North Korea Declaring War against USA


PDA






Lonestar
October 11, 2006, 11:07 AM
Should be interesting...

Further pressure will be countered with physical retaliation, the North's Foreign Ministry warned in a statement carried by the official Korean Central News Agency.

"If the U.S. keeps pestering us and increases pressure, we will regard it as a declaration of war and will take a series of physical corresponding measures," the statement, said without specifying what those measures could be.

If you enjoyed reading about "North Korea Declaring War against USA" here in TheHighRoad.org archive, you'll LOVE our community. Come join TheHighRoad.org today for the full version!
MS .45
October 11, 2006, 11:16 AM
While North Korea would have a hard time hurting the U.S. directly, they could draw us into conflict by attacking our allies in the region(Japan, South Korea). Scary scenario with so many of our forces deployed in the Middle East.

ETXhiker
October 11, 2006, 11:27 AM
They have an army of a million men. We have 20,000+ troops in South Korea, mostly at the DMZ acting as a "trip wire". I think you have to take their threats seriously.

The scenario I fear most is NK attacking South Korea and China moving simultaneously on Taiwan while we have our hands full. I find it hard to believe NK is doing all of this sabre rattling without China's tacit approval.

Third_Rail
October 11, 2006, 11:29 AM
Oh joy.

Bartholomew Roberts
October 11, 2006, 11:34 AM
The scenario I fear most is NK attacking South Korea and China moving simultaneously on Taiwan while we have our hands full.

Well, this is not that scenario. China doesn't have the power projection capability necessary to invade Taiwan at this moment. Not to mention that a "hostile" takeover of the island would put a tremendous dent in their own economy.

North Korea threatens war, plague, famine and death on a pretty regular basis so it is always hard to tell just how serious they are about it. We'll see what China does in the Security Council. That will be a good indicator of where all of this is heading.

Biker
October 11, 2006, 11:35 AM
As I recall, we have about 37,000 troops in SK who are essentially either hostages held by NK or potential sacrifices made by us. NK doesn't even need WMD to roll over our guys in a matter of hours.
There are 8,000 NK arty pieces trained on them this second. It would be ugly.
Our only response would be a nuke response. Then the fun would start.

I'm glad I live in Idaho.

Biker

Deanimator
October 11, 2006, 11:42 AM
If North Korea attacks the United States, they're going to have a food SURPLUS without increasing supply. There won't be anyone left to eat what's there.

This isn't 1950. They're safe only so long as they stay in their tunnels under the DMZ. The second they set one foot in fresh air, they're toast. They can't move and hide in the dark the way they could during the Korean War.

At MOST they can kill a lot of people between the DMZ and Seoul.

The best thing for all concerned would be for the Chinese to say to some North Korean general, "Want to be President of North Korea? Act now on this limited time offer!" The second best thing would be a Chinese invasion, which would provoke a collective shrug from the world at large... except maybe Ramsey Clark and Noam Chomsky who would hysterically protest the violation of the North Korean peoples' right to mass starvation...

Manedwolf
October 11, 2006, 11:45 AM
I suspect that if this keeps up, Crazy Kim is going to have a most unfortunate accident.

Helmetcase
October 11, 2006, 11:46 AM
If you're really worried about this, here's a good article on it: http://www.theatlantic.com/doc/200610/kaplan-korea

In short, it would be an ugly war for the SK's and lots of civilians would die, but man it'd be even uglier for them. Our airpower would decimate them.

Sistema1927
October 11, 2006, 11:49 AM
We have been at war with North Korea since 1950. The Armistice did not end the war, it only cooled down hostilities.

junyo
October 11, 2006, 11:50 AM
Brilliant. The Norks shouldn't really be worried about the US. They've got the Asian Michael Jordan of whoopa-- right in their backyard. Japan really won't have a choice soon except to remilitarize; and I kinda think that's like poking your neighbors friendly rottweiller/pit bull mix with a stick; it's all fun and games until the instincts kick in and he remembers what he's capable of. Even accepting the fact that Japan and S. Korea can't defeat NK, they'd certainly take the edge off, especially of a conscript army. The real question is, is whoever's driving the car in NK non-delusional enough to see the situation for what it is?

Manedwolf
October 11, 2006, 12:02 PM
I also think as a matter of necessity, we'll soon see the Rising Sun again on fully armed attack aircraft for the first time in over 60+ years.

Might actually help our military in the long run. The Japanese have done some significant technology improvements to the F-16's we've sold them. Imagine what sort of things the big Japan-based semiconductor corporations could come up with if they went full-out to development.

"Ghost in the Shell" weapons for real? :D I think we'd at least see complete optical camouflage for aircraft within a couple years, being that several Tokyo R&D places and universities are already working with it, (metamaterials that conduct light around an object, rather than reflecting) and a military-industrial complex would likely pour money at that.

Also picturing caseless-ammo bullpup rifles and other extreme tech goodies. Or a Honda light armored vehicle based on the Ridgeline chassis. It'd never quit! :D

Keith Wheeler
October 11, 2006, 12:15 PM
"Ghost in the Shell" weapons for real?

I have to admit, when I first read reports of Japan heading towards the "not just for self defense anymore" path, the first thing that came to mind was Tachikomas asking if they could shoot down the helicopters, because "they're our natural enemies".


They sure have some creative minds and talented engineers.

ID_shooting
October 11, 2006, 12:15 PM
Having been stationed in the ROK and accepting the fact thet we were a "speed bump" of sorts, this could get ugly fast.

2ID has two major combat brigades. I was part of first brigade, 1/72 Armor to be exact. Our practice in the monthly drills were to move out of Camp Casey and roll north while second brigade rolled south and took up defensive positions in Seoul. We were told to expect light Marines to arrive in 12 hours and light Army units from the US in 48. The first mech units would arrive in 1 week. The AF would launch thier fighters and then evac to Japan. We would esentially be alone for quite a while to hold them off.

The challenge was for those of us on Casey, we had a huge mountian to our north. In the case of a massive arty attack, our barracks were protected by this mountian yes our motor pool was sitting out in the open. On the flip side, 2/72 Armor was just the opposite, the barracks were in the open and thier motor pool was protected. Our unspoken plan, besides eliminating the KATUSAs was to head to 2/72 and steal thier tanks and head south as fast as we could and meet the Marines comming over from Japan.

High Planes Drifter
October 11, 2006, 12:17 PM
As I understand it, China is for imposing sanctions against NK, but not severe.
They're stance is that harsh sanctions would crush NK's already crippled economy . They (China), along with Russia want to continue talks. The "China Factor" is a huge part of this whole situation.

Borachon
October 11, 2006, 12:18 PM
Well, this is not that scenario. China doesn't have the power projection capability necessary to invade Taiwan at this moment. Not to mention that a "hostile" takeover of the island would put a tremendous dent in their own economy.

I agree with the premise that China won't attack for economic reasons. I disagree with the idea that they COULDN'T project enough force to attack.

In fact, the information from this website http://www.sinodefence.com/navy/amphibious/default.asp
indicates to me that they are planning SOMETHING in the future, just based on the type of equipment they are building and buying.

I think right now it would be a close run war and a losing one for China...if the US is there to help Taiwan. If the US is occupied elsewhere and it was just Taiwan versus China....? Well....it would be tough for China and it would suffer a lot of losses, but if it maintains a good air cover and can get paratroop and sea borne forces to Taiwan in a timely fashion...who knows?

And of course if nukes were used on a couple of major airbases...or even used for their EMP pulse OVER Taiwan...then invasion would be a lot easier. EMP could fry all of the electronic components on jets, radar, tank targetting systems, maybe even the guidance systems on anti-ship and anti-aircraft missiles. Taiwan would then have to rely on line of sight shooting with artillery, and couldn't "pulse" the Chinese army in the same fashion.

