Jump to content
  • Announcements

    • Battlefront.com

      Special Upgrade 4 Tech Tips   12/27/2016

      Hi all! Now that Upgrade 4 is out and about in large quantities we have now discovered a few SNAFUs that happen out in the scary, real world that is home computing.  Fortunately the rate of problems is extremely small and so far most are easily worked around.  We've identified a few issues that have similar causes which we have clear instructions for work arounds here they are: 1.  CMRT Windows customers need to re-license their original key.  This is a result of improvements to the licensing system which CMBN, CMBS, and CMFB are already using.  To do this launch CMRT with the Upgrade and the first time enter your Engine 4 key.  Exit and then use the "Activate New Products" shortcut in your CMRT folder, then enter your Engine 3 license key.  That should do the trick. 2.  CMRT and CMBN MacOS customers have a similar situation as #2, however the "Activate New Products" is inside the Documents folder in their respective CM folders.  For CMBN you have to go through the process described above for each of your license keys.  There is no special order to follow. 3.  For CMBS and CMFB customers, you need to use the Activate New Products shortcut and enter your Upgrade 4 key.  If you launch the game and see a screen that says "LICENSE FAILURE: Base Game 4.0 is required." that is an indication you haven't yet gone through that procedure.  Provided you had a properly functioning copy before installing the Upgrade, that should be all you need to do.  If in the future you have to install from scratch on a new system you'll need to do the same procedure for both your original license key and your Upgrade 4.0 key. 4.  There's always a weird one and here it is.  A few Windows users are not getting "Activate New Products" shortcuts created during installation.  Apparently anti-virus software is preventing the installer from doing its job.  This might not be a problem right now, but it will prove to be an issue at some point in the future.  The solution is to create your own shortcut using the following steps: Disable your anti-virus software before you do anything. Go to your Desktop, right click on the Desktop itself, select NEW->SHORTCUT, use BROWSE to locate the CM EXE that you are trying to fix. The location is then written out. After it type in a single space and then paste this:

      -showui

      Click NEXT and give your new Shortcut a name (doesn't matter what). Confirm that and you're done. Double click on the new Shortcut and you should be prompted to license whatever it is you need to license. At this time we have not identified any issues that have not been worked around.  Let's hope it stays that way Steve
    • Battlefront.com

      Forum Reorganization   10/12/2017

      We've reorganized our Combat Mission Forums to reflect the fact that most of you are now running Engine 4 and that means you're all using the same basic code.  Because of that, there's no good reason to have the discussion about Combat Mission spread out over 5 separate sets of Forums.  There is now one General Discussion area with Tech Support and Scenario/Mod Tips sub forums.  The Family specific Tech Support Forums have been moved to a new CM2 Archives area and frozen in place. You might also notice we dropped the "x" from distinguishing between the first generation of CM games and the second.  The "x" was reluctantly adopted back in 2005 or so because at the time we had the original three CM games on European store shelves entitled CM1, CM2, and CM3 (CMBO, CMBB, and CMAK).  We didn't want to cause confusion so we added the "x".  Time has moved on and we have to, so the "x" is now gone from our public vocabulary as it has been from our private vocabulary for quite a while already.  Side note, Charles *NEVER* used the "x" so now we're all speaking the same language as him.  Which is important since he is the one programming them
exsonic01

Next Korean war is coming close...

Recommended Posts

Posted (edited)

https://mobile.nytimes.com/2018/02/28/world/asia/us-north-korea-military-war-planning.html?referer=

It is nothing new that this administration is preparing war against DPRK, but I think it is closing really fast. I think this really might happen before this summer. IMO, Kim will never give up nuke, Kim already saw what happened to Gaddafi after he declared denuclearization of Lybia, and Kim is watching what is happening in Syria. For Kim, nuke is a solid insurance for his regime, and can be used as a leverage to increase his influence over RoK.

Kim's best plan and intention is reduce the US influence over RoK one by one, little by little. Then, he will try to exploit the advantage of left-wing parties in RoK, which are very pro-DPRK and pro-PRC. During this process, nuke will prevents the intervention from US or Japan or any other western allies. So, I think Kim will not gonna want to give up nuke. 

