Free Republic
Browse · Search
Bloggers & Personal
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

North Korea versus South Korea Military Comparison
Conservative Refocus ^ | 11/2110 | Barry Secrest

Posted on 11/23/2010 2:48:50 PM PST by Barry Secrest

Military Hardware, submarines, equipment and air power comparisons


TOPICS: Military/Veterans; Politics
KEYWORDS: comparison; militaryforces; northkorea; southkorea
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-2021-4041-6061-67 next last
To: Barry Secrest

Time to go clean house. Time to cut the head off of some snakes ! Time to do a very quiet invasion of Pyongyang and take out all gov’t officials at the top.


41 posted on 11/23/2010 4:08:20 PM PST by CORedneck
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Leaning Right
A very good navy and air force that could serve as a force multiplier for the ROK.

My money is on the ROK. Kimland has nukes, but not many, and they are going to find the ROK forces are a lot tougher than they have been taught.

42 posted on 11/23/2010 4:12:08 PM PST by GAB-1955 (I write books, love my wife, serve my nation, and believe in the Resurrection.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 15 | View Replies]

To: jmacusa

‘Doubt that. Doubt that very much. “

And that is based on what?

“What I see happening is every North Korean soldier go running for the nearest foreign embassy, Western, Asian , East European, anywhere they can get to trying to get out.”

About 15 years ago a NK sub had engine trouble and beached in SK. The commander lined up 10 of his men on the beach and shot them. Then he shot himself. The two remaining men went on a rampage killing farmers until the SK army found and killed them.

They did this because any NK that defects is condemning his entire family to the death camps. Aunts, uncles, cousins, grandparents, infants and anyone else associated with the individual is sent to a camp. The women are often raped to death. Children are used for experiments. Few manage to survive the camps.


43 posted on 11/23/2010 4:12:42 PM PST by driftdiver (I could eat it raw, but why do that when I have a fire.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 40 | View Replies]

To: Tucker39

China will stay out of this one unless the integrity of China were at stake - and the ROK forces will stop at the Yalu.


44 posted on 11/23/2010 4:14:00 PM PST by GAB-1955 (I write books, love my wife, serve my nation, and believe in the Resurrection.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 26 | View Replies]

To: gbs
The United States removed its last tactical nuclear weapons from South Korea in December of 1991.

I could give you countless sources documenting US policy that denuclearizes the Korean peninsula. Bush 41 made that call. I am surprised that anyone on this site wouldn't know that.

S. Korea denies seeking redeployment of U.S. tactical nuclear weapons

45 posted on 11/23/2010 4:16:02 PM PST by kabar
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 39 | View Replies]

To: EQAndyBuzz
The minute the norks try to cross the border hell will be turned loose on north Korea. The question no one is asking is why is great leader goading the south?

I'm not a millitary strategist in any way shpae or form, but my understanding is that with Seoul within the reach of fortified artillery, etc., in NK, the north gets to play terrorist. They have 10M+ people they can threaten but know that one shell into Seoul is all out war.

While the logistics would be massive, I would think that SK could return pressure without firing a shot by announcing an orderly evacuation of Seoul to southern areas of the country. Just the announcement would send chills, actual movements would likely be seen as dead ass serious as mobilizing troops and equipment on the border, but would nopt be offensive. Any offensive action by NK would be seen a their desire to effectively hold civillians hostage.

I'm sure there are smarter people than on this, and there certainly would be economic impacts to SK and globally. But a firm response from the world saying we will float / forgive resources during this critical period would be one way of providing a unified response with real teeth, and make the cheese a little more binding for NK.

On the other hand, SK knows more than I do and might have a plan in place to knock out the threat with limited damage. I wouldn't put it past them.

46 posted on 11/23/2010 4:18:38 PM PST by !1776!
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 24 | View Replies]

To: 4rcane

Very good comparison - Saddam’s Iraq was similar to today’s NK. However, Saddam wasn’t real close to anyone except poor Kwait. North Korea is right on top of the South.


47 posted on 11/23/2010 4:20:47 PM PST by JimSEA
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 11 | View Replies]

To: Bon mots

Oh, obama would retaliate all right. He too would attack the United States.


48 posted on 11/23/2010 4:21:14 PM PST by sport
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: texmexis best

Has obama apologized to NK and blamed America yet?


49 posted on 11/23/2010 4:23:58 PM PST by italianquaker ( teabag the vote!!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 3 | View Replies]

To: Tucker39
North K. has the Chicoms, their humongous arsenal and the Chicom leaders, who would NOT mind spilling someone else’s blood; just like back in the ‘50s.

While counterintuitive, the large amounts of U.S. debt held by China may work against them. A strong USA would freeze and suspend that debt and any nation that traded such debt with China if China actively interfered against one of our allies.

That in and of itself would be considered an act of war to China, but it is a lever and a potentially useful one. Without our dollars China's economic system collapses and they have a billion subjects that might find that outcome to be an enormously difficult pill to swallow, not to mention the impact of the suspension of other critical items such as grains. Again - likely to be considered an act of war, but in a shooting war with one of our allies, difficult issues are likely to arise.

Better now than later I would suspect. China might have a massive millitary, but they are only beginning to develop the capacity to significanty project that power. A few million soldiers sitting in China doesn't get alot accomplished on the battle field.

