DPRK shells inhabited S Korean island

[Mikey]

Frankly if you were the commander of the South Korean forces the most civilized thing to do if forced to fight this war by higher ups would be to simply use nerve gas on NK military opposite the DMZ, drop a Nuke on the capitol and end it from the get go. You are going to have to kill most of those loons anyway as they are deeply brainwashed. Might as well do it without getting yourself shot to pieces in the process. Anything short of that level of commitment on a first strike by the South likely sees many thousands if not more dead in the streets of Seoul and other border areas.

Man, you are talking about killing millions of theirs to preserve the lives of thousands of yours?

It will never pass. This ain't Israel!

Funny. Interestingly enough, Israeli citizens are vastly outnumbered by Islamic Arabs in that area of the world, so your "joke" is completely opposite of what you intended, but if it made you laugh then fine.

Big... SK's whole gig is that they're Glinda; they're the West-friendly, "good" Korea. I think using biochem or nuke warfare would sort of go against that.

[Captain Seafort]

Big, that is just utter crap. You start using chem/bio/nuke warfare and they'll respond in kind. Plus the back wash would put SK at risk as well. Fighting like that is just going to get both countries destroyed beyond repair.

A resumption of hostilities would get both countries utterly trashed anyway, along with a good chuck of eastern Asia's (and probably the world's) economy. The only major difference between that and Big's suggested solution is the added worldwide revulsion the RoK and the US would be on the receiving end of. Of course, it also completely ignores the fact that the DPRK population is far from the mass of brainwashed zombies he seems to think they are - understanding of how the other half lives has been increasing at an ever increasing rate in recent years, from RoK DVDs coming across the border, and there have been as many defectors in the last three years as in the previous fifty.

[stitch626]

If this did collapse into open conflict, does NK have anyone that would come to their aid? Or would they be pretty much on their own?

[BigJKU316]

So we should just start nuking the place and hope for the best and tell Russia, China, South Korea and Japan... tough luck but you're f***ed?

Yeah, that counts as total crap.

No, as I said it would be best if there is no conflict at all. Additionally I was approaching it from a SK perspective rather than the US perspective and looking at the situation if they felt they had to go to war for some reason. The key phrase in what I was saying being "the most civilized thing to do if forced to fight this war by the higher ups..." If I were the US I never consider this, neither nation is worth us taking on that kind of baggage. But if I am the SK's and am staring down the throats of a few thousand NK guns that might use NCB weapons on my largest urban area I would have to at least consider how to get rid of that threat on some level.

Again, they would be better off not fighting it at all and hoping over the next 10, 20 or 100 years that the North just gives up. But if forced to fight it to the finish SK would be faced with basically having their largest city shelled into ruin and having to dig a bunch of brainwashed and heavily armed loons out of fortified positions and urban centers all the way to the Chinese border.

If this ever kicked off millions are going to die either way.

[BigJKU316]

Big, that is just utter crap. You start using chem/bio/nuke warfare and they'll respond in kind. Plus the back wash would put SK at risk as well. Fighting like that is just going to get both countries destroyed beyond repair.

A resumption of hostilities would get both countries utterly trashed anyway, along with a good chuck of eastern Asia's (and probably the world's) economy. The only major difference between that and Big's suggested solution is the added worldwide revulsion the RoK and the US would be on the receiving end of. Of course, it also completely ignores the fact that the DPRK population is far from the mass of brainwashed zombies he seems to think they are - understanding of how the other half lives has been increasing at an ever increasing rate in recent years, from RoK DVDs coming across the border, and there have been as many defectors in the last three years as in the previous fifty.

I don't think the people are brainwashed. But I think the military and leadership very much is. They are hardly going to give up and throw in the towel and there are likely more than enough people loyal to the regime that control could be maintained throughout a pretty intense conflict. I think plenty of the people would be happy to give up but would be for lack of ability to resist lashed to the whims of the military and government who would likely be more than willing to shoot them for something such as fleeing a town in which a battle was raging.