I'm still worrying about the intervention from PRC. PRC will never allow the unified-Korea as a democratic nation, right in front of their capitol city Beijing. Beijing is placed right beside the ocean. If RoK and US defeats DPRK, then the control over Yellow sea will be given to RoK-US fleet, and Beijing is not that far away from Yellow sea. PRC will do anything to prevent that, as much as possible. Plus, Xi is trying to abolish the term limitation for his position, i.e. he is trying to become a dictator, saying "Chinese value that Westerns will never gonna understand". Emergence of unified Korea as a democratic nation will be burden for Xi's regime. 

IMO PRC will try to secretly support DPRK, but not sure how much. PRC will not gonna want to fight against US army directly, but they don't want unified Korea. So, they will try to do something. 

 

 

Edited by exsonic01

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted (edited)

Even if the US was committed to launching a war against the DPRK, it isn't gonna happen off 3 months of mobilization.  Not to mention S Korea will not back a war.  Without them it is pretty much saber rattling.  Any attempt to launch it on our own would be a political disaster.  Likely before the US got close S Korea would demand all US troops leave.

Edited by sburke

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted (edited)
11 hours ago, sburke said:

Even if the US was committed to launching a war against the DPRK, it isn't gonna happen off 3 months of mobilization.  Not to mention S Korea will not back a war.  Without them it is pretty much saber rattling.  Any attempt to launch it on our own would be a political disaster.  Likely before the US got close S Korea would demand all US troops leave.

Good point, but I have a bit different opinion. 

Yes, current RoK leadership and cabinet are consist of left-wing figures, from moderate to extreme, most of them are originated from student activist organization like 'liberation front'. And yes, the position of current RoK is they don't want the war.

However, if US decided to go on war, can RoK veto that decision? I don't think so, such decision from RoK will bring fundamental change of US-RoK relationship, and RoK will be regarded as 'PRC-side' or 'Russian-side', off from conventional 'western ally list'. This will be huge political burden, even for the left wing RoK president. Mr. Trump is very serious right now towards the DPRK, and he is kinda person who doesn't care about traditional alliance or any form of "old community", so such decision will bring destructive consequences in RoK economy, considering the RoK - US trade (both import and export) takes major part of RoK economic portfolio. I don't think the current RoK leadership has huge balls to attempt such a dangerous gambling. 

On the other side, there's nothing to lose for US and Trump. US has Japan instead, and can strike DPRK key points from safe distance. Of course air strike will be less effective when compared to air-land battle with ground forces, but still, at least US still can do something despite of denial from RoK. 

Edited by exsonic01

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
19 hours ago, Sgt.Squarehead said:

It won't end well.  :mellow:

Indeed, Kim will not gonna give up nuke, and Trump will not gonna allow that, it is kinda obvious and inevitable..... 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, exsonic01 said:

Good point, but I have a bit different opinion. 

Yes, current RoK leadership and cabinet are consist of left-wing figures, from moderate to extreme, most of them are originated from student activist organization like 'liberation front'. And yes, the position of current RoK is they don't want the war.

However, if US decided to go on war, can RoK veto that decision? I don't think so, such decision from RoK will bring fundamental change of US-RoK relationship, and RoK will be regarded as 'PRC-side' or 'Russian-side', off from conventional 'western ally list'. This will be huge political burden, even for the left wing RoK president. Mr. Trump is very serious right now towards the DPRK, and he is kinda person who doesn't care about traditional alliance or any form of "old community", so such decision will bring destructive consequences in RoK economy, considering the RoK - US trade (both import and export) takes major part of RoK economic portfolio. I don't think the current RoK leadership has huge balls to attempt such a dangerous gambling. 

On the other side, there's nothing to lose for US and Trump. US has Japan instead, and can strike DPRK key points from safe distance. Of course air strike will be less effective when compared to air-land battle with ground forces, but still, at least US still can do something despite of denial from RoK. 

War is logistics and the US trying to wage a war on the peninsula without S Korea is highly unlikely. There are millions of S Korean lives at stake. It is the US that is risking the relationship by trying to unilaterallly push a war, not S Korea. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted (edited)
6 hours ago, sburke said:

War is logistics and the US trying to wage a war on the peninsula without S Korea is highly unlikely. There are millions of S Korean lives at stake. It is the US that is risking the relationship by trying to unilaterallly push a war, not S Korea. 

