Budget cuts in NATO module countries

[Waaarg]

A) SK can't move without us

If we overtly attack China we have no idea what they would do, but imho without any shooting, they can hurt us more and know it.

C) No one really understands NK, they have been indoctrinated like you couldn't believe. I have a video of NK 4 year old kids doing this dance for a delegation my parents were in, in NK. Anyone who has kids has seen a performance by 4 year olds. Theres always one digging his nose, one kid doing his own thing, and the rest butchering the song with zusto. This was something way way different. Every kid did the dance and song perfectly with this creepy prema-smile while a room full of military guys glared at em. Was off.

We don't understand the region at all. In all honesty I don't think Americans understand America. But bottom line is SK can't move without our permission, we can't move on NK without Chinese approval.

[Michael Emrys]

First every month the NK regime continues to exist we sell the South a nice battery of Pershing 2s complete with nukes.

Unless you have definite knowledge to the contrary, all the Pershings were destroyed over nine years ago. There are none left to sell to SK.

Michael

[dan/california]

I was exaggerating for effect, just a little. But the fact remains that the Chinese do NOT want nuclear armed neighbors other than their little pet. A very frank conversation about how quickly they could have said neighbors might focus their minds a bit. And most of the economic levers at their disposal would push the dollar down, which is what the Fed is trying to do as we speak. Their threating to help is less than intimidating.

[Michael Emrys]

I was exaggerating for effect, just a little.

In any event, I don't think Washington wants any additional nuclear weapons outside of its direct control, not even in the hands of its nominal allies. For instance, after WW II they refused to help the UK develop its own bomb, even though British scientists had worked on the Manhattan Project.

Michael

[Sivodsi]

Im all for a preemtive strike right now,

If you let the DPRK sink your warships and bombard your towns then that is pretty much a fail, whatever rationale is behind it.

Easy for you guys to say, sitting back in your padded office chairs, watching it all go off on CNN, an ocean and a continent away from all the actual firing.

Seoul is within artillery range, and if the balloon goes up you can bet that it won't take long for the North's guns to open up. How many hundred thousands of civilians and billions of dollars of destruction are you ready to sacrifice?

Eventually the South and US forces will overcome the shoddy ill-equipped North Korean hordes, but you can bet that there are enough fanatics in the North with enough to lose that they won't go down without taking as many with them as possible.

This is without considering what a belligerent China would do in reaction. The border between North Korea and China is a lot easier to cross than the DMZ between North and South. They did it before in the Korean War, you can bet that they won't stand back if it all goes off again.

So yeah, a military response from South Korea is not likely, and if it happens it will be localized, but the North has always got less to lose than the South, and if they see themselves in a position of losing power domestically (as might happen in the upcoming transfer of leadership to Kim Jung-un), they might just escalate regardless.

What can be done to 'punish' North Korea that they aren't already doing?

As per above they can't take military action without risking everything.

They can't do much more in the way of sanctions. Going to the UN seems like a waste of time, with China refusing to censure NK.

One of the few things they could do would be to pull out of the Kaesong Industrial complex, but that might damage the SK commercial companies operating there more, and maybe the Chinese would move in (as what may happen at the Kumgangsan resort).

China are calling for 6 party talks, but that seems to have been ruled out by the 'lets not reward bad behaviour' school of thought.

Plain and simple, Lee Myung-bak is in a no-win position, just like he was after the Cheonan incident.

[ChrisND]

This is without considering what a belligerent China would do in reaction. The border between North Korea and China is a lot easier to cross than the DMZ between North and South. They did it before in the Korean War, you can bet that they won't stand back if it all goes off again.

China wouldn't get involved militarily. Why would they, what do they have to gain compared to what they would have to lose? This isn't the same China or world situation as 1950.

[Sivodsi]

China wouldn't get involved militarily. Why would they, what do they have to gain compared to what they would have to lose? This isn't the same China or world situation as 1950.

