This has always been something that has made me curious. Would the people really go whole-heartedly into war, knowing that even if they “won” the most likely outcome would be that the whole peninsula would end up a shattered hulk. No insult intended to the South Korean people, who are certainly tougher people than most, but I’m not sure if even they could psychologically handle the thought of their nation being torn apart by its’ own people. And following the recent spat between them and the Bush Administration, as well as greater nationalism, how easy would it be for them to decide “That was then, now is now. Come on, Bush, Koizumi, let’s go kill some commies.” Perhaps they could (There’s really no way of finding out, unless this scenario actually unfolds, but I wonder what the rest of you think.
They really would have no choice. They would be faced with a “win-or-die” situation. History is full of stories of people who find their inner iron when push comes to shove.
That being said, the military situation in Korea has changed in the last twenty years. The North now has no chance of winning (that is uniting the nation under their rule). It ain’t gonna happen.
The North Korean military is a shell of its former self. It has missed two entire generations of military evolution. If they attack they face a world united against them. They would have no chance.
Do not sell the ROKs short. They have been thinking about defense as long as the NKs have noodling over how to attack. The Republic is armed to the teeth and prepared.
Nope, it would be bad, but it would almost certainly be quick.
My guess is that there might be some protests from the younger South Koreans, but the pace of the war would be so blindingly fast that it would be over before the paint on their picket signs was dry. The entrenchments on both sides are so ridiculously over-armed that the combat would make D-Day look like a kindergarden spat.
The best the U.S. can hope for is that North Korea will implode before the current generation of South Koreans gets into power and demand the U.S. leave, border security be downgraded, conscription eliminated etc. and other steps that offer an invitation to the North to invade.
I’m not sure that any war has ever seen peace protests from people who are under attack from an invading force. I can’t see students with placards on the streets of Seoul as the artillery shells were raining down really!
Li’l Kim (Jung Il, not the singer) isn’t so crazy as people make him out to be. He knows a ROK/NK war would mean the end for his government and the probable detachment of his head from his neck. IMO Kim is successfully using Nixon’s “madman plan,” and the current dynamic tension is exactly what he would like to maintain as long as possible.
That said, were such an attack to occur I think the South would fight to the last child with a chopstick.
BTW there is a great pic that just ran in U.S. News & World Reports that shows Kim & his posse dressed in black posing like a rock band. Quite a piece of Despot Chic. Must be seen to be believed.
I question how fast paced the war would actually be. Deep, heavily armed entrenchments and fortifications (which describes both sides of the DMZ very well) have the effect of drastically slowing the pace of military operations while increasing the casualty rates. Throw in the extremely high troop densities that will be seen upon mobilization of the Koreas, both of whom can put over a million men under arms, and the narrowness of the peninsula and it could turn into quite a slogging match before a useful breakthrough occurs. North Korea doesn’t stand any realistic chance of winning, but it could dish out a great deal of damage before losing.
Regarding protests, I don’t see much chance of anything significant if South Korea is attacked by the North. More so if the North starts shelling Seoul, which is within artillery range of the DMZ. I can see the possibility of significant protests if the South attacks the North, but at the same time I don’t see much likelihood of that happening.
I think the last SK kid with a chopstick would win in a fight against the last NK kid with a chopstick. SK wins.
Anyway, from what Ive heard the NK can do a whole lot of damage via tunnel networks they have made to SK. That and their deeply entrenched cannons that can devistate Seol, which really is the heart of SK.
If there is a war on the Korean Penisula, I predict a preemptive nuclear strike by the United States on the NK nuclear facilities, and maybe the fixed artillery. I don’t see GWB letting KJI get the upper hand while holding all the cards. Is that a mixed metaphor, or does the subject of card playing trump? Sorry.
>> How would South Koreans respond to an attack from the North?
>>Would the people really go whole-heartedly into war, knowing that even if they “won” the most likely outcome would be that the whole peninsula would end up a shattered hulk.
So you really think they’d roll over? The north is already a shattered hulk and if they took over the south that’s what the south would be. The south would be forced to fight for survival.
>> No insult intended to the South Korean people, who are certainly tougher people than most, but I’m not sure if even they could psychologically handle the thought of their nation being torn apart by its’ own people.
So the north attacks and the south says “look, we don’t want to argue so we’ll just give in”. This is just silly.
>> And following the recent spat between them and the Bush Administration, as well as greater nationalism, how easy would it be for them to decide “That was then, now is now. Come on, Bush, Koizumi, let’s go kill some commies.”
It’s not “let’s go kill some commies” but “the commies are already killing us, what do we do?”
I’m glad you aren’t in charge of US nuclear policy, because you’d better hope that the preemptive strike catches every one of the possible North Korean nukes as well as every single damn one of the 10,000 artillery pieces before they start deluging Seoul in chemical weapons. I’m sure that China would really enjoy being in the fallout pattern as well.:rolleyes:
David H. Hackworth the colorful and outspoken retired U.S. Army colonel, Korean- and Vietnam-War veteran-turned journalist made his first return trip to Korea in 1994 since the War’s inconclusive end. His book Hazardous Duty, recounts that experience and a meeting he had with ROK Army units and frontline commanders on the DMZ, where he shared his wartime experiences with them one-on-one.
The most memorable quote was when he told a roomful of young officers, whose units would be the first to be thrown into battle if hostilities resumed, that if and when Korean War II takes place, it really wouldn’t be a war in the conventional or nuclear sense that we have grown accustomed to in this day and age. Rather, it would – as he succinctly put it – “a human meat grinder.”
First, I said “predict.” Second, I accurately suggested the US policy of “first use” of nuclear weapons. Third, If you plug “first strike”, and “nuclear policy”, “Korea” (or other search terms) – or find where I was pitted for making a similar observation – there are many citations which will educate you about US nuclear policy. One of Clinton’s people outlined it nicely back then.
BTW, nobody gives a turd what China thinks if they can’t keep their rabid pit bull (North Korea) from biting. If China wants to risk global thermonuclear war protecting Kim Jong Il, that’s their problem. Moreover, they won’t have fallout to worry about – but actual ICBMs.
In the event of a nuclear exchange, the US better hope that the events occur during winter, because according to the Korean Embassy website, "The prevailing winds are southeasterly in summer, and northwesterly in winter. The winds are stronger in winter, from December to February, than they are during any other season. The land-sea breeze becomes dominant with weakened monsoon winds during the transitional months of September and October. "
Any fallout during summer is going to drift right back down the peninsula (which will probably be the least of everyone’s worries).