea fuck over people in South Korea (allies) and China (major trading partner) to some extent?

It doesnt appear there's going to be any way around that no matter what.

While basically continental, the climate of South Korea is greatly influenced by prevailing winds. In general, there are hot summers and cold winters. In the summer, the prevailing winds are from the south and south-east, bringing hot, humid weather. A cold, dry wind blows from the north and north-west during the winter, bringing cold weather.

source

[Starglider]

And even if one were sufficiently ruthless to write off those 24 million North Korean civilians as acceptable losses, and commit one of the largest mass-murders in history...

Why would you 'carpet nuke' the country? You'd use tactical nuclear weapons on the dangerous troop concentrations, WMD sites and deep bunkers. What would be the point of wiping out all the (hopelessly obsolete) factories and (starving) civilians? Of course the regieme likes to claim that every citizen will fight to the death in its defense, but in the historical record very few nations actually lived up to those kind of claims. In short I don't see a reason why NK should come off worse than WW2 Japan.

[Archaic`]

This declaration may be a bit more important than some people are giving it credit. When it came out that North Korea was being investigated as a suspect for this (before they even announced the results), they announced that if any additional economic sanctions were levelled against them, that they would consider it a declaration of war and attack.

The South here are effectively calling their bluff. They don't want to invade themselves (probably for political reasons), but by doing this they've basically said "Bring it on".

[Prannon]

This declaration may be a bit more important than some people are giving it credit. When it came out that North Korea was being investigated as a suspect for this (before they even announced the results), they announced that if any additional economic sanctions were levelled against them, that they would consider it a declaration of war and attack.

The South here are effectively calling their bluff. They don't want to invade themselves (probably for political reasons), but by doing this they've basically said "Bring it on".

I want to point it out that this is the sort of bluff calling that only the Koreans can do. Korea is a very proud nation, and like many eastern cultures it has a lot of emphasis on saving face. So, you might imagine when some brutish American outsider without such a sensitivity comes along and challenges the Northerners with military deployments, bombs, planes, and nukes, the Northerners have to try and at least put up a show. It's been the primary motivation behind their outward propaganda for years.

I think that for a Korean administration to come out and say "You're full of shit" means a whole lot more, and I think it's wise for all the powers involved to have let the Southerners dictate the line. Granted, it was their ship blown up, but I can imagine some politicians back in the states would be unnecessarily vocal on this (Russo-Georgian War anyone?) Now the north is really backed into a corner. They either do what they said they'd do and attack (and die) or they face the utter humiliation of acknowledging the wrong committed, which hands the south a major diplomatic, moral, and cultural victory. Despite all their bellicosity, I doubt that the North Korean elite is all too keen on doing either of those things. I'd dare say that this incident looks like a real breaking point...

[Edi]

There is a part of me that says that steps should be taken to actively destabilize North Korea's government before they can get their nukes going, but open war is off the table, because there are only two ways a war with North Korea will go; a protracted ground war that takes years and kills millions, or a carpet nuking that essentially murders an entire country of 24 million people. I dunno, most of us like to stop short of nuclear holocaust when it comes to international relations.

And even if one were sufficiently ruthless to write off those 24 million North Korean civilians as acceptable losses, and commit one of the largest mass-murders in history, wouldn't the fallout from a carpet-bombing of North Korea fuck over people in South Korea (allies) and China (major trading partner) to some extent?

People who know nothing about military matters should keep their pieholes shut when such matters are discussed. These two posts are stupid on a level that is hard to comprehend, because they betray a profound ignorance of many of the conditions that would affect such a situation and those conditions have been public knowledge for years.

Starglider at least has a realistic expectation of how things would go if that came to pass.

Thanks to Prannon for an insightful comment on the political realities of the situation.

[Simon_Jester]

I prefer sending in some of our Los Angeles class subs in and go to town on the NK's navy. After that, have the New Jersey and her sister ships, alogn with a carrier group or two begin blowing up the NK infrastructure, or what little exists. We then launch another battle of Inchon.

I'm not sure we do have the Iowa-class. At least some of the ships have been demilitarized, and the Navy doesn't really want the others back, because they take crews ten times the size of what a modern warship of comparable firepower needs. A missile cruiser is quite capable of blasting the crap out of a battleship, because the battleship doesn't have very good defenses against even primitive antiship missiles. And the missile cruiser has much greater striking range, to boot.

So I wouldn't even invoke the battleships. They aren't needed, they aren't wanted, and they aren't all that helpful.