They have 1.3 bn angry Chinese to distract from local concerns they may have about corrupt governance and their elites ripping them off.

At the same time Chinese have deep national pride at their growing status in the world, and even feel that it is their right to be world leaders, as they have been for several millennia in world history. I have had enough dealings with Chinese and experiences in China to know that they don't have a sense of humor over such matters.

It doesn't take much to get a few thousand Chinese throwing stones at the US embassy or rioting against Japanese businesses. You only have to look at how prickly they are over territorial and other matters that affect their 'national interest'. For example, the recent confrontation over the disputed Senkaku islands with Japan, and their reaction to the recent noble prize by Liu Xiaobo. They are even protesting US and SK naval maneuvers in the Yellow sea, which they regard as rightfully theirs.

The Chinese are a rising new power, and overly sensitive and defensive about their position. You don't have to look far into history to see parallels to a time when there was another brash new power on the scene, say just as far back as a newly reunited Germany under Wilhelm II, looking for 'their place in the sun'.

Of course its not the same situation, but its enough to make me nervous about the destabilizing effects of a rising national power.

[Waaarg]

Chinese reaction to our going in Iraq style to NK could not be anticipated ahead of time. And any type of deployment would be see as the first shot by NK. It would be messy from jump street.

The pulse I got back from the group that went to NK from the time they spent with brass and govt officials across the board was an attack by the west was immenent. Apparently there is always a new sign (there were members who had been in past delegations). The Neon sign of this trip was the Axis of Evil. The fact that worked in any way still makes me laugh.

Anyhow I am as biased towards the south as any American. I have family there, granted in-laws but still.....and I just don't see a win in any kind of way here for the south or the US short or long term.

IMHO we need to stop planning wars w.o Russia and China. They both have stakes in every potential war we have been looking at. Our current partners can't sustain the current conflicts.

[Dietrich]

To paraphrase Yogi Berra: "It's 'almost World War Three' all over again." =P

[MikeyD]

There's getting involved and 'getting involved'.

Remember Russian pilots flew against us in the 1950 Korean war though Russian was never an 'official' belligrerant. I could imagine N Korea's air defenses being mysteriously patched back together following the first week of fighting, or the U.S. having to contend with significantly more sophisticated anti-ship missiles than they were expecting, or Chinese air superiority fighters in N Korean markings doing combat sorties. Lets also consider Chinese strategy. China may not actually want either side to 'win' such a conflict, it would be in their greater strategic interest for the conflict to drag on and on and on, draining the resources of their global competitors. You see photos of Afghani Taliban soldiers and they're often carrying Chinese Army recoilless rifles on their shoulders.

[Lethaface]

According to the dutch newspaper 'depers.nl' South Korean forces actually fired shells directly on the disputed borderline in the Sea, which triggered the (mad) response from the North Koreans.

I'm curious as to the reason for having to practice shelling precisely this area, when even a child understands that there is a good chance this will provoke North Korea...

http://www.depers.nl/buitenland/526443/Propagandamachine-draait-volop.html

[Boche]

According to the dutch newspaper 'depers.nl' South Korean forces actually fired shells directly on the disputed borderline in the Sea, which triggered the (mad) response from the North Koreans.

I'm curious as to the reason for having to practice shelling precisely this area, when even a child understands that there is a good chance this will provoke North Korea...

http://www.depers.nl/buitenland/526443/Propagandamachine-draait-volop.html

well for one, if I wish to conduct military excercises in what is my own sea, i may

And two, SHOW OF FORCE! which is exactly what was done after the corvette sinking and what is going to happen with the George Washington.

[Sivodsi]

According to the dutch newspaper 'depers.nl' South Korean forces actually fired shells directly on the disputed borderline in the Sea, which triggered the (mad) response from the North Koreans.

I'm curious as to the reason for having to practice shelling precisely this area, when even a child understands that there is a good chance this will provoke North Korea...

http://www.depers.nl/buitenland/526443/Propagandamachine-draait-volop.html

SK sources say that they were conducting drills on their side of the border, and the live firing exercises were pointed west, not north.