Like I said, there is Japan right beside the Korea with much more ammunition and fuel storage and logistics, and current US readiness and ability is capable of pursuing such operations over Korean peninsula regardless of RoK support. 

His video has some limitations, but still, IMO it is very detailed and reasonable expectation on US-DPRK war, better than any other youtubes. Again, I'm not saying this video is entirely and absolutely true. But one thing I wish to point is that, for US forces, RoK support would be great if it is possible, but it is not like "absolute necessary requirement" for the operations against DPRK and PLA targets. 

Like I mentioned above, RoK can deny the decision against US but that will be also big political and economical burden to RoK leadership. US and RoK agreed mutual defense treaty and RoK survived thanks to US/UN support, and now RoK refuse to break DPRK? That doesn't make sense.  

Yes, I agree that the war will be very ugly and bloody, and Seoul is too close from border. But regardless of all those gloomy expectations, I think we are really serious right now this time, and IMO this administration will never allow nuke on DPRK, while Kim will probably never give up the nuke option. To me, it is kinda inevitable regardless of RoK's opinion..... 

US is already building up reasons and justifications, mentioning human rights, defectors, and chemical weapons to Syria, and etc... We will see what will going to happen, but I think it is coming, fast. 

 

Edited by exsonic01

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted (edited)

well none of us really knows, but the idea of the US trying to launch an attack where we admittedly are not going to be able to stop N Korea from causing a huge number of casualties puts the US in a bind.  Is it legitimate for the US to launch an attack because N Korea could possibly launch a missile at the US knowing that attack will likely cause untold suffering in S Korea?  I think what you would find is the US extremely isolated and without allies as the thought that they could be sacrificed to prevent a possible attack against the US just isn't going to go over well.  So is the US prepared to be that isolated internationally for this?

I don't think war is inevitable.  What I do think is inevitable is the US has to realize we do not have a military option to solve this situation.  But what the hell do I know.... :P Hell I couldn't even figure out how to get rid of Bermuda grass.  Ended up ripping up my entire backyard and building my own wall to stop it...and Mexico won't pay for it.

Oh and for what it is worth.  I find it really really hard to take geopolitical information and strategy from a hand puppet... just saying.

Edited by sburke

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted (edited)
37 minutes ago, sburke said:

well none of us really knows, but the idea of the US trying to launch an attack where we admittedly are not going to be able to stop N Korea from causing a huge number of casualties puts the US in a bind.  Is it legitimate for the US to launch an attack because N Korea could possibly launch a missile at the US knowing that attack will likely cause untold suffering in S Korea?  I think what you would find is the US extremely isolated and without allies as the thought that they could be sacrificed to prevent a possible attack against the US just isn't going to go over well.  So is the US prepared to be that isolated internationally for this?

I don't think war is inevitable.  What I do think is inevitable is the US has to realize we do not have a military option to solve this situation.  But what the hell do I know.... :P Hell I couldn't even figure out how to get rid of Bermuda grass.  Ended up ripping up my entire backyard and building my own wall to stop it...and Mexico won't pay for it.

It is about nuke, proliferation of nuclear weapons, more precisely. If DPRK has nuke, then RoK will have it, Japan will have it, Taiwan will try to get one and PRC will never going to happy about that. DPRK nuke will be very likely to spread out to Syria, which will bring nuke build up from Saudi and Israel, and Turkey will try to have a nuke. Then, Europeans will not gonna happy about that situation. DPRK already supported pilots, weapons, ammunition, and advisory group and instructors to Syria. Why not nuke to Syria if they have one? Everyone knows DPRK is crazy country, and everyone knows what could possibly happen if they have nuke in their hand. This is why we don't want the nuke on DPRK and why almost every UN nations agreed with sanctions against DPRK. And this is why I think the attack will not gonna isolate us. UK, Austrailia, and Japan already declared support to US when we attempt maritime interdiction and even naval blockade. Whether Mr Trump wants it or not, he will be forced to choose, soon. 

Do you think are there any other option? I don't think Kim will give up nuke, after he watched the fall of Gaddafi and Sadam, and all those mess in Syria. I'm skeptic about talks, so many sanctions, supports, and talks were done but DPRK ignored all of them. They just used peace talks as a mean to earn time and money. I don't think any more talks will gonna work in here, they will eventually get nuke, just like they did in last 20 years. Peace talks should've been worked 10 years ago and 20 years ago, if the talks really works against DPRK, but no it didn't. 

