| Submit your comments on this article |
| Korea |
| The Next Korean War |
| 2003-08-08 |
| Hat Tip: The Marmot’s Hole: http://marmot.blog-city.com/ Using the military is an option. Here’s how it can be done. If China won’t step up to the plate... BY R. JAMES WOOLSEY AND THOMAS G. MCINERNEY Monday, August 4, 2003 12:01 a.m. EDT Mr. Woolsey was CIA director from 1993-95. Gen. McInerney, a retired three-star Air Force lieutenant general and former assistant vice chief of staff, is a Fox News military analyst. The White House had a shape-of-the-table announcement last week: North Korea would participate in six-sided talks with the U.S., China, Russia, South Korea and Japan. This was welcome but it changes nothing fundamental. Kim Jong Il has clearly demonstrated his capacity for falsehood in multilateral as well as bilateral forums. The bigger, and much worse, news is the overall course of events this summer. He’s not just a liar, he’s an industrious little shit... In early July, krypton 85 was detected in locations that suggested that this gas, produced when spent nuclear fuel is reprocessed into plutonium for nuclear weapons, may have emanated from a site other than North Korea’s known reprocessing facility at Yongbyon. Surprise, surprise.... There would be nothing surprising about a hidden reprocessing plant--North Korea has thousands of underground facilities. But if the reprocessing of the 8,000 spent fuel rods that the North Koreans took out of storage at Yongbyon last January--when it ousted international inspectors and walked away from the Non-Proliferation Treaty--has been completed clandestinely, then Kim Jong Il may already have enough material for several more weapons to go with the one or two he is thought to have from previous reprocessing. This is the real deal: a recommendation for a pre-emptive strike from two knowledgable and experienced hands. Read the rest to get their logic on the military option. |
| Posted by:·com |
| #20 For the US, waiting without giving up anything substantial is probably the only available policy. In the meatime, I hope the DoD and Boeing is proceeding along at or ahead of schedule with the Airborne Laser project. If that contraption was working now, there would be no need to worry about an attack on the U.S. mainland, and U.S. naval forces could begin interdicting NK shipments of exported missile/nuclear material, their likely shipment route being via sea. |
| Posted by: Bomb-a-rama 2003-8-9 12:05:42 AM |
| #19 Ultimately, any military option on our part must escalate to full regime change againts Kim Jong Il. Look at the best case: we lauch air and missile strikes on PDRK nuclear and missile facilities and KNOW with certainty that we destroyed them. What then? Does PDRK just take it? No. Knowing we are several months from deploying enough ground power, they level Seoul. As they start to level Seoul, ROK government is under tremendous pressure to launch frontal attacks on entrenched PDRK troops north of Seoul in an effort to shove PDRK lines back out of artillery range. Will ROK army break in this desperate frontal attack? I don't know how we get out of this, but there are no clean military options. Let's get real here. Regime change is only way and if we go military route, it won't be cheap. As for offering guarantee that we won't attack, why would PDRK believe us anyway? We've tolerated their psycho regime for 50 years yet they still think we are poised and ready to strike at any moment! They would not believe our promise. By their screwy logic, they might even think we were on the verge of invading since we promised not to. As a general policy, I think we should never guarantee the safety of our enemies. It's tough enough to get the anti-war professional protesters to agree to defend our allies--figures they'd go for protecting our enemies... |
| Posted by: BJD (The Dignified Rant) 2003-8-8 11:18:52 PM |
| #18 "Would it be that bad if we lost Seoul? I mean, let's be realistic here -- the destruction, nay, decapitation of the South Korean leadership might favor America's interests in the region. " Gee, I don't know, would it be that bad if America lost New York? I mean the complete eniolation of that hotbed of liberal thought might favour America's interests in the long run. Never mind the people killed, let's just be realistic here. Better yet destroy Washington. Fewer people there, and a more effective "decapitation" of a democratic regime. No need for annoying elections anymore that might no lead the desired outcomes, I'm sure that a West-friendly general can fill in the position of head of government. Seoul isn't your own personal toy to have a right to lose, Brian! |
| Posted by: Aris Katsaris 2003-8-8 10:15:36 PM |