[BigJKU316]

I should add to clarify, I am not chosing to use those weapons just because it sounds like fun if I am the South Korean commander charged with over-running the North.

1. Gas was suggested because it offers a way to possibly wipe out the North Korean artillery before it can inflict heavy losses on civilians. If I were given the ability and opportunity to do it without killing a single person that would obviously be preferable but as far as I know no such weapon exist.

2. Ditto for the idea of nuking the capitol city. If I could simply put a guy like Deep into the cabinet meetings and wax all of the leadership and they would give up the next day sign me up. I am guessing we don't even know where they meet. To me the only way you stop this is to decapitate the leadership and hope the rational people living in the rest of the nation assert themselves. Given a less violent alternative certainly you take it.


To me it is somewhat like the delima faced by the Allies in WWII in regards to area-bombing. You had to hit the German and Japanese production facilities and you could not do so with great accuracy, so you resorted to burning down the whole city. It was messy but it was what you had to do to acheive your objective so you closed your eyes and did it.

More than anything the two examples were meant to illustrate the shitty tactical situation the South is in. Lacking the ability to simple take out the guns in a reasonable manner or timeframe you are left with the option of either getting hammered while you try to do it the slow way or doing something drastic to try to preserve your capitol city and civilians lives. It also illustrates why nothing at all will come from this, because the South can't win and the North knows that will keep them from playing at all.

[Tyyr]

Seoul is the killer, being that close to the border there's no way the Koreas can go to war that doesn't result in a lot of death and destruction in Seoul. The North has too many artillery pieces for the South and the US to wipe them out quickly.

Additionally, reunification isn't something people really want anyways. This isn't East and West Germany where both are first world countries just with different politics this is two countries on the opposite ends of the wealth scale. If the did reunify the North will add 24 million people to the country who have no job skills for a first world economy. Not to mention the North is horribly under developed, their infrastructure is a joke, adding North Korea to the South will absolutely tank their economy.

They'll both make a lot of noise and a lot of fuss and in the end nothing will happen. The only real hope for the peninsula is that someone gets in charge in Pyongyang that is not bat shit insane and starts looking for ways to get his country into the 20th century.

[SolkaTruesilver]

They'll both make a lot of noise and a lot of fuss and in the end nothing will happen. The only real hope for the peninsula is that someone gets in charge in Pyongyang that is not bat s**t insane and starts looking for ways to get his country into the 20th century while not being a dick to its neighbours

Added a bit that I think is necessary.

[Captain Seafort]

This isn't East and West Germany

where both are first world countries just with different politics this is two countries on the opposite ends of the wealth scale. If the did reunify the North will add 24 million people to the country who have no job skills for a first world economy. Not to mention the North is horribly under developed, their infrastructure is a joke, adding North Korea to the South will absolutely tank their economy.

Which? Taking on the GDR did tank the German economy. They managed to recover, but it was a long way from plain sailing, and the east is still very much the shittier end of the country. I don't disagree that taking on the north would seriously bugger up the south but you'd be better off comparing to Germany, only several times worse, than contrasting it.

[SolkaTruesilver]

Which? Taking on the GDR did tank the German economy. They managed to recover, but it was a long way from plain sailing, and the east is still very much the shittier end of the country. I don't disagree that taking on the north would seriously bugger up the south but you'd be better off comparing to Germany, only several times worse, than contrasting it.

However, taking on East Germany was probably the best move on part of West Germany on the long term. Getting that kind of demographical strenght and growth potential allowed for Germany to become quite the player on the international front.

While the ROK will be impacted negatively if they start taking back North Korea, on the long term, they will become quite the economical powerhouse if they don't crumble into civil trouble.

But I guess that's the huge "if". Has there been any recent (50- years) instance of political reunification between a rich and a poor half, except Germany?

[Captain Seafort]

I was approaching it from a SK perspective rather than the US perspective

Then why did you even mention nukes? The RoK doesn't have them. For that matter, both the US and RoK are party to the Chemical Weapons Convention, so their stockpiles have been confirmed destroyed.