That is why I think it is coming close. I wish I'm wrong, but to me, I think it is kinda inevitable... 

 

Edited by exsonic01

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Sounds like a rehashing of the domino theory. Trump has already gone on record suggesting support for a nuclear arms race in Asia with Japan and S Korea having that capability so that kind of undermines the proliferation argument.

Regarding our support vs N Korea,  it is one thing to call for an economic blockade, it is quite another to support a war.  I fail to understand how an almost guaranteed catastrophe for S Korea (Seoul is a city of 10 million people) is balanced out by protecting the US from a possible but highly unlikely DPRK nuke strike on the US.  I doubt many other countries will see that either especially if S Korea starts saying hold on here we have millions of civilians at risk right now and the US has no answer as to how to prevent that.

The US is in position to enforce a sea blockade of N Korea, what is it like 33 ships we know about that we have to contain (only 19 of which are actually N Korean flagged)?  That would have significant impact and force Russia and China's hands on the sanctions that they supposedly support.  The only retaliatory action N Korea has is to attack S Korea, but that is also their only ace in the hole.  If they play that card then all bets are off and S Korea would not only support a US attack, they would probably be all in leading the charge.

However that only works if we continue to push on the sanctions and blockade side. Only those who ignore the human catastrophe that could unfold keep pushing for war.

This on the other hand is what sane people say.

U.S. Secretary of Defense James Mattis says that war with North Korea -- should tensions ever come to that -- would be "catastrophic."

"A conflict in North Korea, John, would be probably the worst kind of fighting in most people's lifetimes," Mattis told CBS News' "Face the Nation" host John Dickerson in his first official interview as defense secretary.

The North Korean regime has hundreds of artillery cannons and rocket launchers within range of one of the most densely populated cities on Earth -- Seoul, the capital of South Korea, Mattis said.

North Korea is a threat to the surrounding region, including Japan, China and Russia, he said.

"But the bottom line is it would be a catastrophic war if this turns into a combat if we're not able to resolve this situation through diplomatic means," Mattis said.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted (edited)

 

36 minutes ago, sburke said:

Sounds like a rehashing of the domino theory. Trump has already gone on record suggesting support for a nuclear arms race in Asia with Japan and S Korea having that capability so that kind of undermines the proliferation argument.

Regarding our support vs N Korea,  it is one thing to call for an economic blockade, it is quite another to support a war.  I fail to understand how an almost guaranteed catastrophe for S Korea (Seoul is a city of 10 million people) is balanced out by protecting the US from a possible but highly unlikely DPRK nuke strike on the US.  I doubt many other countries will see that either especially if S Korea starts saying hold on here we have millions of civilians at risk right now and the US has no answer as to how to prevent that.

The US is in position to enforce a sea blockade of N Korea, what is it like 33 ships we know about that we have to contain (only 19 of which are actually N Korean flagged)?  That would have significant impact and force Russia and China's hands on the sanctions that they supposedly support.  The only retaliatory action N Korea has is to attack S Korea, but that is also their only ace in the hole.  If they play that card then all bets are off and S Korea would not only support a US attack, they would probably be all in leading the charge.

However that only works if we continue to push on the sanctions and blockade side. Only those who ignore the human catastrophe that could unfold keep pushing for war.

This on the other hand is what sane people say.

U.S. Secretary of Defense James Mattis says that war with North Korea -- should tensions ever come to that -- would be "catastrophic."

"A conflict in North Korea, John, would be probably the worst kind of fighting in most people's lifetimes," Mattis told CBS News' "Face the Nation" host John Dickerson in his first official interview as defense secretary.

The North Korean regime has hundreds of artillery cannons and rocket launchers within range of one of the most densely populated cities on Earth -- Seoul, the capital of South Korea, Mattis said.

North Korea is a threat to the surrounding region, including Japan, China and Russia, he said.

"But the bottom line is it would be a catastrophic war if this turns into a combat if we're not able to resolve this situation through diplomatic means," Mattis said.

This is not a same domino theory. Is the DPRK and Kim's regime trustwothy party like Soviet Union or PRC? No, not at all. Nuke on DPRK is totally different story, since they cannot be trusted at all.

What do you think Kim will going to do after he get the nuke? He will spread it to Syria and make all the trouble around the region, and he will try to use nuke to increase the influence over RoK. He will attempt to use the nuke as a leverage to threaten RoK, to get significant amount of financial and logistic support from RoK. And then? after he recover the readiness of his forces then he will ask more, and more to RoK. Sorry for Koreans, and you would be surprised but even myself is half Korean, but for RoK, they don't have that much choice in this situation. Once DPRK successfully develops a nuke, the fate of RoK will be slowly but firmly diminished. Whether they like it or not, DPRK nuke should be removed whenever it is possible even for the sake of Koreans. And this will be significant direct threat to Japan and Austrailia, not only this will ignite nuclear race again, worldwide scale. 

I'm skeptical about the blockades, after watching of secret Russian and PRC support to DPRK 

http://www.newsweek.com/north-korea-covertly-given-illicit-cargo-six-chinese-ships-and-us-caught-it-784929

https://www.reuters.com/article/us-northkorea-missiles-russia-analysis/russia-throws-north-korea-lifeline-to-stymie-regime-change-idUSKBN1C91X2

Especially PRC. Like I mentioned in first post, PRC will never allow unified Korea as democratic nation because of clear strategical reason. They will never going to join blockade, or they will act like they are doing something, but they will secretly support DPRK anyway by any means, like they've done after UN sanctions for last several months. Maybe, they will try secret tunnel next time to support DPRK. 

Regarding the lethality of next Korean war, I couldn't agree more, Kim will throw chemicals and virus and anything he has to densely populated area. But all those situations and movements around Korea right now are heading to the ciritical point, whether we like it or not. Time will tell us what will going to happen. 

 

Edited by exsonic01

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

well you seem pretty set in your view and  unfortunately I can't say I feel convinced by your arguments.  DPRK conventional and potential chemical attack is more than enough leverage on S Korea.  Anyway, like I said before and as you noted time will tell.  I do agree things are heading to a critical point, whether that critical point is war or a diplomatic solution of some sort remains to be seen, but I am hoping cooler heads prevail.

I don't disagree about relying on PRC and Russia hence my feeling that we need to do something about those ships.  Hard for PRC and Russia to contribute to smuggling if we intercept, board and seize the N Korea ships they are meeting.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted (edited)
24 minutes ago, sburke said:

well you seem pretty set in your view and  unfortunately I can't say I feel convinced by your arguments.  DPRK conventional and potential chemical attack is more than enough leverage on S Korea.  Anyway, like I said before and as you noted time will tell.  I do agree things are heading to a critical point, whether that critical point is war or a diplomatic solution of some sort remains to be seen, but I am hoping cooler heads prevail.

I don't disagree about relying on PRC and Russia hence my feeling that we need to do something about those ships.  Hard for PRC and Russia to contribute to smuggling if we intercept, board and seize the N Korea ships they are meeting.

Because the effect of weaponized nuke will be significantly destructive then chemical attack... Missile is not the only the nuclear concern for RoK, 

http://www.independent.co.uk/news/world/asia/north-korea-news-latest-soldiers-nuclear-backpacks-kim-jong-un-tensions-us-south-korean-military-a7217401.html

This is the most problematic threat to RoK. What if Kim threatens to detonate 20 sleeping agents in big cities with nuke back pack in the future, after he successfully minimized nukes? The chance for such events are really small right now, DPRK's technological capability is not even close to such minimization of weaponized nuclear device. But, still, it is possible in the future, if they get what they want. With the nuke in one hand, he will ask more, and more, and more to RoK and try to increase their influence over RoK, and will try to decrease the US influence over RoK, slowly but steadily. The merit of dictatorship is that they can make really really long term plan, ahead of 20 years or so. 

Virus and chemicals are deadly as well, but potential risk from nuke is much much worse, like order of magnitude different level.. That is why nuke will definitely work as a leverage to threaten RoK. 

Do Russia and PRC will agree to board and investigate their ships form us on international water? I don't think so. Even if they allow such action and they agree with the blockade, like I said, they will find another way to help DPRK. 

I really wish something magical happens, but magics only appear on fantasy... I dunno, maybe I'm missing something but to me it is clear that all those indications are directing one possible outcome, the one very deadly and bloody... I really don't want to see that as well. 

Edited by exsonic01

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Not sure, but it very well may be we attack S Korea first.....