And I know from studying some Chinese strategies that the use of EMP producing weapons (not necessarily nuclear) is a goal for Chinese forces. They want to knock the technological edge off of any opponent (i.e. The US military) and electro-magnetic pulse is a wonderful way to do that while still allowing China the use of its huge numerical advantage.

Borachon
October 11, 2006, 12:21 PM
http://www.wnd.com/news/printer-friendly.asp?ARTICLE_ID=20553


Electro-magnet threats
Posted: February 16, 2000
1:00 a.m. Eastern

By Charles Smith
© 2000 WorldNetDaily.com

China has accelerated the development of a new class of energy weapons against which the United States has no defense. The new weapons are designed to disable or destroy advanced U.S. military electronic systems such as military radars with a single blast.

According to official Chinese army statements published by the Chinese news agency Jiefang Ribao, the Internet version of the daily newspaper of the Shanghai Municipal Communist Committee, the new energy weapons are specifically designed to attack American aircraft carriers.

"As an aircraft carrier fleet is apt to come under saturation attacks by satellite-guided missiles, its entire combat effectiveness can be paralyzed by paralyzing its electronic equipment, which is its central nervous system," states the Feb. 12 article by Chinese military analyst Ye Jian entitled, "Armchair Strategy: Using a Bomb to Deal With Aircraft Carrier."

gopguy
October 11, 2006, 12:22 PM
We should not forget this crisis is part of curse that keeps on giving. The Clinton Presidency. The arrangement made by Jimmy Carter and Madeline Albright to give the N.Koreans nuclear power plants has come back to bite us. Bill Clinton who won't trust you or me with a gun, gave that gargoyle the nuclear plants and material they now have...Keep that in mind as Hillary and the man who would be "First Lady" launch their campaign for another co presidency in '08. You can't trust gun banning liberals with our national security.

Manedwolf
October 11, 2006, 12:22 PM
I suspect that EMP is one of the things Japan is most afraid of. If an airburst EMP'ed Tokyo, they'd likely have to evacuate the city, millions of people as refugees or at least trying to get to relatives further out in the rural areas. It's far, far too congested and built-up in close quarters to survive without electrical power for long, and replacement of distribution transformers would literally take months.

fordfan485
October 11, 2006, 12:23 PM
Having been stationed in the ROK and accepting the fact thet we were a "speed bump" of sorts, this could get ugly fast.

2ID has two major combat brigades.../

All im going to say is OPSEC, you know what to do.

ID_shooting
October 11, 2006, 12:28 PM
Fordfan, really, pulease. Every platoon had no less than 5 KATUSAS. They even served in BN S2. That coupled with I was in the ROK over 10 years ago makes non of what I posted classified info.

dfaugh
October 11, 2006, 12:29 PM
They have an army of a million men. We have 20,000+ troops in South Korea, mostly at the DMZ acting as a "trip wire". I think you have to take their threats seriously.

Let them have at it..we don't need "on the ground" troups....If they "declared war" and attacked any USA interests, the cruise missiles, B-2s and F-117s start to fly. We sould pretty much disable their entire infrastucture, as well and any real military threats in about 48 hours.

The key would be China's reaction to this, and IMHO they want no part of a shooting war over an insignificant (relatively) peice of real estate. It's very much in their best interests to maintain good relations with the US, fo now.

justatexasboy
October 11, 2006, 12:32 PM
The China factor is THE factor in this matter.

So long as they keep saying that major sanctions and military intervention is off the board NK will view that as a quiet nod of approval.

I really miss the days when our military was structured to operate in two theaters at once.:uhoh:

Borachon
October 11, 2006, 12:34 PM
I suspect that EMP is one of the things Japan is most afraid of. If an airburst EMP'ed Tokyo, they'd likely have to evacuate the city, millions of people as refugees or at least trying to get to relatives further out in the rural areas. It's far, far too congested and built-up in close quarters to survive without electrical power for long, and replacement of distribution transformers would literally take months.

Exactly.

It's scary how dependent all aspects of an industrialized society are on electronics. Including my ability to send this message via computer. :D
I think the Chinese are on to a winning strategy actually. If your opponent is stronger than you and relies on technology, then cut the technological edge.
Then its back to high powered rifles and bombs.

Kim Jong Il is playing a dangerous game. I'm not entirely sure he plans on backing down, and when push comes to shove he has GOT to know that China will back him. China can't afford not to. Not backing him means that either 1) his country falls apart and millions of N. Koreans go to China as refugees or 2) the whole thing escalates into a major war and China has the possibility of large radioactive clouds that use to be Pyongyang drifting over its large population centers. China will be forced to support NK just to keep the US and South Korea from ending up with a base on the Yalu.

Also, it would be a testing ground for Chinese weapons and tactics against the US without the annoying necessity of having Chinese soldiers DIE to do so. If I was China, I'd be willing to fight to my last North Korean. And who knows....NK might win. There's a real chance of that.

I think there is a real possibility that if sanctions are imposed on North Korea that Kim is going to do something realllllly stupid.

Retro
October 11, 2006, 12:34 PM
Someone needs to assassinate that crazy SOB-Kim and avert the re-armament of Japan... Everytime when the Japan re-arms, it will invade nearby countries... In 1450, Japan was unified under Hiroyushi, and Japan immediately invaded Korea (and then was defeated and repelled by the Chinese foreign expeditionary force in Korea at the time.) In 1860s, Japan underwent reform and militarization, it immediately invaded Siberia, and had a war with Russia, and then a war with China, defeating both, and annexing Korea. In 1938, Japan became militarized and governed by the military chief of staffs, and it invaded Northern China, and then, attacked US Pearl Harbor. Therefore, with history as a mirror, Japan is never to be trusted with a strong military force... the strong urge to leave their tiny island is inherent in their genes. If they re-arm, in a few decades, they may wanna "thank" us for the nukes that we have dealt them during WWII, that is, after they are done with China. North Korea is only a temporary problem, that crazy SOB-Kim has multiple types of sexually transmitted diseases, including HepB and HepC, and hence he may not be around for a long time, which made him very unstable and violatile, and hence an attempt to assassinate him without resorting to war is essential.

Borachon
October 11, 2006, 12:41 PM
If they "declared war" and attacked any USA interests, the cruise missiles, B-2s and F-117s start to fly. We sould pretty much disable their entire infrastucture, as well and any real military threats in about 48 hours.

None of those have ever been tested in a nuclear war. Is there enough shielding on the electronic components to keep them working? Maybe. But a high altitude North Korean airburst over...oh...let's say...Okinawa....(or half way between South Korea and Japan somewhere over the ocean) might be enough to knock airpower, radar, and missile guidance systems offline. I've no doubt we've TRIED to prepare for a nuclear war....BUT.....we don't know what might happen to our "wonder weapons" when EMP comes. Maybe nothing. Or maybe we end up with several trillion dollars worth of scrap metal.

offthepaper
October 11, 2006, 12:52 PM
Quote: "The best thing for all concerned would be for the Chinese to say to some North Korean general, "Want to be President of North Korea? Act now on this limited time offer!"
-------------------------------------------------
It would'nt be the first regime change to take place from the "inside" :D

junyo
October 11, 2006, 12:59 PM
Is there enough shielding on the electronic components to keep them working? Maybe. But a high altitude North Korean airburst over...oh...let's say...Okinawa....(or half way between South Korea and Japan somewhere over the ocean) might be enough to knock airpower, radar, and missile guidance systems offline. I've no doubt we've TRIED to prepare for a nuclear war....BUT.....we don't know what might happen to our "wonder weapons" when EMP comes. Maybe nothing. Or maybe we end up with several trillion dollars worth of scrap metal.Regardless, I doubt the B2s and B52 launched cruise missiles that would be sitting safely in the MidWest would be affected. The problem with screwing with a superpower is the same as a boxer facing a guy with 6 inch longer arms; you've got to deal with his reach. The Norks could disable every single weapon in the theater, and if we were sufficiantly agitated we could have our own nuke on target in 15-20 minutes. Conventional weapons from outside the theater within a day. Just because we choose to fight most wars with one arm tied behind our backs doesn't mean we have to.