I think the NKs were waiting to use something as an excuse.

[Lethaface]

Sivodsi, that is what I read before but this source claims differently (fired in opposite direction, NK send multiple faxes to protest and warn). Since this source is newer I thought this would be more accurate. They don't report where they got their claims from, but they insinuate it is not only (propaganda) from NK.

A show of force is pointless in this regard IMO, it is either blow it to smithereens or let it implode over time. NK isn't afraid to show force as they have shown. Quite a result the show of force got the SK in that case...

NK knows that invading SK is playing Russian roulette with a FMJ loaded AK47.

If I were SK and was interested in avoiding casualties, I would choose a smarter spot to conduct exercises. Just my opinion.

[Boche]

Sivodsi, that is what I read before but this source claims differently (fired in opposite direction, NK send multiple faxes to protest and warn). Since this source is newer I thought this would be more accurate. They don't report where they got their claims from, but they insinuate it is not only (propaganda) from NK.

A show of force is pointless in this regard IMO, it is either blow it to smithereens or let it implode over time. NK isn't afraid to show force as they have shown. Quite a result the show of force got the SK in that case...

NK knows that invading SK is playing Russian roulette with a FMJ loaded AK47.

If I were SK and was interested in avoiding casualties, I would choose a smarter spot to conduct exercises. Just my opinion.

a show of force persues one objective, to show the enemy what they are up against and deter them from atacking. do you think its better to do nothing?

"Hey they just shelled us, but lets do nothing, those mongrels will implode one of these years, yes yes!"

what the NK did wasnt a show of force, it was an attack, an act of war.

The south koreans arent interested in pissing off the north, all they want is to continue to prosper as a nation as they have done for the past 50 years. they wouldnt risk all the gained for a pity conflict with the north.

[Sivodsi]

Sivodsi, that is what I read before but this source claims differently (fired in opposite direction, NK send multiple faxes to protest and warn). Since this source is newer I thought this would be more accurate. They don't report where they got their claims from, but they insinuate it is not only (propaganda) from NK.

A show of force is pointless in this regard IMO, it is either blow it to smithereens or let it implode over time. NK isn't afraid to show force as they have shown. Quite a result the show of force got the SK in that case...

NK knows that invading SK is playing Russian roulette with a FMJ loaded AK47.

If I were SK and was interested in avoiding casualties, I would choose a smarter spot to conduct exercises. Just my opinion.

I've just read reports critical of the Southern reaction. They had 6 K-9 155mm SP guns on the island, of which 2 were being repaired, and they could not direct their fire onto the Korean positions, instead spraying their fire at barracks and other soft targets. Also, the NKs fired two salvos and questions are being asked about why ROK F16s couldn't hit the guns firing the second salvo. Read all about it here

The KoreanTtimes also claims that Jong-il himself okayed the decision to fire.

So if the naval drills were firing towards NK it was an extremely rash thing to do given how poorly prepared they evidently were. In no way could it be claimed that they were trying to provoke the NKs with the expectation of smashing whatever the NKs countered with.

What I would like to see is a map of where the ROK naval drills took place in relation to the island the NKs fired on.

[Boche]

I believe it was just south of the island in question. Or near that area

[Lethaface]

Just for clarification:

I understand that SK is doing a large naval exercise (~70.000) troops in the region later this month. Before the attack by NK they were doing an artillery test firing, of which there are ambiguous reports of were those test fires had taken place.

I'm not talking about the SK response to the NK's attack.

If it were true that SK had fired their practice rounds in the direction of NK and directly at the disputed border line, I find that quite appalling. While it might be SK's right to do this, according to international law it is SK's territory after all, I wonder what the bloody purpose is.

A small example:

Let's say I live in a country were you are legally allowed to let your dog **** on any pavement. Then if I have a psychopathic aggressive neighbor which hates dog****, would it be wise to let my dog **** on his side of the pavement, or the otherside?