WASHINGTON — The White House said Monday that Donald Trump had been referring to a call with South Korea's leader when he appeared to suggest a landmark direct contact with the nuclear North.

Trump raised eyebrows at a Washington media dinner on Saturday when he said "they, by the way, called up a couple of days ago and said 'we would like to talk.'

"And I said, 'so would we, but you have to de-nuke, you have to de-nuke,'" Trump added.

A senior administration official, speaking on condition of anonymity, told AFP that Trump had in fact been referencing a call he had on Thursday with South Korean President Moon Jae-in.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted (edited)
1 hour ago, sburke said:

Not sure, but it very well may be we attack S Korea first.....

WASHINGTON — The White House said Monday that Donald Trump had been referring to a call with South Korea's leader when he appeared to suggest a landmark direct contact with the nuclear North.

Trump raised eyebrows at a Washington media dinner on Saturday when he said "they, by the way, called up a couple of days ago and said 'we would like to talk.'

"And I said, 'so would we, but you have to de-nuke, you have to de-nuke,'" Trump added.

A senior administration official, speaking on condition of anonymity, told AFP that Trump had in fact been referencing a call he had on Thursday with South Korean President Moon Jae-in.

Let's see what will going to happen, but again, I already mentioned that I'm very skeptical about it, and it is not only me that thinks in that way. How many talks have been done since 1990s when the first DPRK nuke attempt was detected, and see what happened now? Whatever sanctions we pushed or supports we provided, they just proceed their plan (with the help from PRC, Russia, and Iran). They think we are fool. How many more times are needed to for you to be satisfied? How many times do you think we are OK to be fooled? 100 times more?  

Are you sure that Kim's regime will follow the agreements and promises? Whatever promises and agreements we had since 1990s, Kim's family just pushed missile and nuke program whatever they promised. I don't think talks will going to work to denuclearize DPRK. Kim will send the peaceful gesture, saying he is willing to give up nukes, but I bet Kim will never agree to full scale inspection, and he will try to secretly continue their nuke program. It is not the first time they lied and did something similar to us, they already did this during Clinton and Bush. Honestly, I personally believe that anyone who claims the talk will going to work is very naive or fool or spy. If Kim will accept unconditional denuclearization and full scale inspection over entire nuke facility after the talk, I will be really surprised, but that is the miracle we (including me) are looking for. I really do wish the miracle, but realistically, I don't think Kim will give up nuke. 

Regarding RoK president Moon, like I mentioned above, the current RoK leadership and cabinet are more or less lefty position and have pro-DPRK / pro-PRC tendency, all of them are originated from radical left organization like 'national university student front' or 'liberation movement' when they were young. Some of them sneak into DPRK and meet Kim il sung to support and praise Kim's regime during their 20s. Because of that, I'm very dubious about current RoK leadership's intention over 'peace talks' since they are willing to support DPRK regardless of UN sanctions. 

Those are reasons why I'm not that positive to talks. I'm just crossing my fingers. 

 

Edited by exsonic01

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
13 hours ago, exsonic01 said:

Those are reasons why I'm not that positive to talks. I'm just crossing my fingers.

Oh for sure. The NK regime is just playing for time and looking for opportunities to put a wedge between the SK government and the US government. Both governments should avoid letting them. I don't see that changing. The issue I have with your prediction is that any time a US admin might think about being preemptive they have to think about the casualties the SK will suffer. I honestly don't see how it can be justified without a provocation from NK first. Of course that could happen because Kim has little to no regard for his people or anyone else's for that matter. I just don't see the US going unilaterally without some kind of provocation first. Granted what level of provocation might be needed could vary as time goes along.

I honestly think the most likely path forward is for this stalemate to continue - possibly even for decades.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I see an almost zero chance of the US acting unilaterally against the DPRK without the RoKs full cooperation. The entire air/ land battle strategy for the peninsula is based on the RoK and US militaries along with our other allies in the region to act in concert. One US division plus air support isn't going to win on it's own.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted (edited)

 

5 hours ago, IanL said:

Oh for sure. The NK regime is just playing for time and looking for opportunities to put a wedge between the SK government and the US government. Both governments should avoid letting them. I don't see that changing. The issue I have with your prediction is that any time a US admin might think about being preemptive they have to think about the casualties the SK will suffer. I honestly don't see how it can be justified without a provocation from NK first. Of course that could happen because Kim has little to no regard for his people or anyone else's for that matter. I just don't see the US going unilaterally without some kind of provocation first. Granted what level of provocation might be needed could vary as time goes along.