Keith Wheeler
October 11, 2006, 01:00 PM
we don't know what might happen to our "wonder weapons" when EMP comes

Really? Why do you say that?

Correia
October 11, 2006, 01:02 PM
And keep in mind that when it comes to the actual fighting part, we're the best that there has ever been in history.

The hard part comes after when we choose to stick around, build nations, and then have the press freak out everytime an IED goes off.

It isn't the military power that is in question, it is our will power. We could smite North Korea from the face of the Earth in under two weeks if we really wanted to.

carlrodd
October 11, 2006, 01:03 PM
the NK war 'machine' would burn itself out VERY quickly. they can barely feed the population, which is largely impoverished, and certainly could not sustain combat for any length of time, given the harsh economic realities of the NK situation. this is not to say that they couldn't create one hell of an initial bang with all the arty and troops, but it sure wouldn't last very long. i think south korea could handle them alone. it would be ugly at first, but NK could not long survive what would turn out to be a war of attrition.

Deanimator
October 11, 2006, 01:03 PM
I suspect that if this keeps up, Crazy Kim is going to have a most unfortunate accident.

A hunting accident, with something made by Norinco...

Deanimator
October 11, 2006, 01:12 PM
It would'nt be the first regime change to take place from the "inside"

I've got four words for Kim, "Afghanistan", "Hafizullah Amin", and "Spetsznaz"...

Sorry, I don't know how to say "Spetsnaz" in Chinese...

Master Blaster
October 11, 2006, 01:16 PM
According to official Chinese army statements published by the Chinese news agency Jiefang Ribao, the Internet version of the daily newspaper of the Shanghai Municipal Communist Committee, the new energy weapons are specifically designed to attack American aircraft carriers.

"As an aircraft carrier fleet is apt to come under saturation attacks by satellite-guided missiles, its entire combat effectiveness can be paralyzed by paralyzing its electronic equipment, which is its central nervous system," states the Feb. 12 article by Chinese military analyst Ye Jian entitled, "Armchair Strategy: Using a Bomb to Deal With Aircraft Carrier."

Hey there is a relaible source the Official chinese news agency;)
They have never lied, or spread any propaganda, everything they say is the gospel truth. The government there contols the media to make sure they tell us the truth about all their top secret plans.:barf:

Hey Borchon I hear the Brooklyn bridge is for sale again, just send me a money order and its yours. Its not like we have been workeing to harden all of our weapons against EMP for like the last 50 years. The chinese use stone gears in their computers and radar systems I'm sure.

And heck we only have 27,000 troops in South Korea right??

The 800,000 man South Korean army was trained by France over the last 50 years Huh??

Correia
October 11, 2006, 01:24 PM
Master Blaster, please, haven't you seen the Chinese press release about their new bio-engineered super pumas? We're doomed! Dooooooommmmeeeddddd!!!!!!!!!

Look guys, I know this is serious business, but EMPs are not magic wands that cancel out technology and render us powerless.

buzz_knox
October 11, 2006, 01:26 PM
For the NK to take out the SK military, it would have to use nukes or chemical weapons. That would result in a very bloody but very short war, and the end of a certain dictator's regime (and country). Our people would inevitably be caught in the middle, and we have precisely one response to our folks get nuked or gassed, which is the elimination of whoever did it.

If the NK decided to stay conventional, the war would take longer and the psycho would survive (for a while) but his force projection ability and the threat he posed would be largely eliminated. The South Korean military is far from a paper tiger. It's been in a state of war for more than five decades and has prepared itself accordingly.

This is, of course, contingent on American willpower. It's all too easy to see certain elements of our society who are willing to appease at any cost, especially if the only blood spilled in the process will be that of the South Koreans. That's in large measure how laughing boy got his supposed nukes, after all. We gave him the reactors and the materials to make them possible, all in exchange for his promise not to do what he's doing.

justatexasboy
October 11, 2006, 01:29 PM
Here are some qoutes form fox news:


Along the razor-wired no-man's-land separating the divided Koreas, communist troops were more boldly trying to provoke their southern counterparts: spitting across the demarcation line, making throat-slashing hand gestures, flashing their middle finger and trying to talk to the troops, said U.S. Army Maj. Jose DeVarona of Fayetteville, N.C., adding that the overall situation was calm.


The top U.S. general in South Korea said American forces are fully capable of deterring an attack despite the North's still-unconfirmed nuclear test.

"Be assured that the alliance has the forces necessary to deter aggression, and should deterrence fail, decisively defeat any North Korean attack against" South Korea, U.S. Army Gen. B.B. Bell said in a statement to troops. "U.S. forces have been well- trained to confront nuclear, biological and chemical threats."


The top Generals comments are pretty telling in and of themselves.

Bartholomew Roberts
October 11, 2006, 01:30 PM
I disagree with the idea that they COULDN'T project enough force to attack.

OK, show me the amphib capability that China will need to get to Taiwan. Where does it exist today? Next show me the blue water navy that will get it there in one piece sufficient to overcome the Taiwanese Navy. Finally show me the air cover available in sufficient numbers (and don't forget little things like range and endurance) to provide the big umbrella that all of this will need to operate under. China does not currently possess the military capability needed to be assured of success in an attack on Taiwan. So it would be a bit illogical to assume this was some grand cover plan to give them the slim chance they might have now if EVERYTHING that could go their way did go their way.

In fact, the information from this website indicates to me that they are planning SOMETHING in the future, just based on the type of equipment they are building and buying.

China imports all of its oil through the same straits that the rest of Asia does. I think a more probable explanation is that they are building the force they need to protect that line of communication. I'm sure it doesn't bother them that it can be used to threaten Taiwan though.

If the US is occupied elsewhere and it was just Taiwan versus China....? Well....it would be tough for China and it would suffer a lot of losses, but if it maintains a good air cover and can get paratroop and sea borne forces to Taiwan in a timely fashion...who knows?

China loses. This has been gamed frequent and often lately. You can google a nice unclassified report from RAND on just that issue that describes in great detail why China loses (in fact, I'm sure China has read it).

I also think you greatly overestimate the effects of EMP, particularly against the U.S. Let's say you get the U.S. concentrating for attack and knock out the entire 7th Fleet in an incredibly lucky blow (especially considering how long we have tested and prepared for EMP) - well that is why we have a 3rd Fleet that just by itself is more powerful than any other Navy in the Pacific.

Thefabulousfink
October 11, 2006, 01:40 PM
I really don't think Economic Sanctions are going to work against Kim. This man has been starving his people in order to divert funds to the military. Any sane leader would realize that an attack on SK, Japan, or anywhere else would damn him and his people. The problem, however, is that Kim is not sane. He might just get mad that no one is respecting him and decide, "Well I'm all dressed up, I think I'll go party in Seol tonight."

I fear that a military option might be the only permenant solution to the NK problem. Now if only we could get China to do the dirty work.....

And as for EMPs. N. Korea has had so much trouble building nukes and ballistic missles, do you really think that they can swing an EMP?:rolleyes: Also, Haven't most military systems since the Cold War included at least some hardening against EMP?

TallPine
October 11, 2006, 01:42 PM
Look guys, I know this is serious business, but EMPs are not magic wands that cancel out technology and render us powerless.

Yeah, I kinda suspect we have a "boomer" lurking around somewhere under the northwest Pacific ... ;)

Manedwolf
October 11, 2006, 01:45 PM
Yeah, I kinda suspect we have a "boomer" lurking around somewhere under the northwest Pacific ...

