If North Korea invaded South Korea, the US would...

[expatriot]

[Muddleoftheroad]

1. Invasion

A true, full-scale North Korean invasion would be devastating. Yes, South Korea could on, but thousands of American troops would be killed almost instantly and many thousands more threatened. If you think * or any other president wouldn't use nukes -- either tactical or larger -- to stop that, you are wrong.

[Booberdawg]

2. Need another option

US would stay in Iraq and send additional troops to Korea

:nuke:

[expatriot]

3. remember that about 50% of our combat ready units are in or around Iraq...

we have five infantry divisions in active duty

the 1st ID in Europe
the 2nd ID in South Korea
the 3rd and 4th ID in Iraq or in transit somewhere
the 25th ID headquartered in Hawaii with units on west coast (the natural first reinforcements)


the 10th Mountain Division is in Afghanistan and bits of it in Iraq
then we have the 82nd and 101st ABD's in and around Iraq

the 1st AD is in Europe with components strung all over.

the 1st Calvary Division is in Iraq or at least in theater.
hell, closer to 2/3's of our combat ready units are in Iraq and Afghanistan....

[Drifter]

4. I was going to say either ...

Attack Iran or Syria.

Cheers
Drifter

[teryang]

5. The threat is of the US invading the North

The question is what will the Chinese do if we invade or attack N.Korea? The North is in very poor condition to invade anyone. No food, no fuel, no spare parts, antiquated and dilapidated equipment.

War could evolve after a series of low level provocations if it occurs at all. It may begin with US surgical strikes on Yongban and other nuclear sites. War with Korea regardless of the circumstances will require a draft because the Chinese will mobilize.

[DemocratSinceBirth]

6. If North Korea Starts The War

there is no way China comes to their aid.

This is not 1951.

[NNN0LHI]

12. US/Canadian relations are not too good right now either. This is not 2000

But if someone were to invade them I really think the US would do something to help them. If for no other reason than to keep a potential hostile enemy off of our border.

Don

[Muddleoftheroad]

7. War

A leadership that teeters on collapse like Kim Jong Il is capable of anything.

[maha]

8. There's another option.

One of the poll choices should have been, "Wet its pants."

[incontrovertible]

9. go nuclear

within minutes, before Seoul could get nuked by PyongYang (which would do it as soon as threatened by a counterattack). A nuclear attack on Seoul would wipe out the global economy for about a decade, and China would accept our kind regrets.

All known facilities would get multi-megaton Trident warheads. All minor assets emitting signature would get multi-kiloton tacticals. Standard hardware would get micros.

I'm sure people won't appreciate the answer, but there it is.

[Pepperbelly]

11. I saw that too although I am not sure China would be so sanguine

about it.

[sweetheart]

10. reverse the whole argument

What an interesting perversion of the facts on the ground... over the past few decades, america has beligerently invaded many nations, while that entire time, north korea has invaded nobody.

Who is most likely to invade? Who has been practicing? Who is a scared shitless little country backed in a corner by idiot fools, the sort of bullys that corner the neighborhood cat with sticks behind the garage and then run home to mommy when it bites them.

America is most likely to invade the north of korea, with mass murder its objective to prove that iraq and afganistan were just small death tolls in a relative sense.

I would like to see the entire administration dressed up in their military finest lead the rush across the DMZ towards NK. With luck, none of them would survive... and THEN the world would breathe a sigh of relief like when sauron's ring is dropped in to orodruin and the black cloud is banished from the earth.

[teryang]

13. Good points

After the alarming gullibility of the American public which allowed our pre-emptive war based on false pretenses in Iraq, the overwhelming majority of Americans are being led down the primrose path of collective delusions concerning N.Korea and China.

Anyone who thinks the Chinese will allow the detonation of nuclear weapons within their strategic sphere of influence is delusional. I'm sure that American politicians have already been told privately that the presence of US forces north of the DMZ will not be tolerated by the PRC. The N.Koreans have no incentive to start a war. Capability is measured in real terms not invective.

[Character Assassin]

23. Got history?

Evidently not.

What an interesting perversion of the facts on the ground... over the past few decades, america has beligerently invaded many nations, while that entire time, north korea has invaded nobody.