I honestly think the most likely path forward is for this stalemate to continue - possibly even for decades.

Good point, but I also don't know when, or what kind of DPRK action, is the last red line which will initiate the serious reaction from US-RoK. I think current US planners are considering any reliable signal / image detection of DPRK nuke activity or long range missile activity, or detection of evidence of serious level of imminent nuke test from DPRK, or detection of evidence of DPRK's will to continue the weaponize nuke plan as the moment for the intervention, but that is just truly and purely my thinking. No one may know for sure about this point, isn't it? But several newspapers already mentioned that preemptive strike is also one of the options. It is not like we will never going to attempt the preemptive strike, but the key is what will cause that. 

News says that RoK and DPRK leaders are agreed to have head to head meeting in April. We will see where those events will going to lead us. This can be a beginning of miracle which leads the total denuclearization from DPRK, but IMO this is just another show to bring fake hope and earn more time for Kim's regime. I really do wish the miracle, but history already taught us that when it comes to DPRK, this kind of peace talks or stalemate just earn more time for Kim. Time is their side, and they will not just going to sit and rest during 'peaceful time', they will slowly and secretly try whatever they can do to achieve some level of nuclear capability.  

https://www.reuters.com/article/us-northkorea-missiles-southkorea/trump-sees-possible-progress-in-north-korea-denuclearization-idUSKBN1GH3BX

Well, it is good to read that we are not that naive like we did before, and we already detected the indication of plutonium production. See, they will not give up. But I still wish to see the miracle despite of very low chance.

Edited by exsonic01

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted (edited)
1 hour ago, Splinty said:

I see an almost zero chance of the US acting unilaterally against the DPRK without the RoKs full cooperation. The entire air/ land battle strategy for the peninsula is based on the RoK and US militaries along with our other allies in the region to act in concert. One US division plus air support isn't going to win on it's own.

I agree that any direct action against DPRK will be greatly hindered or at least being far less effective if we don't get full RoK support. But still, such scenario is still possible and planned as well. And if RoK denies the full cooperation at the moment of action, then that will be also a political and economical burden for RoK leadership as well. 

Key is the PRC intervention, and how much they will intervene. If PLA does not support KPA then chance of success will be increased. But IMO PLA will intervene in one way or another, in that case any operations will be really tough. Another aspect is the how much Japan and any other allies can support US. Well, good time to play CMANO for myself :)

Edited by exsonic01

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Probably best strategy is to threaten Chinese interests and let them take care of NK.  eg: Trade War and withdrawal of US biz interests in China.  The additional benefit is dealing with Chinese expansionism into S. China Sea (and other places like Africa, S. America and current incursions vs Bhutan and India etc) at same time.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted (edited)
On 3/6/2018 at 6:58 PM, Erwin said:

Probably best strategy is to threaten Chinese interests and let them take care of NK.  eg: Trade War and withdrawal of US biz interests in China.  The additional benefit is dealing with Chinese expansionism into S. China Sea (and other places like Africa, S. America and current incursions vs Bhutan and India etc) at same time.

That is also a good point, and I think it is already going on, isn't it? (I mean the trade war) We'll see what will going to happen. But I don't think PRC will 'take care of' DPRK, they are in the same boat, PRC will try to save Kim's regime. Or, they will make their puppet NK if Kim's regime fail. PRC has no intention to give up the control of northern part of Yellow sea. 

Edited by exsonic01

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

To put the NK-China situation in perspective one can think of it as nuclear Scotland vs England.  Or, maybe nuclear Luxembourg vs Germany.  Lots of things China can do, but they will have to be forced.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
20 hours ago, Erwin said:

To put the NK-China situation in perspective one can think of it as nuclear Scotland vs England.  Or, maybe nuclear Luxembourg vs Germany.  Lots of things China can do, but they will have to be forced.

Yes, that depends on how much we push PRC. But they will try secretly to support DPRK. Anyway, newspaper says that Mr Trump will meet Kim. I'm not sure whether it is a good idea or not. But I really do wish he get the full scale inspection and total denuclearization of DPRK, instead of getting fooled again. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now

×