I suspect there's more than a few holding on-station deep beneath the waves near NK.

Keith Wheeler
October 11, 2006, 01:46 PM
Also, Haven't most military systems since the Cold War included at least some hardening against EMP?

That was my alluded to point above. It's not like our boffins don't know, and don't under estimate our boffins.

quatin
October 11, 2006, 01:49 PM
I wouldn't play down China's capability in this. As I remember they have the world's largest modern army (2 million standing) and the world's largest artillery force. Korea will be take over in days. Even if the US were to intervene, China can pretty much plaster Taiwan or Japan with missiles and long range artilery (last I read they have artillery that goes over the strait of Taiwan) leaving us with no bases to operate out of. The only thing China is lacking in is a blue water navy and airforce to properly take over an island. So we can only station carriers and subs out near the coast. Even then there's questions as to how many nuclear subs China has underway and how many of those mach 7 anti-ship missiles they can launch. There's not much anyone can do under that situation, without resorting to nukes, and we all know what will happen if anyone tries that. At this stage, it's all up to economics and international relations. No one wants to fire the first shot, because it can cascade into a pretty horrible scenario.

Tommygunn
October 11, 2006, 01:56 PM
China has a VERY large army, true. But it has very little way of projecting them where needed if it's offshore. They have some minor naval capabilities and would be capable of inflicting damage, but we would win in the end.
As things stand now.
China is learning to fight asymetric warfare and better equiping its forces. If they keep on, things may change...in 20-40 years.

quatin
October 11, 2006, 02:02 PM
They have some minor naval capabilities and would be capable of inflicting damage, but we would win in the end.

How do we win? Last I checked, the Navy can move 40,000 troops through amphibious vehicles at one time. We'd have to seize cruise ships and cargo ships to transport more. Even then, we don't have a large enough force to invade China, even when not preoccupied with the Middle East. Also, where are we going to station the troops? Who's friendly to us near China? Taiwan? Japan? S.Korea? Those islands would probably be in pretty bad shape from missile attacks by the time we get there and we'd still have to jump over water to get to mainland. S.Korea would probably fall quickly to N.Korea/China as well. It's much easier to defend than it is to attack.

Art Eatman
October 11, 2006, 02:21 PM
quatin, the mainland Chinese would have to get across open water with those 40K troops. The question there is how many might actually arrive?

The situation is not one where we would have to occupy ground. What's needed is a cessation of armed hostility by the mainland Chinese. I know of nobody who'd ever want to actually occupy and try to control mainland China. All those who tried either failed or married into the population with their descendants being Chinese and the country kept right on chooglin'. In Chinese terms, Mao was a temporary aberration.

Art

SoCalShooter
October 11, 2006, 02:27 PM
In my assesment it is necessary to get China on our side completely. Because if NK decides to make a go for the south again China is the only nation with enough military mass in the region that we can look to. Otherwise we have to nuke the NK, there really is not other alternative, a conventional war with NK is out of the question.

Deanimator
October 11, 2006, 02:30 PM
Mao was a temporary aberration.

China has returned to its traditional form of authoritarian kleptocracy, dressed up in cynical lip service to "socialism".

China's leaders are "communist" in the same sense that the Mafia are "Sicilian patriots". But it sure sounds good in toasts at a banquest...

carlrodd
October 11, 2006, 02:32 PM
China has returned to its traditional form of authoritarian kleptocracy, dressed up in cynical lip service to "socialism".

China's leaders are "communist" in the same sense that the Mafia are "Sicilian patriots". But it sure sounds good in toasts at a banquest...-deanimator

great analogy:)

Lou629
October 11, 2006, 02:35 PM
Gotta love those Norks' and their seeming endless supply of blood-curdling rhetoric, and they're now playing right into W's hands, even though they don't seem to realize it. One could easily make the argument that The Prez. has had a woody for Iraq, Iran and NK for years. Now he can say "I told you so back in my 'axis of e-vil' speech" and who could argue the point?

I don't think our side would be so trigger-happy as to be the first to push the N button over this, but if i were Kim Jong Il, ( or what's-his-name that's in charge of Iran for that matter ) i'd be making very sure that the paths to the shelters are well lighted before i turned in for the night. At least for the next two years and change that W has left in office anyhow. Once Hillary gets elected in '08 :barf: then they can both start to breathe a sigh of relief.

Gewehr98
October 11, 2006, 02:44 PM
aka, declare war on the United States, lose quickly, and reap impressive amounts of financial aid, technology upgrades, and economic assistance from the victor. ;)

Lou629
October 11, 2006, 02:53 PM
< deleted this post in responding to another that seems to have disappeared >

quatin
October 11, 2006, 02:56 PM
quatin, the mainland Chinese would have to get across open water with those 40K troops. The question there is how many might actually arrive?

I was talking about the US, the US amphibious forces can transport 40k of troops at one time. This relates to how is the US going to stop China's hostility without an invasion?

Also, Chian Hai Shek and his party was not any better. China was in as bad shape economically/socially as N.Korea is now under his rule. Comparatively Mao was one step forward. Granted his reaction was rather extreme, as is with almost any follow up leader to a overly corrupt government, it at least got the country unified and moving under one rule.

Art Eatman
October 11, 2006, 03:01 PM
China has had a certain amount of control over the NK megalomaniac via trade. Nobody else, really, will trade with NK due to its lack of hard currency.

China certainly has cause for concern about radioactive fallout if the North uses nukes on the South. Same for Japan. I guess a look at an annual wind rose might be worthwhile.

As far as China and armaments which would overwhelm our naval forces, they offered a helluva lot of money to the inventor of the Metalstorm gun. He turned them down. A conceptual use is for protection of naval vessels.

But NK is pretty much limited to conventional war on the peninsula. It's actual, proven delivery systems basically can't deliver. I'd worry more about a nuke on a ship than their rocketry. For Japan, of course, it's a bit different.

Art

High Planes Drifter
October 11, 2006, 05:08 PM
SoCal Shooterwrote:
In my assesment it is necessary to get China on our side completely.
-------------------------------------

I dont think that will happen; but we dont need them anyway. We just need them to stay out of it.


--------------------------------------------------------
Because if NK decides to make a go for the south again China is the only nation with enough military mass in the region that we can look to. Otherwise we have to nuke the NK, there really is not other alternative, a conventional war with NK is out of the question.
--------------------------------------------------------------

To say the least - Todays United States military would demolish North Korean forces in a timely fashion. What happened in the 50's is nothing like what you will see happen if war were to break out today. Thing is, they're worse off than they were in the 50's. They're people have resorted to canibalism because of the starvation in NK.

quatin
October 11, 2006, 05:56 PM
China certainly has cause for concern about radioactive fallout if the North uses nukes on the South. Same for Japan. I guess a look at an annual wind rose might be worthwhile.

I think N. Korea is developing the nuke primarily for the US, we're the only nation they have mentioned publicly about "aggression and defense". Besides, they can take over S. Korea conventionally and can just develop midrange missiles to shoot at Japan. Japan is afraid of a nuclear lash out of revenge for crimes against humanity (rape, torture, execution and etc.) they performed on Korea during WWII. People in Asia are still bitter about the Nano-Japanese invasion, there are still those living who personally witnessed or were subjected to that described.

RNB65
October 11, 2006, 06:07 PM
Perhaps it's time to put this Korean peninsula issue to rest once and for all?

Before the NK's succeed in building a bomb that actually works (since this one appears to have been mostly a dud or a fake) and missiles that don't malfunction and crash harmlessly into the Sea of Japan?

Hit 'em, hit 'em hard, and don't stop hitting them until KJI and his band of cronies are all hanging from nooses.

That's my $.02.