Golly, I guess you're right, if you exclude S. Korea, and kidnapping Japanese and hundreds of S. Korean citizens.

Who is most likely to invade? Who has been practicing?

Do you have even the most slight understanding on NK military strategy?

Who is a scared shitless little country backed in a corner by idiot fools, the sort of bullys that corner the neighborhood cat with sticks behind the garage and then run home to mommy when it bites them.

Don't ask the question if you cannot comprehend the answer. NK isn't 'scared shitless'. It's about as bad as it gets here on this planet, and that includes everywhere. Why don't you explicitly detail about how they're been 'bullied'?

America is most likely to invade the north of korea, with mass murder its objective to prove that iraq and afganistan were just small death tolls in a relative sense.

That is utter, unadulterated, festering bullshit. Please support your statement.

I would like to see the entire administration dressed up in their military finest lead the rush across the DMZ towards NK. With luck, none of them would survive... and THEN the world would breathe a sigh of relief like when sauron's ring is dropped in to orodruin and the black cloud is banished from the earth.

It is clear you have no idea who NK is or what they have perpetrated for the last, oh, 50 years or so.

Grow up.

[teryang]

27. Who has been practicing?

The North Korean military posture is defensive in nature, not by inclination but by lack of capability. With their lack of resources and dilapidated equipment, it is unlikely they could stage any successful invasion. I haven't heard of any invasions by N.Korea since 1953.

There have been a N.Korean DMZ incidents, kidnappings in Japan, terrorist incidents, and forays into S.Korean waters. The latter typically end in diaster. The nature of these operations is evidence of their military and political weakness. Recriminations in this regard are a distraction from the fact that the US had contained the nuclear proliferation problem with N.Korea by signing the agreed framework and our side breached the agreement by failing to deliver reactors and fuel oil as promised. The current crisis is the result of our intentional violation of international law. This is an ugly truth that Bolton and the American press try so hard to conceal.

We are more likely to strike N.Korea than they us. The US has been promoting this idea to S. Korea at least since 1988. It is a matter of record since 1994. The S.Koreans do not support our military threats toward N.Korea. We are the promotors of pre-emptive war. We have convincingly demonstrated our intent and capability to conduct pre-emptive war. N.Korean bombast is desperate bluffing by comparison. Hence, its absurdity.

They are scared and have reason to be scared because of our past performance and threats. Fear is essence of their rule. N.Koreans are inculcated with fear of American bombers from childhood. This is how they justify their dictatorship and hermit policies. We leveled the entire peninsula after Yuk i o te. We nourish and reinforce that fear and provide the dictatorship with its "anti imperialist justification" with every threat we make.

If we quit playing the role of bully and complied with the agreed framework, restarted wheat shipments, and supported S.Korean unification policies instead of scheming to undermine them at every turn, the N.Korean dictatorship would dissolve within 24 months as S.Korea's businessmen cut deals and take over their country. But then of course, we'd have no reason to be in Korea at all. The economic and humanitarian crisis in N.Korea is an opportunity to change the regime but not in the way neo con militarists think.

[whoYaCallinAlib]

14. Based on your premise . . . US would have no choice but to

hit North Korea as hard as they could. There is no alternative but to fight to the death if the North invaded the South. I don't see thermonuclear war, at least not right away. We would try to defeat the N. Koreans with conventional weapons first.

[Muddleoftheroad]

15. Those U.S. troops

Do you honestly think any U.S. president would just let thousands of American troops be wiped out without doing anything to stop it? Conventional war would take too long to get people there.

[Avatar13]

20. Conventional weapons or not...

Whatever response the US decides to take will determine the geopolitical balance in East Asia, wrt China, especially concerning Taiwan. Anything short of the complete occupation of DPRK (a la Iraq, but maybe with UN involvement) will embolden China to reassert its influence elsewhere, and will test the mettle of the American military presence within East Asia, albeit under more uncertain and unpredictable circumstances.

Didn't Brzezinski talk about some of this stuff in the Grand Chessboard?

[MaverickX]

16. I'm guessing we'd .....

Send bombers to North Korea before we tried to use ground troops for an invasion. Invasion of North Korea by ground troops wouldn't be a goal I can guarantee. But with Rumsfeld who the hell knows.