I believe Shep's idea is that it's basically daring the Norks to escalate, knowing it means their doom. The Norks know if they shell Seoul in any way the balloon comes up and they're getting an asskicking, so they have to decide if they want to end their national existence or simply accept getting one-upped and being able to remain in power (while getting to scream about the EVIL IMPERIALIST YANKEES even louder).

This might actually work; on the other hand, as a one-off response to this situation it would be such a divergence from all American policy of the past that it would seem like we'd gone insane. Which would have... undesirable consequences.

If however deterrence does fail -- about 5,000 to 9,000 people will probably die in the initial Nork barriage --

So casual. It's amusing to contrast this with 9/11, a "mere" 3000 people was it, and America wept with total national mourning and lashed out with "righteous" fury.

Shep is a Ruthless Genocidal Warmonger, remember? He's perfectly willing to accept casualties, American or otherwise, thousands of times higher than that as long as the enemy gets the crap beaten out of it even more thoroughly. Picture him as a throwback to the era of the World Wars, when major nations were a lot less casualty-averse.

In this case, he's proposing to avenge roughly ten thousand or so South Koreans in Seoul by a massive nuclear strike against North Korea, which would kill many times more people. He probably proposed the same thing around 9/11, once he picked out a target for nuking.

For all the understandable reluctance of South Koreans to go to war, I don't think most of them realise that they've got one of the most powerful militaries in Asia. They're going to eat NK alive if it comes to war, it's just that they've got a pathological fear of fighting that terrible war over again with gazillions of casualties and devastation of their society. I'm sure many are just thinking: "We'll send you the damn aid, just STFU and go back to whatever it is you do, we'll go back to Starcraft."

Hmm. So North Korea is seen less like an enemy and more like the creepy roommate you'd rather not have to deal with?

[Big Phil]

Shroom man, anything, Simon Jester - seriously, shut your fucking pie holes. Have you read Mike Wong's story, Conquest? Because right now you're sounding like his version of Jean Luc Picard, whining because Shep doesn't feel feel bad enough about possible deaths. Take your self-righteous, whiny bullshit and shove it up your giant, gaping vaginas.

To address Sea Skimmer and Master of Ossus, this "announcement" basically amounts to nothing. It's the playground equivalent of going and playing with a different group of friends when the annoying, whiny, snotty kid hits you and wipes his boogers on you.

[Simon_Jester]

Shroom man, anything, Simon Jester - seriously, shut your fucking pie holes. Have you read Mike Wong's story, Conquest? Because right now you're sounding like his version of Jean Luc Picard, whining because Shep doesn't feel feel bad enough about possible deaths. Take your self-righteous, whiny bullshit and shove it up your giant, gaping vaginas.

What, you think I'm whining about how Shep looks at war?

If we take for granted that a war on North Korea is necessary, Shep's pretty much right about how to do it. I'm calling him "Ruthless Genocidal Warmonger" because that's his forum title; he got it for a reason.

Ruthless: do you see Shep saying "we shouldn't fight a war in this situation because of the casualties in Seoul?" Quite the opposite. He takes that for granted, and proceeds to come up with a way to minimize them. As long as he can cause enough harm to the enemy to end the war without having the enemy cause that much harm to him, the losses on the friendly side can be written off. Hence, ruthless.

Genocidal: "the Shep solution" is a recurring meme around here for a reason. A Shep-style war against a reasonably well equipped opponent is liable to escalate into megadeaths; that's planned for ahead of time as a contingency. The basic approach here is that of the World Wars, in which civilians got absolutely hammered. And it's cranked up a notch for the increased deadliness of weapons in the nuclear age.

Warmonger: well, you hardly see him peacemongering in situations like this, now do you? Shep does tend to go looking for a fight, then propose how to win it by overwhelming escalation. Preferably escalation involving nukes; that's just how he rolls.

If I needed the crap beaten out of a nation-sized enemy and I had to pick an amateur to plan the attack, Shep would be one of my top choices. I'd prefer a professional (like, say, Stuart), of course, but that's a side issue.

Now, I don't always agree with the way Shep goes about looking at foreign relations, since it seems to me that he's mostly interested in where to drop which bombs. But I don't condemn his approach either. Used intelligently and within its limits, Shep-style war planning is very rational and (I suspect) quite effective.

Despite this, I don't ignore the facts- that fighting wars Shep-style results in mass deaths, and in avenging large numbers of deaths on our side with even larger numbers on the other side. If you don't like that, don't fight a Shep-style war. If you think I don't like it... well, should I?

And yet if you're going to fight a war at all against a serious opponent, there's something to be said for Shep-style, because at least it's usually over fast and the enemy no longer has the ability to hit back.

So you, in turn, can take your posturing and choke on it.