Truman had the right idea.
Posted on 10/11/2006 7:03:38 PM PDT by Flavius
PLANS previously drafted by the Pentagon predict 52,000 US military casualties and one million civilian dead in the first 90 days of conflict if America attacked Pyongyang. The US leadership is looking at international economic and diplomatic sanctions against North Korea as its primary response to Monday's nuclear test.
(Excerpt) Read more at news.com.au ...
So am I! I love the FReeper Collective! :-)
Don't kid yourself. NK has one of the strongest land armies in the world. We would probably need to resort to tactical nukes in order to defeat them. I don't know how many troops we have there but we would suffer very badly.
Are nukes are much cleaner today. Better to get hit with the radiation of our nukes hitting NK than radiation AND BLAST hitting US.
You know, at this stage, I don't see the deterrence effect of our troops on the DMZ. This crazy little lunatic, if he has a nuclear device will unhessitatingly use it at a moments notice.
Stratfor's undoubtedly correct analysis of the NK artillery capacity within range of Seoul is the reason that any attack on NK has to begin with a tactical nuclear equivalent of carpet bombing of all NK military positions within artillery range fo Seoul, and all NK missile emplacements. (On top of the usual measures to gain air supremacy.)
(Heck, even my wife, who is usually almost pacifist and suffers from a mild case of BDS was advocating nuclear first strike against NK when they were running missile tests, so there might be enough political support for it in the US. Trouble is, SK has to be in, or its a non-starter.)
Truman had the right idea.
I'm guessing some MOABs would do the trick!
"Truman had the right idea."
And Truman faught a war against Korea, and he didn't nuke them.
They said that during the Gulf War I there would be north of 100,000 US KIA.
Seoul, a mega city, is built up virtually right to the DMZ. Folks who have never been there would have to see it to believe it.
The battle would be ugly. But then again, North Korea has no effective air force and there is a fair chance the North Korean army would implode into chaos and disorganization.
You will be assimilated!
Resistance is futile!
http://www1.korea-np.co.jp/pk/012th_issue/97100803.htm
""If war broke out in Korea, his military leaders told him, they estimated that it would cost 52,000 U.S. military casualties, killed or wounded, and 490,000 south Korean military casualties in the first 90 days," Oberdorfer writes. North Korean casualties would be enormous, Clinton was told, and U.S. financial outlays would be tens of billions of dollars, he says." There is no such thing as a FRee Lunch. Have You stopped by and Bumped the FReepathon??
It could be worse than that. Our past two opponents were Hussein's Iraq and the Taliban.
Iraq is a desert country with a highly centralized population along the Tigris/Euphrates river valley. This combines to give a swift moving distance engaging force with air dominance a huge advantage. Of course that Hussein was the clown prince of misunderestimation helped.
The Taliban were in a mountainous country with little technology, no artillery, no infrastructure, and a population who supports whoever seems to be winning.
North Korea militarily has dated but servicable equipment, mountainous terrain, 10,000 pieces of artillery, a navy, a air force, a special operations component. NBC warfare capability (questionable on th "N" though). A population that may or may not support their opressors.
Further North Korea could wipe out Seoul, South Korea with the 3,000 to 4,000 artillery pieces in range.
Our side (counting South Korea, Japanese, and USA as our side) could lose the amount mentioned in the first few hours of the war.
The question is what would be the war aims of North Korea?
Completely taking over South Korea would be beyond the North's capability by itself. Destroyning Seoul and negotiating an end to hostilities is much more likely.
"What good would it do to starve even more of them?"
Aid to a totalitarian government doesn't help it's people to begin with. You're only feeding tyranny. The people see little benefit.
Might have been helpful if MacArthur hadn't incompetently ignored numerous warnings of Chicom troops being in North Korea before that.
Actually,chemical weapons are the way to go.
They can be designed to become inert after 30 minutes.
Too late for me! I'm 1952 of 2006.
:-)
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.