| #17 It wouldn't be just a few people unless SK somehow managed to evacuate Seoul first. They will lose tens of thousands, possibly 100,000 depending on what happens. I would not wish for that. The SK leadership is most unlikely to die, or at least not many of them. The SK industrial base probably wouldn't be damaged that much. The actual tonnage the NK's can fire won't be that great. The 2nd ID, unlike the civilians of Seoul, has bunkers and armored vehicles and chemical warfare suits. I don't think they will suffer that many casualties. |
| Posted by: buwaya 2003-8-8 6:09:10 PM |
| #16 Would it be that bad if we lost Seoul? I mean, let's be realistic here -- the destruction, nay, decapitation of the South Korean leadership might favor America's interests in the region. A few people might die...and their industrial base would be set back a decade, but the new orders for United Technologies and Caterpillar couldn't come at a better time in the macroeconomic cycle. It would also be the facilitator to the permanent removal of the North Korean government and the unification of the Koreas. All this makes the assumption that 2ID is no longer in Seoul, of course. |
| Posted by: Brian 2003-8-8 5:46:55 PM |
| #15 buwaya - as was reported here a few days ago, apparently the Russians have some sort of plan developed - a pre-emptive nuke attack. I think this is the only thing I've seen that, should force be required, doesn't put the onus on the US - and will leave the US as the bad guy. We all know how revisionist history works in the PC world. I think Japan is right there with us - the NorKs shooting their little missile over Japan was, actually, incredibly stupid on their part as it guaranteed that Japan would be party to any action or talks that might occur. The SorKs, well, they're just fucked. Self-delusional youth and the generation that "gets it" is not only dying off, it's also being ignored completely by the fat little college shits and the SorK press. So SorK will always oppose any action other than tool/fool ideas. China? What a morass of medieval piss they peddle as foreign policy. ZF has their number, methinks, as well as others. I, for one, see them as the real long-term threat - unless they have a real revolution sometime before push comes to shove. They need us even more than we need them - for a ton of reasons elaborated in numerous comments posted here on Rantburg. But are they with us in acting if the NorKs don't respond, assuming they apply the pressure? I don't know, do you? Russia suffers from Putinism - pop-idol cult worship mixed with Al Caponski or Tamanisky Hall - what a mess. Are they with us? What day is it? I doubt them more than any of the others due to their schizophrenia and Putin's foolish management. |
| Posted by: ·com 2003-8-8 4:27:59 PM |
| #14 .com - You are completely correct. There are no good options. Unfortunately this situation cannot be resolved until SK, China and Japan are sufficiently frightened to act. The US cannot act unilaterally in the area - we variously need enthusiastic cooperation or aquiescense from all these people. I suppose that means we all have to wait and give the NK's the rope to hang themselves, and take the risk of a disaster. For the US, waiting without giving up anything substantial is probably the only available policy. |
| Posted by: buwaya 2003-8-8 3:32:18 PM |
| #13 buwaya / others - A few observations... Since the NorK nuclear efforts were allowed to chug along under the covers of willful blindness by the US (Clinton's Appeasement) and IAEA - and with help from numerous unfriendly sources... we now find ourselves facing a number of onerous choices... 1) I've heard it stated several times by military types that Seoul is doomed in any shooting war, no matter what the level of the conflict - because the NorKs can and would do it just to punish SKor as their dying gesture. 2) If the NorKs aren't stopped somehow, they will hold SKor hostage and extort them, and by extention the US, in perpetuity. 3) If the NorKs aren't stopped SOON, they will peddle the nukes and missiles to other locales - and then we have this nightmare happening all over again - in multiple places. A vision of the future anyway, I think. Don't we have to face up to Seoul's devastation and end this nightmare before it spreads? I know that, from everything I've read, only China is postioned such that this can be ended peacefully. Even if they can be motivated to do it and do put the pressure on, it doesn't automatically mean the NorKs will cooperate if they see no future for their Dear Leader in his comfort zone, so he may even buck them, too. This looks like a lose-lose-lose-lose set of options - and only by using force in the very near-term, and taking the losses, is there any chance of resolution. |
| Posted by: ·com 2003-8-8 2:08:24 PM |
| #12 I don't think actually defeating the NK army is such a big problem. It would be mainly a job for the SK's anyway. The real problem is that this is more like a hostage situation. The bad guys are no match for the SWAT team but they are perfectly capable of killing a lot of civilians - both the population of Seoul currently and those of whatever cities in SK, Japan or the US they manage to use nuclear weapons on. |