Global economic hit - likely massive. Though an outright ban on Chinese imports / exports among allies might have mid to long term benefits regardless of short term pain.

50 posted on 11/23/2010 4:31:08 PM PST by !1776!
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 26 | View Replies]

To: Moonman62
If that's the case, then would it be wrong to hope that Obama is in the city that gets it?

Actually, I have very sadly come to the realization that nuking certain US cities would be more akin to flushing a bunch of rancid toilets.

There is nothing left to destroy in places like Detroit, Newark, Philadelphia and especially Washington DC. All of them hopeless ghettoes.

51 posted on 11/23/2010 4:31:33 PM PST by Bon mots ("Anything you say, can and will be construed as racist...")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 36 | View Replies]

To: Bon mots

You don’t give obama’s fighting ability any credit.

Ever since he assumed office, obana and his henchmen have been waging war and attacking the United States of America.


52 posted on 11/23/2010 4:31:43 PM PST by sport
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 17 | View Replies]

To: kabar

Well I was in SK in 1991 and the nukes were still there. Article in the Stars and Stripes about them.


53 posted on 11/23/2010 4:33:32 PM PST by driftdiver (I could eat it raw, but why do that when I have a fire.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 45 | View Replies]

To: !1776!

They won’t evacuate south. More likely north figuring they are going to die anyway.


54 posted on 11/23/2010 4:36:10 PM PST by driftdiver (I could eat it raw, but why do that when I have a fire.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 46 | View Replies]

To: kabar

I’ve seen em, and they denied they were there then! Would have to believe it is still true to this day. Too much at risk, now even more so!


55 posted on 11/23/2010 4:40:34 PM PST by gbs
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 45 | View Replies]

To: driftdiver; gbs
Bush announced the policy in 1991. The United States withdrew the last nuclear weapons from South Korea in December 1991. The initiative was a result of President George H. Bush's unilateral disarmament initiative in September 1991, which withdrew tactical nuclear weapons from all overseas locations, except air bombs from half a dozen NATO countries in Europe.

USCINCPAC Command History

Congressioinal Research Service--Nonstrategic Nuclear Weapons

Then, in 1991, President George Bush, and Soviet President Mikhail Gorbachev, each announced that they would withdraw from deployment most of their nonstrategic nuclear weapons and eliminate many of them. These 1991 announcements, coming after the abortive coup in Moscow in July 1991, but months before the December 1991 collapse of the Soviet Union, responded to growing concerns about the safety and security of Soviet nuclear weapons at a time of growing political and economic upheaval in that nation. It also allowed the United States to alter its forces in response to easing tensions and the changing international security environment. Consequently, for many in the general public, these initiatives appeared to address and solve the problems associated with nonstrategic nuclear weapons.

The United States implemented these measures very quickly. Nonstrategic nuclear weapons were removed from bases in Korea by the end of 1991 and Europe by mid-1992. The Navy had withdrawn nuclear weapons from its surface ships, submarines, and forward bases by the mid- 1992.


56 posted on 11/23/2010 5:19:45 PM PST by kabar
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 53 | View Replies]

To: driftdiver
"About 15 years ago a NK sub had engine trouble and beached in SK. The commander lined up 10 of his men on the beach and shot them. Then he shot himself. The two remaining men went on a rampage killing farmers until the SK army found and killed them."

Close, but not quite accurate :-) You're talking about the Kangnung (Gangneung) submarine infiltration in '96.

See: http://rokdrop.com/2009/01/14/nk-spy-submarine-incident-in-gangneung/.

I had a front row seat ;-)

57 posted on 11/23/2010 5:31:16 PM PST by Joe 6-pack (Que me amat, amet et canem meum)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 43 | View Replies]

To: Strk321
They assemble some cars in the US, but aren’t a lot of the parts made in Korea?

I can't say for certain, but here's a document that may give a clue.

58 posted on 11/23/2010 5:33:28 PM PST by Moonman62 (Half of all Americans are above average.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 38 | View Replies]

To: kabar

Do you always believe your goverment? Sometimes yes and sometimes no? Which is true here? You and I will never know, unless there is some kind of heavy exchange on the Peninsula.
Enjoyed the article, I am sure the Russian have done all their withdrawals also :) !!!


59 posted on 11/23/2010 5:33:33 PM PST by gbs
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 56 | View Replies]

To: driftdiver

Based on what? Based on starving people desperate to get out of a rapidly failing police state that’s what I base it on. That and the understanding of the history of communism. The real truth the Russians always hid about any confrontation with the West would have been the slaughter of their soldiers by East Germans and Poles. The Russians knew damn well the Germans and Poles weren’t going to die for them. Strutting legions of soldiers looking tough on the parade ground in front of their leader is nothing new. We’ve seen them come and go. Kim-jungs boys that are likely to fight will die. More will try to just survive somehow or try and flee. If The Dear Leader is dumb enough to send his army across the border the potential scale of the sure disaster will likely put an end to him and his regime. It’s tough to get starving, brutalized men to fight and die for the man and the regime that have left them so bereft.


60 posted on 11/23/2010 6:24:22 PM PST by jmacusa (Two wrongs don't make a right. But they can make it interesting.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 43 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-2021-4041-6061-67 next last

Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
Bloggers & Personal
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson