Seoul vows to bar U.S. strike at North Korea

International Herald Tribune ^ | July 8th, 2005 | Choe Sang-Hun

[Paul Ross]

SEOUL President Roh Moo Hyun declared Thursday that under no circumstances would South Korea allow the United States to resort to a military attack against North Korea.

President George W. Bush insists that he wants to resolve the nuclear crisis through diplomacy, but he has not officially ruled out a military option, which he has called a "last choice."

[NJ_gent]

"If and in my opinion WHEN it happens, their wont be nothing left of a South Korean economy."

Indeed, Kim Jong-il or whoever succeeds him will inevitably destroy South Korea's economy and her people. However, the technological leaps they'll make by milking every red penny out of the South Korean economy, along with the revitalization of their military, will make them a direct military threat to Japan, and a potential nuclear threat to everyone in the world.

[Stag_Man]

All the way...to Japan...that's not that far...and they couldn't sustain an attack on Japan,,,the Japanese air power and navy is very technologically sound.

---

Lets also keep in mind that China is still a poor nation. Japan, though it is only allowed to spend 1% of it's budget on defense spends a comparable amount on defense($45.841 billion) to China ($67.49 billion). True, Japan's military is only good for defending Japan, but it's very good at what it does. If China was stupid enough to attack Japan conventionally, the Japanese would mop the floor with them.

Of course there's always the nuclear problem with China. We need to pursue missile defense with Japan with abandon. Japan is the only other country with the technological savvy to truly help us out on this one.

[NJ_gent]

"If the public knew cities would be destroyed they would overwhelming support invasion of NK."

Perhaps if the public were informed of the seriousness of the threat, they'd give some support. Thus far, the issue has been entirely swept under the rug. President Clinton signed the Agreed Framework and then pretended North Korea no longer existed, and President Bush fired out some angry rhetoric publicly, then asked the North Koreans if they'd like to have a little chat about this whole nuclear weapons thing. Meanwhile, the North Koreans have been openly threatening war on the US, and have been threatening to destroy our allies in the area. We appear unwilling or unable to protect them, which looks real good to our other allies around the world who may be looking for our protection at some point in the near future. Since we're inept and paralyzed in the protection of South Korea, they've begun cozying up to Red China in an effort to get some sort of protection. China, in turn, has been working to aid high ranking North Korean defectors who are working to destabilize the regime, and has been lining up tons and tons of firepower along their North Korean border. (Ok, so the Chinese claim their military units are there for 'immigration control', but where are tanks, artillery, jet fighters, and bombers needed to control immigration? Who's jumping their border; the Incredible Hulk?)

"no President will perform an all-out invasion of NK unless they attack first."

The North Koreans won't attack first unless their first-strike capability is such that they can vaporize their enemies. Even then, it'll take someone slightly nuttier than Kim Jong-il to go ahead with it. However, if Kim Jong-il feels his rule is threatened - militarily or economically - then he'll likely launch a massive first strike with every bomb, missile, and man he's got to propel himself into the history books. If he's going down, he wants himself immortalized.

"Seoul has 9.5M people. No one in their right mind would just write them off."

Certainly not, but if I were the leader of South Korea, I'd quietly start evacuations now and very quietly ask the US to come up with a plan to end the North Korean crisis as soon as possible. I'm not entirely writing off the city, but unless the North Korean military basically en masse refuses to fight (very unlikely due to Kim Jong-il's regime's 1984ish tactics), it's unlikely that much of the city will survive even a few days of war.

"So there will have to be a smarter way via SWAT teams, perhaps targeted cruise missle strikes (much of their operation, however, is underground) etc."

If we're finding it difficult just to get HUMINT in and out of North Korea, I highly doubt we're going to be anywhere nearly as effective as we'd like in getting sabotage teams to have the success necessary to save us all a lot of trouble. We tried that approach with Saddam, and the CIA was embarrassed a number of times by Iraqi intelligence, which wasn't much to write home about. The worst of which was when the Iraqis called the CIA on their own radios to tell them not to expect the speedy return of the agents sent into Iraq.

As for cruise missiles, you highlighted just one problem with them. Clinton wowed us all with his frequent use of cruise missile attacks against enemies. Wowed, of course, because they were so incredibly ineffective. What was it President Bush said? Sending a million dollar missile to blow up a ten dollar tent and hit a camel in the butt? They're great for taking out wide-open military targets that are readily identifiable from the air and from space, and they're effective as part of an integrated campaign. What they cannot do is take out embedded targets, camouflaged targets that aren't identified, or win any war for you. At best, they're useful for softening up hard targets so that air power can soften them more, so that ground units can come in and win with far less resistance. Even that is severely limited by North Korea's terrain and preparation. They've been expecting superior American air power for the past 50 years and have prepared very appropriately. We could carpet bomb the northern end of the DMZ with MOABs and we'd still not get all their emplacements.

"I just hope someone in this admin has a plan because we have a serious problem here and in Iran."

I hope so too, but I'm not seeing it. We did a good job of planning with Afghanistan, and a good job of planning the conventional war against the Iraqi government's military forces. Otherwise, we don't seem to be doing much of anything about Syria, Iran, or North Korea. I think that it's no coincidence that we're seeing China and Russia allying against us. They've been quietly supplying weapons and technologies to North Korea and Iran for a number of years, but now that we've shown weakness in not dealing with many of the situations that have developed, they're openly defying US power. I think we need to yank our troops and equipment away from NATO commitments (let some of our 'allies' handle these never ending missions) and start really slamming some of the countries like Syria, Iran, and North Korea, that have been causing us so many headaches.

[Stag_Man]

I other words, if Japan increased its spending by 1% to 2%, they would spend 25 billion more on defense than China.

[JudgemAll]

South Korea?

Since when Roh spoke for all of SK?

Democracy in action

[gooleyman]

From the Article: ...under no circumstances would South Korea allow the United States to resort to a military attack against North Korea.

-----
Thus proving once again the old saying: "Blood is Thicker than Water"

[Paul_Denton]

Roh, the best thing for you to do is to stay out of our way.

[TADSLOS]

Dear Roh Moo, the whishing sounds over your head are American nuc's travelling inbound to your ronery cuz up north. You might want to duck, then follow the green glow to unify.

[Paul_Denton]

What makes you think Taiwan, where we currently have zero bases, would want us?

Oh they would want us alright. I mean with China just 100 miles away and all.

[NJ_gent]

"Taiwan has a capable air force and navy...China does not have a great amphib infrastructure and even less capable when you consider training. There are some easily defensive mountains in Taiwan IF they got on shore in any size force."

China does have special forces though. If communications and power are sufficiently disrupted, even for a short time, the Taiwan military simply won't have time to properly react. This, of course, assumes a worst-case scenario where Taiwan and the US have no intelligence that an attack is coming, and China's forces already on the island are successful in their missions.

"The US air power would be available on the initial assault in a standoff mode to help reduce the Chinese aircraft."

I would worry far less about China's air power than I would about their missiles and troops. China does have decent air and submarine capabilities at this point. Their air force was of particular interest to military folks testifying before the Senate. Their pilots are, apparently, pretty decent. Granted they're not going to win any sustained fight with the US, but a fast and overwhelming strike could very well bring Taiwan under China's control before the US and Taiwan defensive plans can be put into place.

"In reality, the Chinese ability to take Taiwan is in serious doubt."

That depends entirely on how quickly and how quietly they move to do so. In open, sustained combat? I agree with you that they'd have a heck of a time. With a fast and furious first strike following a coordinated special forces sabotage campaign? I don't think anyone could help Taiwan in that case.