I'm legally allowed to do both ways, but if I'm not after trouble i'll let the dog loose on the other side.

If I let my dog **** on his side of the house, just as a show of force, and then he kills my dog for which he can´t be convicted on grounds of insanity, it was a stupid show of force. I have basically only lost my dog (which is a loss), can't retaliate any further without risking the neighbor burns my house down and have gained nothing. Well, perhaps only I got some looks from the girl across the street who hates the man and is impressed by this show of force.

Point i'm trying to make is that, while I never believe NK propaganda, I also don't blindly believe reports from SK or US for that matter. There are some strange things going on around the area, it's a smelly mess. I wonder if NK is the only one that has farted.

Anyways, this is not a political forum so I digress.

R.I.P. to the fallen ones.

[Erwin]

"...I got some looks from the girl across the street who hates the man and is impressed by this show of force."

And there you have it... Pretty girl China maybe?

[Sivodsi]

The strategy page on the NK-ROK dilemma:

"What the North Koreans are saying to South Korea is "give us more food and oil or we will keep attacking you in the name of self-defense". North Korea is starving again, and the leadership (representing about ten percent of the population that are well fed) need help and don't what to risk their control of North Korea to get it. Meanwhile, South Korea and Japan are fed up with over a decade of North Korean extortion and are no longer willing to provide free food to North Korea unless the nuclear weapons program is shut down. North Korea refuses to consider this, and has come up with a new tactic; fatal warning shots. Over half of South Korea's population (and more than a third of its GDP) is within range of thousands of North Korean 170mm guns (range of 50 kilometers) and 240 mm multiple rocket launchers (range of 45 kilometers). Actually, North Korea has hundreds of ballistic missiles capable of hitting anywhere in South Korea. What if North Korea demands that free food and oil shipments resume, or more South Korea towns (or neighborhoods in cities) will be hit? What's South Korea going to do, when North Korea threatens to launch a major offensive if the south fights back and tries to destroy North Korea guns, rockets and ballistic missiles? Because North Korea has the ability to do major damage to the southern capital (where half the population and a quarter of the GDP are), the South Koreans have more to lose than the northerners. Sprawling Seoul is 40-50 kilometers from the North Korea border. The city alone is 600 square kilometers, and the suburbs even larger. There are over 17,000 people per square kilometer (45,000 per square mile) in the city. The southerners know the north has nothing to lose, are desperate and heavily armed. What do you do?"

[Thomm]

What if North Korea demands that free food and oil shipments resume, or more South Korea towns (or neighborhoods in cities) will be hit?

Does not sound like a successful approach to me.

Best regards,

Thomm

[Erwin]

This sounds like a job for a dynamic UN fact-finding commission!

[Lethaface]

"We ignore your hollow threats" to follow the good CIV tradition

But, seriously, it's indeed complicated. I'm however quite sure that US has options on the table for any scenario.

The only problem indeed is Seoul being in Artillery range. I don't think it would be a problem for the US to bomb most artillery sites overnight, the problem is more the Chinese reaction that would possibly come out of it.

However I must say I can understand China's reaction to these naval exercises. Why they have to be exactly there?

The Democratic free media argument is a poor (propaganda) excuse. The US can build up forces secretly (although more difficult) like China and if China would hold a major naval exercise in the Chinese sea, we would also know of it. If only because they would warn that it isn't an attack.

[Erwin]

One explanation is that the Chinese are casting covetous eyes over the ocean all the way to Indonesia, to include the strategic Mallaca Staits. I predict there is oil under them thar waters... And that is something they may be growing short of considering their massive increase in automotive ownership.

(What are Chinese oil reserves/production - anyone know?)

[Erik Springelkamp]

They buy on the open market, but also have their own operations in Africa.

They are in the process of buying large concessions in Nigeria, and are already present in Sudan, Angola, Mozambique. They have also contracts with Iran.

Natural gas they buy from the central Asian states of the former Soviet Union, and from Russia itself.