[incontrovertible]

17. It wouldn't be bombers

Unless you're talking about an Aurora-class orbital bomber, I wouldn't think so. I'd guess there's at least a half-dozen Trident-class submarines trolling the Sea of Japan at any time, within one-minute's missile trip of Pyongyang.

Sorry, folks, I know it's a dismal subject, but, really, it'd mean nuclear war. Like, right now. Wouldn't matter if it were Bush, Gore, Dean, Clinton, Jimmy Carter or anydamnbody else in the White House. The U.S. isn't getting overrun on the Peninsula, period. It is not happening.

[NNN0LHI]

19. Don't think there will be an American troop presence there much longer

http://216.239.51.104/search?q=cache:I0KCvqpMqqQJ:www.dailysouthtown.com/southtown/dsnews/061nd5.htm+us+pulls+back+for+korean+dmz&hl=en&ie=UTF-8

U.S. pulls troops out of the Korean Demilitarized Zone

Friday, June 6, 2003

By Robert Burns
The Associated Press

WASHINGTON — In a historic move after a half-century, the United States will pull its ground troops away from the Demilitarized Zone separating North and South Korea and consolidate them at bases well to the south.

The realignment, announced in a joint U.S.-South Korean statement Thursday, has been in the works for months. It reflects Defense Secretary Donald H. Rumsfeld's push to break a Cold War mold of assumptions about the usefulness of having troops along the tense DMZ.

The moves in Korea are part of a broader Pentagon strategy to realign U.S. forces around the globe, to include likely reductions in Germany and the establishment of new bases in eastern Europe. Last month the United States pulled its troops out of Saudi Arabia after a 12-year stay.

In Rumsfeld's view, moving U.S. troops away from the DMZ and consolidating them at perhaps two main "hub" bases south of Seoul will create a more formidable fighting force. It will not remove the troops from danger, and in Rumsfeld's view it does not weaken the U.S. deterrent at a time when communist North Korea is openly pursuing an expanded nuclear arsenal.

The United States has assured South Korea it will spend more than $11 billion over the next four years on 150 improvements in the combined U.S.-South Korean defenses. No details were provided.

more

[ScotTissue]

21. Correct

This would be the Navy's war. And what the Navy offers isn't boots on the ground, it's the biggest ordinance you ever saw in your life. I hope this fact is plain to Mr. Kim Jong Il.

[NNN0LHI]

22. Heck yes, Kim Jong Il knows it

That is why he expelled the UN weapons inspectors last year and removed the UN inspection cameras from inside their facilities. For the past eight months N. Korea has been trying to build nuclear weapons just as fast as they can. How good are they at it? How many have they produced, if any? Our government probably knows. But we don't. If and when they test one we will know that they have plenty.

Don

[jagguy]

18. between China and the Navy...

... this would be over rather quickly.

This is far more significant to China than to us.

But the chances of it coming to pass are about as likely as my dog becoming smart.

[maine_raptor]

24. I agree, but not with the chances.

An invasion of the South by the North (and in spite of how "bloodthursty" some might think the miltary is, going North is NOT in the offing) would mean, at second best, a VERY short conventional war folowed by a nuke one. At worst, it could be "all-out", cause China is not going to be pleased with a bunch of nukes going off next door.

Then there is the distinct possibilty that China would step in on our side and it would be over before the nukes started flying. Best of all scenarios.

But as to the chances of the whole thing actually cooking off, it might seem unlikely, but I'll always remember the Austrian diplomat who was asked how WWI started and replied; "Ach, if only we knew".

[jfkennedy]

25. The US will do nothing

The Republicans already have plans to let North Korea take over South korea. The US has no support around the world. Bush does not have the courage to take on China. China will say if you fight the North Koreans there will be nuclear War.

Then even if Bush gets elected out of office, the Republicans will sell Nuclear technology to North Korea win win for the Republicans.

[Muddleoftheroad]

26. Wrong

If * does nothing in event of a North Korean attack, thousands of American soldiers die. He would be impeached by his own party. We wouldn't even have to do anything. His ass would be gone soooooooo fast, it would break the sound barrier leaving D.C.

Look, say what you want about the Republicans, but they wouldn't just walk away and let 37,000 U.S. soldiers be killed.