03-04-2003, 05:32 PM
*sigh* I was hoping for interesting discussion about strategy, logistics etc. I specifically wanted to avoid the flamewariness.
Thanks to the few who honored this request.
How strong are these troops. Do you have an OOB available? It seems to me, that for example the carriers will be mostly concentrating on Iraq. Five near, Nimitz on the way. Yet NK actually has a somewhat capable air force, unlike Iraq. About troops, I recall reading a long time ago, that US had an active roster of around 4-500k troops. (a bit) More than half of these are deployed or being deployed to the Gulf. Yet again, NK has much larger (effective) army than Iraq.
I must admit I was indeed thinking that US might have to enlist more men, National Guard most probably. Now this will have it's obvious (if slight) impacts on the society and economy. What about general discontent?
What are US options? Halt war in Iraq and concentrate on the larger threat? Or keep a holding action in South Korea until Hussein is deposed? Obviously in this scenario US doesn't have surplus men it can just leave to stabilize Iraq after the war. Will this mean the economic benefits will be diverted to another direction? Towards the countries that will send the peacekeeping force into Iraq. Also, the US budget probably cannot handle fighting the NK war and rebuilding Iraq. Will Europe cough up the money?
Furthermore, if there will be war in NK, it is quite possible that it will be a lengthy one. This will ofcource have a huge effect on the presidential campaigns.
Finally with US so stretched out, I could imagine other hostile countries taking advantage of the situation.
Tongue-in-cheek: It'd make a heck of a strategy game.
Umm, with all respect. I think you magnify the 911 here. Reaction to a nuclear attack for example on Seoul would be of a totally different magnitude. I don't rule out even a panic reaction of total nuclear destruction of NK.
Thanks to the few who honored this request.
Quote:Firstly, there are elements of the US military that are not being deployed to the Gulf. In particular, forces set up for the defence of the Pacific
How strong are these troops. Do you have an OOB available? It seems to me, that for example the carriers will be mostly concentrating on Iraq. Five near, Nimitz on the way. Yet NK actually has a somewhat capable air force, unlike Iraq. About troops, I recall reading a long time ago, that US had an active roster of around 4-500k troops. (a bit) More than half of these are deployed or being deployed to the Gulf. Yet again, NK has much larger (effective) army than Iraq.
I must admit I was indeed thinking that US might have to enlist more men, National Guard most probably. Now this will have it's obvious (if slight) impacts on the society and economy. What about general discontent?
What are US options? Halt war in Iraq and concentrate on the larger threat? Or keep a holding action in South Korea until Hussein is deposed? Obviously in this scenario US doesn't have surplus men it can just leave to stabilize Iraq after the war. Will this mean the economic benefits will be diverted to another direction? Towards the countries that will send the peacekeeping force into Iraq. Also, the US budget probably cannot handle fighting the NK war and rebuilding Iraq. Will Europe cough up the money?
Furthermore, if there will be war in NK, it is quite possible that it will be a lengthy one. This will ofcource have a huge effect on the presidential campaigns.
Finally with US so stretched out, I could imagine other hostile countries taking advantage of the situation.
Tongue-in-cheek: It'd make a heck of a strategy game.
Quote:Secondly, a confirmed nuclear strike would get the kind of reaction from the international community that we saw in the wake of the WTC destruction.
Umm, with all respect. I think you magnify the 911 here. Reaction to a nuclear attack for example on Seoul would be of a totally different magnitude. I don't rule out even a panic reaction of total nuclear destruction of NK.