"All the way...to Japan...that's not that far"

No, but who else, realistically, do they have to attack? They're not going after Russia; they're allies. They aren't hitting up the Middle Eastern countries, as they're a nice distraction for US forces. They're not going after North Korea unless and until it brings South Korea completely away from the US and into their arms. They've never had much of a reason to develop the ability to project force any substantial distance. However, their recent sub improvements shows that they're at least beginning to look forward to developing worldwide force projection capabilities.

"and they couldn't sustain an attack on Japan"

I think a lot of that would depend on how generous North and South Korea are with their airspace and soil. China certainly has the air power and naval power to keep Japan from any sort of counter-attack. The real question of it would be whether China has the capability to get enough boots on Japanese soil to seal the deal. Certainly they could devastate Japan's cities and open military targets. Of course, once Japan's allies get involved (primarily the US, obviously), things start looking mighty bleak for China.

"Japanese airpower and navy is very technologically sound."

They have nice toys, courtesy of the US (that's rather ironic, isn't it?), but they don't develop too many things too terribly far in terms of military due to restrictions in place in their constitution. Following the obliteration of two cities (three if you count the utterly destroyed Tokyo), the good folks of Japan decided that any future military probably shouldn't have offensive capabilities, so as to prevent a repeat of the loss and destruction wrought upon them. While they can aptly defend themselves, anyone adopting a siege mentality with respect to military strategy is almost invariably doomed to defeat. Again, it's the US that's the ace in the hole for Japan.

"They couldn't grap anything as important as Taiwan or Japan and would never be able to logistically maintain it even if they could. Those forces would be cut off very quickly with mulitiple carriers and deep long range strike aircraft pounding the Chinese and their sealanes for reinforcements and supply."

You can only suppress so much with air power. You're again discounting China's air and naval power, which has been rapidly developed since the mid 90s. The Chinese have worked hard to create a military that can openly challenge any American strike effectively, and we've been cutting down our own capabilities. In addition to that, we're barely able to maintain our forces in Iraq. We're spread out all over hell between Korea, Iraq, Afghanistan, and NATO commitments around the world. If we were to go to war against China, it's difficult to say just who could show up for our side. Just having airplane and carriers in the area doesn't stop someone like China from throwing its weight around. We'd need tanks, troops, bombers, and more to even begin to launch a serious large-scale defense of Taiwan, and we'd need to come up with those things mighty quick. If we leave Taiwan to defend itself for a month, there may not be anyone left to defend by the time we get there.

[plain talk]

I hope so too, but I'm not seeing it.

Well that's good. That's how it is supposed to work. In 50,000 words or less what is your solution?

[hinckley buzzard]

South Korea knows that the "cost" of U.S. military action against North Korea may very well be the annihilation of Seoul in a North Korean nuclear attack, and I can understand why they would think that way.

I don't think so. I think South Korea knows that the only reason for an American offensive against North Korea would be a pre-emptive strike to keep NoKo from going nuclear, including against the South. There has to be a domestic political reason for this absurd posture by the South.

[rbmillerjr]

"With a fast and furious first strike following a coordinated special forces sabotage campaign? I don't think anyone could help Taiwan in that case."

You alluded to why this could not happen. The Chinese could possibly pull off a Special ops strategy but they could never follow it up with the big hit...why, because they would tip off Taiwanese and US intel mechanisms when they start to board the ships, group the transports etc etc.

"recent sub improvements shows that they're at least beginning to look forward to developing worldwide force projection capabilities."

It will take them alot of time and resources to do this...even at the current rate, in 10 years they MAY be able to send some battle groups thourout Asia,,,a regional projection that may get Singapore and Indonesia concerned but nothing that the Japanese or the US would really fear.

"The real question of it would be whether China has the capability to get enough boots on Japanese soil"

They do not have the ability to do it...Japan would crush them if they attempted an amphib on Japan....the entrance of the US (do you really think we would permit this?) would actually be a quick death for the Chinese forces, as opposed to the slow death the Japanese would give them.

"While they can aptly defend themselves, anyone adopting a siege mentality..."

They would aptyl crush the Chinese. As far as strategy and defense only, look for the Japanese to get over their SDF philosophy in the next 20 years as China becomes stronger.

"You can only suppress so much with air power"

In defense of an island, we could stand back and use our superior navy and airpower indefinately, but it wouldn't take that long....The Taiwanese and the US would turn the Taiwan Strait into the Marianas turkey shoot II. China's 30 ships that are first line type craft would likely all be sunk within 2 weeks.

I don't see us sending any troops there...maybe in the special ops scenario we'd pour some quick troops in...but that island is going to be saturated with alot of BMs and it wouldn't be a fun island to be on...when it was all over Taiwan would be devestated but holding the island, China's airforce and navy would be humiliated and they would loose troops by the 20s of thousands...what is more China would have shown its true face and be shown to be the rogue that it is.

[NJ_gent]

"In 50,000 words or less what is your solution?"

Ugh, I'm too tired for 50,000 words. :-)

At this point? I'd have to say tell South Korea's government, quietly, to evac any major population centers within range of North Korea's primary strike weaponry, then yank our troops from NATO commitments throughout the world, then start to very publicly negotiate (brinkmanship style) with Kim Jong-il's government for a full and unconditional cease and desist of development and total dismantlement of all nuclear, biological, chemical, and long range weapon programs, along with outside verification and destruction of all materials relating to those programs, then a fast-as-possible buildup of US forces throughout the area. I'd give them a deadline. They're going to push and push until they reach that deadline, and then they'll likely fold. If not, bomb the hell out of all known military targets, starting with suspected nuclear development and storage facilities. Then carpet bomb the DMZ and send a few light units straight into Pyongyang with massive air cover. You take Pyongyang, you take North Korea. You get the radio and television stations intact, and you start broadcasting over every frequency available that Kim Jong-il's regime has fallen. You do that, and a large portion of the military gives up immediately.

We don't have much choice in terms of military options with North Korea at this point, and it's time our so-called allies took up responsibility for NATO commitments. If they really believe in those missions, let's see them commit troops and money to them. Please note that I'm not a professional military strategist, and if my 'solution' seems silly to someone who actually is a professional military strategist, then it probably is. ;-)

[NJ_gent]

I think we're going to have to agree to disagree on China's current military capabilities. I do, however, think we agree that it'd be a good thing if neither of us is ever proven right or wrong on this issue. Here's to hoping that China, like all our big enemies, keeps a cool head.

[Da Mav]

roflol

[bitt]

thanks for the ping - I would have missed this!

[plain talk]

Thanks. You have a lot of good thoughts but on the idealistic side. Shutting down Seoul and relocating 9.5M+ people is not going to happen. I don't many brilliant ideas either. Targeted strikes and overthrow of the government from inside is where I'd would go. Lots of problems with that as well. Take Care.

[wtc911]

Oh they would want us alright. I mean with China just 100 miles away and all.

--------------------------------------

Wrong. A. If Taiwan wanted us we would already be there and we are not. B. A move there by us would be read by China as a provocation, one that China could not afford to ignore and one that Taiwan could not risk.

[CaptSkip]

FYI, we have had no more than 250 US troops deployed along the DMZ for decades. The ROKs handle it all. But don't let the facts get in your way.

Since it's only about 30 miles from the DMZ to Seoul, the big prize, it's kind of a moot point whether our approximately 37,000 troops are at Camp Casey, Camp Red Cloud, or some combination of North and South of the Han River.

If Seoul falls, it's over.

But you missed the whole point of my post in your pissy little retort all big and bad about showing me how stupid I am on "the facts". Eat me.

Deploy our 37,000 apparently unappreciated and unneeded troops in South Korea, where ever the hell they are stationed in defense of that country, back home to secure our borders!

Oh, and BTW...did I remember to say bite me.