--

LightningJoe
October 11, 2006, 08:59 PM
As long as America fights, it has no problem. It's trying to clean up afterward that causes us problems. We got stuck in Marshall Plan mode. It never occurs to us to crush the enemy and walk away. War with North Korea might be quick and easy as long as we stick with just fighting. If we try to turn them into South Korea afterward, well, get out your checkbook.

richyoung
October 11, 2006, 10:34 PM
Also, Chian Hai Shek and his party was not any better. China was in as bad shape economically/socially as N.Korea is now under his rule. Comparatively Mao was one step forward. Granted his reaction was rather extreme, as is with almost any follow up leader to a overly corrupt government, it at least got the country unified and moving under one rule.

1. North Korea is not currently in the throws of a long-running civil war inside its territory AND invasion by a world power - those will kinda depress your economy.

2. You might want to google "cultural revolution", and see how many tens of millions of people have died, before making such an egregiously incorrect statement.

Borachon
October 11, 2006, 11:10 PM
Look guys, I know this is serious business, but EMPs are not magic wands that cancel out technology and render us powerless.

That's exactly what they do actually. :D

http://commdocs.house.gov/committees/security/has204000.000/has204000_0.HTM

But during the course of our early discussions when the Russians were acting very negatively toward America, a senior Russian, who at that time was the Chairman of the International Affairs Committee, the head of the Yabloko faction in Russia, a very dominant political party in Russia, and had been the former Soviet Ambassador to the U.S., Vladimir Lukin, made a statement that Roscoe and I could not believe.

He said, ''You know, you think you can tear people apart as you are doing in Serbia, but we have the ultimate ability to bring you down,'' and he referred to EMP.

So here was a high-level Russian official, someone who had been the ambassador to our country, mentioning the fact of something that we all knew that was a part of Russia's strategic nuclear doctrine that EMP has been, was and is a critical component.


Yes, I have at a number of hearings where it was appropriate to ask our military people how much of their warfighting capability would remain after a robust EMP laydown. Most frequently, the generals and the admirals turn to their staff who is behind them, and then they say, ''Gee, we will get back to you on the record for that.''
My colleague mentioned the President's Commission on Critical Infrastructure that testified before us. General Marsh was here, and we asked him about EMP, and he said, ''Well, we did not think there was a very high probability that that was going to happen, and so we did not look at it anymore.''
One of the Central Intelligence Agency (CIA) agents who are knowledgeable in this area told me that several years ago he briefed one of the Army Joint Chiefs on the EMP threat, and, after the briefing, the General cussed him out. He said, ''Why did you do that? Why did you have to ruin my day? You know there is nothing I can do about that. Why did you want to make me feel bad?'' That is not the right response to this problem.

Any of you feeling better about the situation now?

Junyo said: Regardless, I doubt the B2s and B52 launched cruise missiles that would be sitting safely in the MidWest would be affected. The problem with screwing with a superpower is the same as a boxer facing a guy with 6 inch longer arms; you've got to deal with his reach. The Norks could disable every single weapon in the theater, and if we were sufficiantly agitated we could have our own nuke on target in 15-20 minutes.

Sure. But listen to what you just said. North Korea (or China versus Taiwan) launches a nuclear weapon OVER a terrority and detonates it. It destroys NO infrastructure, kills directly only those people that rely on electricity to survive (hospital patients, maybe some traffic accidents etc) and adds only a minimal amount of radiation to the planets atmosphere....and in retaliation you are suggesting that we launch a nuke in return. I assume you mean against their population centers...correct me if I'm wrong.
Launching a nuclear weapon against North Korea...when none of our bases, equipment, or other assets have been directly nuked will NOT make any friends in China...and maybe not in Russia...and possibly not in any other nation on the planet. Politically, it might not be possible to attack NK with a massive nuke bombardment because NK had not directly attacked your forces.
The US might feel constrained by political concerns to respond in kind. So we explode a nuke over NK and NK goes dark. What effect would that have on N. Korean forces? They aren't dependent on sophisticated laser range finders, and night vision equipment to the same level we are. Guns and cannons and Katyusha rockets will still work. Our stuff and the South Koreans might not.

Again, taken from the House briefing:
EMP is one of a small number of threats that can hold our society at risk of catastrophic consequences and might result in the defeat of our military forces. EMP has the capability to produce significant damage to critical infrastructures and, thus, to the very fabric of U.S. society, as well as to our ability to project influence and military power abroad.

The common element that can produce such an impact from EMP is primarily electronics, so pervasive in all aspects of our society and military, coupled through critical infrastructures. Our vulnerability is increasing daily as our use and dependence on electronics continues to grow. The impact of EMP is asymmetric in relation to potential protagonists who are not as dependent as we are on modern electronics.

Axis-of-evil states, such as North Korea and Iran, may also be developing the capability to pose an EMP threat to the United States and may also be unpredictable and difficult to deter.

Certain types of relatively low-yield nuclear weapons can be employed to generate potentially catastrophic EMP effects over wide geographic areas, and designs for variance of such weapons may have been illicitly trafficked for a quarter century.

The recent test was a low yeild device...interesting huh?

But we are prepared right? We had the Russians breathing on our necks for so many years we'd never forget that we might face a nuclear armed adversary, right?
Next view graph, please.

To turn to the military aspects of the EMP threat for a moment, the end of the Cold War relaxed the discipline for achieving EMP survivability within the Department of Defense and gave rise to the perception that an erosion of EMP survivability of military forces was an acceptable risk. Again, Congressman Bartlett cited specific examples of that in his experience.

EMP simulation and test facilities have been mothballed or dismantled, and research concerning EMP phenomena, hardening, design, testing and maintenance has been substantially decreased. However, the emerging threat environment, characterized by a wide spectrum of actors that include near peers, such as Russia, established nuclear powers, rogue nations, subnational groups and terrorist organizations that either now have access to nuclear weapons and ballistic missiles or may have such access over the next 15 years have combined to place the risk of EMP attack and adverse consequences to the U.S. to a level that is not acceptable.
The situation of general purpose forces is more complex. Our increasing dependence on advanced electronic systems results in the potential for increased EMP vulnerability of our technologically advanced forces and, if unaddressed, make EMP employment by an adversary an attractive asymmetric option.

General LAWSON. Mr. Chairman, I think that if you talk about the military structure, we started in our deliberations and our actions in response to EMP threats with the strategic forces. I think we went from somewhere around a two or a three, and, over the years, we have built up both the knowledge and the capability so that our strategic forces I would assess somewhere between a seven and a eight.

I think, since that time, since the wall came down, as we got into the acquisition of newer forces and so on, there were some aspects of those newer forces that we continued with some pieces of the hardening programs, and we understood hardening all that well, but the attention given to hardening vis-a-vis other things that we wanted to put in terms of capability aboard those weapons systems, I guess I would say that we moved hardening from the absolutely required item in the development of new weapons systems to a nice-to-have kind of an idea.

You can read more about this at the link provided.

Okay....someone asked me HOW China would physically get to Taiwan without being blown away by the tremendous wealth of Taiwanese defenses. First off, let's take the US out of this fight. That makes it more interesting. If the US was fighting in North Korea, it might be hard to protect Taiwan at the same time...and would we want to? Do we want to make China POed at us while we were fighting on the Korean peninsula?

Maybe I better post this and continue later...I'm pooped. :D

Atticus
October 11, 2006, 11:17 PM
Question- Why is it the duty of the US to protect a wealthy, modern, industrialized nation like S. Korea from a starving,rag-tag nation like N. Korea anyway? As I recall, just a year or two ago S.Korean students were protesting for the Yankees to go home. Why the hell do we get ourselves into this crap?