The key phrase in what I was saying being "the most civilized thing to do if forced to fight this war by the higher ups..." If I were the US I never consider this, neither nation is worth us taking on that kind of baggage. But if I am the SK's and am staring down the throats of a few thousand NK guns that might use NCB weapons on my largest urban area I would have to at least consider how to get rid of that threat on some level.

You'd never be able to strike fast enough or hard enough to save Seoul. All you'd achieve would be pariah status on top of having several trashed cities (and potentially a massive economic ball and chain were the peninsular to be reunified).

To me it is somewhat like the delima faced by the Allies in WWII in regards to area-bombing. You had to hit the German and Japanese production facilities and you could not do so with great accuracy, so you resorted to burning down the whole city. It was messy but it was what you had to do to acheive your objective so you closed your eyes and did it.

Entirely different situation. One involves targeting the industrial strength of an opponent with whom you are engaged in a total war. The other involves a preemptive strike on the largest civilian concentration of an adversary you already outmatch in an attempted decapitation strike.

[BigJKU316]

Then why did you even mention nukes? The RoK doesn't have them. For that matter, both the US and RoK are party to the Chemical Weapons Convention, so their stockpiles have been confirmed destroyed.

True, but the RoK also has the ability to produce either on a somewhat short notice given their engineering and technical capabilities. A nuke would be difficult. Chemical weapons not so much. Again my assumption was a the South deciding to go to war quite a while before doing so. It is just one of many possible solutions all of which suck due to the following.

You'd never be able to strike fast enough or hard enough to save Seoul. All you'd achieve would be pariah status on top of having several trashed cities (and potentially a massive economic ball and chain were the peninsular to be reunified).

This is probably true. Still if you are tasked with making a go of it anyway you have to try something. Short of targeting information that is nearly perfect I am not sure what you could really do. Again it is just an awful situation for the SK government to be stuck in.

The present solution of do nothing is really the best one. I suppose there really are no good solutions if the thing becomes a full on shooting war was the point that I was attempting to make. And you are right, even if you go all out and ignore any and all political, economic and diplomatic fallout it probably still does not solve the main problem facing the SK government anyway.

[Captain Seafort]

True, but the RoK also has the ability to produce either on a somewhat short notice given their engineering and technical capabilities.

"Short notice" being years.

This is probably true. Still if you are tasked with making a go of it anyway you have to try something. Short of targeting information that is nearly perfect I am not sure what you could really do. Again it is just an awful situation for the SK government to be stuck in.

The present solution of do nothing is really the best one. I suppose there really are no good solutions if the thing becomes a full on shooting war was the point that I was attempting to make. And you are right, even if you go all out and ignore any and all political, economic and diplomatic fallout it probably still does not solve the main problem facing the SK government anyway.

So why the idiotic suggestion of a preemptive strike requiring several years of preparation? Or was it just internet tough-guy bullshit?

[BigJKU316]

So why the idiotic suggestion of a preemptive strike requiring several years of preparation? Or was it just internet tough-guy bullshit?

It was simply an example of the difficulty of dealing with the situation as it presently exist that came at the end of about 4 or 5 paragrpahs describing the difficulty of the terrain and tactical situation where I flat out said this is a war that no one wants to fight. The key being where I said this.

Anything short of that level of commitment on a first strike by the South likely sees many thousands if not more dead in the streets of Seoul and other border areas.

And as you correctly pointed out even that probably does not save Seoul but it is representative of the kind of decisions one would be faced with as the South Koreans if you even contemplated trying to fight back against the North over stuff like the present crisis. Short of something really nasty like I was describing I don't see a military solution to their problem, hence why it is best to do nothing.

That was pointed out as the reasoning behind doing nothing not as a preferred or even really a suggested course of action as much as it is pointing out the insane difficulty facing the South in even attempting to deal with the North through military action at this point.

[SolkaTruesilver]

24 hours yet and the apocalypse hasn't happened yet.

Maybe KJI was just throwing a tantrum? Or maybe his heir was?