| Posted by: buwaya 2003-8-8 1:38:04 PM |
| #11 Don't the NorK forces have the same huge liability of most 2nd and 3rd tier armies: not trained to think for themselves or adapt - and they never know the big picture? Headless, they are almost useless - as Ridgeway exploited during the Korean War: they took the objective and then - nothing, didn't know where to go or what to do next. Decapitation may be the heart of the unspoken part of the plan. Just speculating on this aspect. BUT. Bank on this: Woolsey is one tough and smart cookie - he's certainly not a fool and wouldn't buy into a dumb gambit. It may be imperfect, as war plans always are, or it may be a forced situation due to time, but I figure it must be imminently doable for him to not just sign on but advocate and put his name on the story. |
| Posted by: ·com 2003-8-8 12:39:11 PM |
| #10 I don't see why the US should not make such a promise on condition of good behavior by NK. The US does not intend to invade anyway unless the NK's present an immediate danger, and the SK's and Japan wouldn't agree to an invasion except in a dire situation. So such a promise is no handicap to an invasion if it becomes necessary and feasible. |
| Posted by: buwaya 2003-8-8 12:33:57 PM |
| #9 I think it would take a month or two to move in Air Force assets up to the limit of available airfields in South Korea, Japan, Guam and Okinawa. These forces are readily available I believe. Between the South Koreans and US forces currently in South Korea and Japan there should be more than enough to maintain air superiority over the Koreas and defeat a NK ground invasion, but not enough to get NK air defenses down to this years Iraqi levels immediately. |
| Posted by: buwaya 2003-8-8 12:18:33 PM |
| #8 Good discussion. Woolsey and the General bring up a topic re a strategy that has to be analyzed. Why do you think Kimmie wants us to agree not to invade in exchange for his cooperation? Cause he'd go down. Remember, Kruschev extracted a promise from JFK for the US to take the invasion option off the table re Cuba. I leave it to you military guys to talk about the feasability of invading NK, but I think, under no circumstances, should we promise not to attack NK. |
| Posted by: Michael 2003-8-8 12:14:55 PM |
| #7 Buwaya, I didn't mean a ground invasion within 24-48 hours from now, I meant from the time the bombing started. Also, my question about going after Kimmy at the same time, was meant more as the ability to go after targets of opportunity, not just "get Kimmy". |
| Posted by: Mike N. 2003-8-8 12:01:55 PM |
| #6 Protect Seoul from invasion- Yes. The SK Army and Air Force would be doing the protecting, and I doubt the NK army can puch through the minefields and the tank/cluster bomb kill zones no matter how much artillery they've got. Hit NK artillery at the DMZ - Yes, but not before the 240mm MLRS have sent a few salvos over into downtown Seoul, likely with nerve gas. Seoul should be evacuated before anything else is done. Fat chance I think. Go after Kimmy ? No. There is no way every hole in NK can be found, much less bombed. Ground invasion in 24-48 hours ?- No. It will take probably two-three months at least to mobilize the SK's 20 plus divisions (who did you think will be doing most of the invading?), and the same time to ship over 2 Marine and 2-3 Army divisions. |
| Posted by: buwaya 2003-8-8 11:50:07 AM |
| #5 This is just part of the poker game. (a) China does not want the US to go in, if that happens South Korea will inherit the North and the unified Korea will be a close US ally. (b) China also doesn't want a nuclear armed North Korea because then everyone in the area goes nuclear. (c) China doesn't want North Korea to collapse because then a ton of refugees pour over the border and South Korea may inherit North Korea. China will have to move soon to avoid these options, China will have to either invade, or arrange a coup in North Korea (by cutting oil and food shipments for starters).They don't want to do it but its the least worst option for them. |
| Posted by: Yank 2003-8-8 11:13:44 AM |
| #4 I wonder how our stockpiles of "smart" weapons are? Same for T-hawks?? |
| Posted by: Yosemtie Sam 2003-8-8 10:11:50 AM |
| #3 Do we have enough forces available to protect Seoul, hit Nork artillery at the DMZ, hit DongWang, and go after Kimmypoo at the same time, and do this all effectively, while getting a ground invasion rolling within 24-48 hours? I'm not convinced that the Soks can gives us all we need. Sure would be nice if Japan could help. Or, maybe not, since that opens a big can of worms with China. |
| Posted by: Mike N. 2003-8-8 9:57:34 AM |
| #2 It is my understanding that the Navy won't be ready until December due to refits and rearms after Iraq. Also it would be nice if South Kor would lend a hand istead of spitting on us. |
| Posted by: Douglas De Bono 2003-8-8 7:56:10 AM |
| #1 We need to take out Frankenkimmie's lab before his monster is completed. |
| Posted by: Dishman 2003-8-8 7:46:27 AM |