Art Eatman
October 11, 2006, 11:23 PM
"Also, Chian Hai Shek and his party was not any better. China was in as bad shape economically/socially as N.Korea is now under his rule. Comparatively Mao was one step forward."

quatin, you reckon the Japanese invasion in the 1930s might have had anything to do with China's condition? By 1945, China was in pretty sad shape. Then came the civil war between Chiang and Mao. For all practical purposes, what Mao won might well have been called Trashville. Wars do that. I saw Manila in 1949; Hiroshima in 1950, and Seoul, Inchon and Yong Dong Po in 1954. I'm glad I can learn vicariously. First-hand learning about war obviously sucks.

Kim Jong Il inherited a country that had not been at war since 1953. What do you think is his excuse?

You might look into comparing what happened in politics and economics between mainland China and Taiwan, during the period 1949-1976, since both leaders were still at it in their respective domains.

I recommend Wikipedia, for Chiang Kai Shek and Mao Zedong.

Art

Borachon
October 11, 2006, 11:40 PM
Just the Chinese military transports...not counting merchant fleet ships (China has a LOT of merchant flagged vessals...2500 plus according to the old year 2000 labor report)

TYPE 072-III (YUTING-II CLASS) LARGE LANDING SHIP...7 ships
---The full displacement of the ship is estimated to be 5,000t, capable of carrying 250 troops and 10 tanks.

TYPE 072-II (YUTING CLASS) LARGE LANDING SHIP...11 ships
---250 troops; or 10 tanks; or 500t cargos

TYPE 072 (YUKAN CLASS) LARGE LANDING SHIP...7 ships
---450t and a maximum speed of 18kt. The ship could carry 250 troops and two tanks over a long distance to the remote islands in the South China Sea.


The New model, Yuhai Class Medium Landing Ship....10 ships...
---250 troops or 2 tanks

Type 079 (Yulian Class) Medium Landing Ship...31 ships
--5 main battle tanks, or 8 vehicles, or 4 trucks plus 4 towed 85mm cannon guns, or 200t cargo

Type 073-III (Yudeng Class) Medium Landing Ship....number unknown
---180 troops; or 6 main battle tanks (MBTs), or 8 light amphibious tanks, or 9 Armoured personnel carriers (APCs), or 12 vehicles; or 250 tonnes cargo beaching.

Type 073-II (Yudao Class) Medium Landing Ship....unknown

Qiongsha Class Troop Transport Ship...no amphibious capability...needs docks or small craft like Type 271 Utility Landing Craft to help.

Type 271 Utility Landing Craft....hundreds of these built.
Capacity: 100t cargo

Type 068/069 (Yuqing Class) Utility Landing Craft....10 left
100 troops...or 1 vehicle

Type 067 (Yunan Class) Utility Landing Craft...40 craft
1 main battle tank, or two light vehicles, or 46t cargo

Zubr Class (Project 1232.2) Air Cushion Landing Craft...trying to buy 8 from Russia...don't know if the deal has gone thru yet.
130t of cargo: three main battle tanks (MBTs) such as T-72, or eight BMP-2 infantry fighting vehicles (IFVs), or ten BTR-70 wheeled armoured personnel carriers (APCs), or 360 fully equipped amphibious landing troops.

Okay that's enough...I'll do parachute and air force capabilities for landing paratroops and equipment another night.

Bartholomew Roberts
October 12, 2006, 12:27 AM
OK, lets assume that all of the Chinese amphib capability arrives safely at Taiwan, with no losses. We will further assume magical transports with no need to pack ammo or other logistics to support the assault. Finally we will assume that all ships have sufficient landing craft or RORO capability to make traditional harbors unnecessary.

1. 1,750 troops and 70 tanks.
2. 2,750 troops or 110 tanks
3. 1,750 troops and 14 tanks
4. 2,500 troops or 20 tanks
5. 155 tanks

No solid numbers on the rest; but I think we have enough to make the point... We'll just triple the above numbers to be on the safe side. That gives us 26,250 troops and ~700 tanks against an active duty Taiwanese army of 200,000 troops and another 500,000 reservists. This does not include Taiwan's 1,831 tanks of various vintages. Even if we assume each of China's 2,500 merchant ships can carry an additional 200 troops and logistics (as well as being magically able to land the equipment), the Chinese amry would be VASTLY outnumbered - and they can only get that good a deal if they totally sweep the skies and seas around Taiwan without losing any ships.

Here is a CATO.org China-Taiwan study (http://cato.org/pubs/fpbriefs/fpb74.pdf#search=%22Taiwanese%20Army%22) based heavily on the earlier RAND study.

I don't know where this idea that China is a legitimate threat to Taiwan in its current state comes from; but it has no basis in actual military ability. China would surely like to have that ability; but they don't - it isn't even close.

plexreticle
October 12, 2006, 12:57 AM
China wants North Korea to start a war about as much as the US wants it.

China is trying to develop it's economy plus the US owes China alot of money. The US is a better friend to China than North Korea will every be. China knows better than to screw that up over North Korea. This isn't 1960.

lamazza
October 12, 2006, 01:13 AM
Since the US hasn't won a war since WWII and the media won't let them win any wars-lots of crazies think it might be a good idea to declare war for benefits and money maybe?

tanksoldier
October 12, 2006, 01:22 AM
China can be "hostile" all it wants. They can't invade Taiwan, they don't have the sealift capability... and won't for many years. They also don't have the airpower and sea power to protect those future amphibs, and may never have it... if they do it will be far in the future. Don't forget, the actuall combat roops themselves is the SMALLEST factor in an amphib operation. Logistics and support takes up 7x the tonnage of the actual combat forces... fuel, ammo, food, etc... and the troops that move the stuff around.

The Chinese also can't sit back and rain artillery on Taiwan in hopes they will surrender... we can do the same to them with conventional tipped cruise missiles and naval gunfire.

No one in their right mind would actually INVADE China, but it is fairly easy to neutralize their naval and air capabilities. We wouldn't have to land any troops anywhere ourselves, just keep shooting the "fish in the barrel" that any Chinese invasion would be until they run out of amphibs and give up.

Now, if you share a LAND border with them you're up crap creek.


I was talking about the US, the US amphibious forces can transport 40k of troops at one time. This relates to how is the US going to stop China's hostility without an invasion?

Gewehr98
October 12, 2006, 01:41 AM
As a newly-retired B-52H and RC/WC-135 crew dawg, I heartily disagree. My platforms were very much configured to withstand and continue functioning during and after EMP was produced by an airburst, even the high-altitude ones designed specifically to incapacitate electrical and electronic systems. They had to, even as protection from other onboard systems - a single B-52's ECM suite could by itself take out an entire regional air traffic control center, like Oakland Center, with a few selective bursts. Nor would I tell the folks in the design requirements that they forgot to include EMP hardening in the development of the B1, B2, F117, and F22 weapons systems. That doesn't even begin to address what means we had to protect ourselves against flash blindness from those same airbursts.

That would also negate ongoing work by Air Force Research Labs (aka Rome Labs) and what the folks at Sandia National Laboratories do out there on their test ramp. (As I watched an RAF L-1011 tanker undergo EMP tests inside their test array not more than a couple years ago...) :scrutiny:

And that's just the Air Force side of the DoD equation. Suffice it to say not all of the lessons of the Cold War have been forgotten.

We (United States) need to keep China engaged in this one, and let them expend oodles of their own money and energy taking care of the junkyard dog in their back yard. There's probably something in Sun Tzu's Art of War that says exactly that. ;)

LeoC
October 12, 2006, 03:51 AM
The evening news here in China has reported after the testing was announced that the Chinese Government is pretty pissed off at North Korea for blatantly ignoring their request to cease testing.

Recently they announced that China will impose economic sanctions on NK. How much is unknown :scrutiny:

China has also said that military action against NK is "out of the question"... but we'll see. I think the ball is in North Korea's court. China is going to react to what crazy thing Kim Jong Il will do next.

I also agree that this one is all up to China. And although it's going to be unpleasant, I'm sure China wants to be the one to solve this. It would buy them a lot of credibility worldwide, which is what the Chinese government is striving for.

gak
October 12, 2006, 04:47 AM
Here they come...
http://i81.photobucket.com/albums/j234/gakk/a3.jpg

combatantr2
October 12, 2006, 07:41 AM
My take...

1. China for now cannot mount a successful invasion on Taiwan. But still the same they'll side with NK on this. So, expect China on this one too. Oh I forgot Russia. A great possibility Russia will be involve by way of aiding these two countries. Oil, firepower, food, etc. Any attempt to block these resources will be considered an act of war against Russia. So Russia could be embroiled in this too militarily.
2. Obviously NK has already lost all food resources, so they could start a war anytime soon.
3. NK cannot sustain a long war. Correct. But they can still cause damage while they're at it. Expect a blitz type maneuver.
4. EMP has never been proven to be a military advantage so far in large scare military confrontation, except in the 24' tv series. But it would be interesting to finally see this one in actual.
5. If only Gen. McArthur was given the go to atomized North Korea, things would have been different today.

Lou629
October 12, 2006, 08:10 AM
5. If only Gen. McArthur was given the go to atomized North Korea, things would have been different today.

Your statement is correct about things being different today, that's for sure. What makes you think that this difference would be for the better? Think about this: History never reveals the consequences of its' alternatives.

The only thing we know for sure is that McA nuking NK around 1951 would mean that this year would mark the 55th anniversary of WWIII. The question is would any of us be here to care? The USA wasn't the only country with nukes back then either, and Russia and China were allies in those days.
Food for thought.

Hugo
October 12, 2006, 08:11 AM
China wants the whole continent to be nice and mellow for the Olympics in 2008 so they can show the world how great they are, and get more tourists. If Kim doesn't mellow out fast, I bet they have some aide, bodyguard, or general just waiting to assassinate Kim and take over, hopefully making a more mellow North Korea. I bet South Korea knows and expects this, if not having their own people ready to whack Kim, then their people in North Korea will help reunite both Koreas and this crap can end peacefully. South Korea is really, really sick of this crap. Probably will take a few years either way though.

buzz_knox
October 12, 2006, 09:20 AM
As far as China and armaments which would overwhelm our naval forces, they offered a helluva lot of money to the inventor of the Metalstorm gun. He turned them down. A conceptual use is for protection of naval vessels.

China's naval strategy for years has been to build up its force projection capability to a level it can stand up to and, in combination with land based aircraft, defeat an American task force. The Kursk was reportedly lost during a weapons excercise put on, in part, to show a visiting Chinese admiral what an Oscar could do. The Oscar, of course, was designed to destroy a carrier task force. The SS-N-22 Sunburn systems the Chinese are using was also designed for taking out carriers groups.

Lovely, isn't it, that it's range and speed were limited until the U.S. Navy redesigned it as a drone, and gave the improvements to the Russian manufacturer, who incorporated them into the next gen of the Sunburn?

Keith Wheeler
October 12, 2006, 09:27 AM
Borachon, you make it sound like the DoD just quit hardening systems against EMP.
As a newly-retired B-52H and RC/WC-135 crew dawg, I heartily disagree. My platforms were very much configured to withstand and continue functioning during and after EMP was produced by an airburst, even the high-altitude ones designed specifically to incapacitate electrical and electronic systems.

I've been on the design side of that stuff. Gewehr98 speaks the truth. Yes indeed folks, us "nerds" developing military hardware know about electro-magnetic pulse. If it needs to be rad-hard, it's rad-hard; if it's at risk for EMP is designed to deal with it.

An "EMPty" bomb or other electro-magnetic weapon is no more a "magic wand" than a nuke is. Dangerous? Sure. Powerful? You bet. Magic? Nope.

Unless you can explain to me why even the most sophisticated of military electronics still have a few discrete transistors, located at the edges of the board, then don't go on about how some wonder weapon is gonna turn off all our stuff. We're fighting in the real world, not against sci-fi toasters.

ozwyn
October 12, 2006, 09:49 AM
I do not believe China and taiwan should be our concerns for this North Korea issue.

Economically, China is sitting pretty, the US and China have huge economic ties, and surprisingly close ties due to counterterrorism treaties.

The Chinese government functions so successfully because (IMO) they offer a very simple and direct trade of economic success for civil liberties. China's longer term goal of become a economic and space superpower is only restriced and put at risk from North Korea.

Historical linsk aside, China knows South Korea and even Japan has done a lot more for China lately than North Korea. North Korea exsists as much as a bad memory of the days when china too was cut off from the world markets and the global stage. Their booming economy, their space program, the Olympics... this is the China they want to sell to the world. North Korea reminds people of "the bad old days".

China has already seriously changed their rhetoric towards North Korea, and we can expect that trend to continue. I believe North Korea may be in for quite a shock if they go to war and expect heavy chinese support.

As far as China and Taiwan, by developing Chinas high tech industries, they are going to break into the market, and then undercut Taiwan and produce at a loss until Taiwan's economy collapses then buy the island back through straw investors. It is a method of victory which strengthens Chinese technology industry, develops R&D capability, and permits a "conquest" without a military concern. If china is smart that's how they will re-assimilate Taiwan - over time and without a shot fired.

LAR-15
October 12, 2006, 10:01 AM
China had nukes in 1951??? :confused:

We should have dropped a nuke north of the Yalu River. :mad:

Frigging UN and Truman :cuss:

ozwyn
October 12, 2006, 10:06 AM
you think the Soviet Union would let that happen without a response?

When it comes to avoiding a nuclear exchange the Korean war was threading a needle.

AirForceShooter
October 12, 2006, 10:16 AM
is this a remake of the "Mouse That Roared"?

AFS

MCgunner
October 12, 2006, 10:26 AM
So, if you drive a Hyundai or shoot a Dawoo, should you stock up on spare parts? God help us if they attack Japan. Half the cars in the country would be jeopardized for parts, but then, they rarely need parts.

dragongoddess
October 12, 2006, 10:29 AM
On the subject of EMP. Properly shielded electronics will surive EMP. All US weapon systems are tested in an EMP environment to see if they can function. Some 7 years of my military service was spent in R&D at WSMR,NM. You would be amazed at what the military does to equipment before it reaches our service members. EMP is one of those tests.

Biker
October 12, 2006, 10:36 AM
Folks, I think that it would be a mistake to underestimate the threat that NK poses and to overestimate our ability to deal with it. Attacking NK would be akin to getting in a shootout in crowded bar with one known hostile, a number of undecideds and a few friendlies.
I don't think that we could get the job done without nukes and the possibility of doing harm to friendlies and undecideds alike is great. Whereas we have to be careful where our "bullets" go in this bar shootout, NK doesn't really care and Kim isn't concerned about collateral damage and he indeed has a gallery full of hostages ready to execute.

Not to mention we're fighting two other wars and we're trying to lean on Iran at the same time.

Let's not write checks with our mouth that our ass can't cash.

JMO...

Biker

longeyes
October 12, 2006, 10:58 AM
As long as the American Consumer is King--or, rather, Queen--we are an impotent tiger. Whoever rules the shopping malls rules America--and right now that's China.

Borachon
October 12, 2006, 11:24 AM
Gewehr98:
The majority of the quotes I put in my previous post came from a House of Representatives briefing about the potential impact of EMP. Now...were the Generals lying and overstating our vulnerability in order to get more funding to upgrade systems that don't need it? :D Lying to Congress in order to get additional money? They'd NEVER do that. :rolleyes:
But the majority of the negative comments I was posting came from Generals testifying before Congress...these were not my personal opinions about the effects of EMP. I'll be the first to grant you that the Generals probably don't understand EMP any better than I do. :D

And yeah, I know a lot of our systems are hardened to withstand EMP. They'd hafta be. What concerns me is that not every link-in-the-chain would be hardened. Some components would be. Others not. Failure at any one of a thousand points could ruin a whole system.

And I think you would agree that some systems are more susceptible to EMP than others. A steam powered engine on an aircraft carrier might suffer no damage and allow the air craft carrier to continue to move...but its radar, positioning systems, and communications could all be destroyed. Jets that were outside the aircraft carrier could have damage to their systems. Every component inside of these systems would have to be protected against EMP, as well as the computer storage for the programs. Wipe the hard drives and you've got nothing useable.

Perhaps you can advise me on something that I don't completely understand. I've heard it said that you can "harden" a system to EMP, but only to a certain level. For example, you can strengthen a system to withstand the energy from a 100 kiloton air burst, but that a 200 kiloton airburst might overload it if the system isn't rated for it. Does this mean that using a larger bomb that puts out more "lightening" can overwhelm a hardened system?

As to the political side:
If the US was fighting actively in N. Korea, how much force could it spare to attack elements of the Chinese military if it decided to attack Taiwan? Most of our force would initally be air power. It would take time to get troops to the conflict. And a lot of people would be asking why we would need to take on China while we were fighting NK. You risk China coming in on the side of NK if that happens. In fact I think that is the most risky element of entering into a conflict with North Korea. Not the threat from NK but the threat of making China come in on the side of North Korea. In order to keep that from happening, I think the administration would bend over backwards and allow China all sorts of latitude.

Chinese troops outnumbered: Yes they would be. So were we when we invaded Iraq...both times. The trick for China would be to have numerical superiority of troops at certain locations, and to achieve air supremacy at the outset. How? Simple. Borachon's Strike--Plan for Liberating A Nation.

Elements of the BS-Plan. :D
Now we know China believes in the use of EMP as a weapon. They've stated this at other times. Why wouldn't they use that at the outset of an invasion? Taiwan is 250 miles long, and 90 miles wide (roughly). 4 nuclear weapons exploded at predetermined heights over the country ought to be enough to knock out a majority of electronic devices. 10 SECONDS after detonation, China could begin releasing information via its embassies around the world explaining that they had not attacked the country with nukes...only the electronic components with an EMP...and not the citizens. This is a fine distinction, but a lot of hair-splitters would grab it and use it to justify their own inaction.

On Taiwan, lots of the jet aircraft used for air patrols could be effected. Taiwan is not the US military. Their systems are likely not going to be hardened to the same degree as our forces. An EMP attack could be devastating. Electricity is gone. Private cars likely won't start. Television and radios (both public and military) are likely down. Telephones are out. Communication is difficult..at best. Some weapons systems may not work.
Moving troops from one end of the country to the other might be hard, and until you know for a fact that Chinese troops are invading at a specfic location.

Confusion, rumor, and mistakes will be rampant. Civil disorder could start very quickly. The nukes would likely be close enough in the atmosphere to be visually seen (you aren't trying to zap half of the United States after all, so the nukes wouldn't need to be at 200,000 feet). Even though these nukes don't have to be overly huge to create EMP, they will likely still have been visible.

People will be terrified. "The capitol has been destroyed!" "No, it was the local airbase!" "It's the Chinese!" "It's the Russians!" "It's Tom Cruise from that bad War of the Worlds remake!" (Taiwanese live in deathly fear of Tom Cruise...as should we all.)

Coordination and control within the country will be difficult enough even WITHOUT the possibility of a Chinese invasion. Fires (accidental or as the result of nuclear "flash"..or sabotage), traffic accidents, people stranded far away from their homes, people stuck in elevators, and riots because the electricity is off are all possible.

Chinese agents in Taiwan could begin sabotage activities. Blow up bridges. Random shooting. Just create enough confusion to get people scared, and get the military moving away from vital locations. Some of these agents could be Chinese special forces that either snuck in on the ferry :rolleyes: or could come from submarines.

Taiwanese troops would be scattered throughout the country. Without an effective transportation systems (EMP'd), without orders (communication possibly EMP'd), and without knowing if the Chinese were coming (radar EMP'd) it would be up to the forces locally to decide what was best in terms of deployment. Most would hunker down, IMO. Restore order locally and await developments.

That's when China needs to send it's fleet. It would have held the fleet far enough back not to get zapped by its own EMP...possibly even as far back as the coast of China. It's going to take it a few hours to get to the coast of Taiwan. At a minimum, probably 6 hours. And since Taiwan doesn't have a nuclear weapons program, China doesn't have to worry that an EMP will be launched against its fleet while it is in motion...not from Taiwan anyway. (The US would have to decide right then and there whether it wanted to pop a nuclear weapon over the Chinese fleet....would take a lot of political will if we were already fighting in North Korea)

During that 6 hours, the Chinese air force would pound whatever it could find.
Any of the surviving Taiwanese aircraft and naval assets would need to be engaged and destroyed. Also, bombing air bases just on general principle would be a good idea. Leave the runways intact though. China will need them. Same for port facilities. Continue air attack sorties for the remainder of the conflict. China has roughly 3000 attack and bomber aircraft scattered throughout the three branches service (globalsecurity.org). Although the data on this questionable. Globalsecurity shows a DECREASING inventory of fighters and bombers over the years for China. If some older aircraft are still in service, or could be brought back into service, China could possess 5 to 6 thousand fighters and bombers.
As of 1997 the PLA Air Force had a total strength of approximately 370,000, organized into 45 air divisions. Among them are five bomber divisions, 32 fighter divisions, six attack divisions, two transport divisions, 17 air defense divisions [with 220,000 troops], and one airborne army comprising three airborne divisions with 20,000 airborne troops.

The fleet arrives. Let's say this fleet is composed of the landing craft in the military and 100 merchant vessals. Roughly 150,000 men. (1000 troops per merchantman) China possesses access to far more merchant vessals than this. 100 would be easy for them to commandeer (if that's even necessary) and to outfit.

Shell and bomb whatever it needs to to make a beachhead and begin landing troops. Taiwanese troops at other ends of the country may be forced to physically MARCH to the battle The naval transport vessals turn around and make the trek back to China to pick up the second wave. Send some elements out to engage the Taiwanese forces whereever they can be found, and leave enough troops to defend the beachhead until reenforcements arrive. Head for the nearest town with an airport runway and secure it. Then begin airlifting troops and equipment to supplement naval shipments.

Within 12 to 36 hours, I'd estimate you could have 200,000 Chinese troops in Taiwan. From then on, it would be house-to-house and artillery versus artillery. Wouldn't be an easy fight for the Chinese, but air superiority, troop movement, and communication coordination could all be on their side because their stuff won't have been fried.

It doesn't even have to be at the level I've described. Mine is a pretty dire scenario. Assuming though that Taiwan's airforce and ships were even PARTIALLY degraded by an EMP attack, an invasion by China becomes a lot easier to accomplish.

Even Taiwanese military strategists seem to think so...albeit with some debate. Note the following link.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Military_of_the_Republic_of_China
A series of computer simulations conducted by the ROC Ministry of National Defense in 2004 predicted that, in the event of a full scale invasion by the PRC, Taipei would fall after almost three weeks. It also showed that the ROC Air Force would be eliminated by about the fifth day. However, the simulation results indicate that the PRC would lose about two-thirds of all its military forces in the process. The results of the simulation are hotly debated since they came at a time when the Legislative Yuan was debating one of the largest arms procurement packages in recent years.

This plan did not incorporate the idea of China launching an EMP strike ahead of time and degrading Taiwanese forces in this fashion ahead of time.

High Planes Drifter
October 12, 2006, 11:42 AM
quote:
Since the US hasn't won a war since WWII and the media won't let them win any wars-lots of crazies think it might be a good idea to declare war for benefits and money maybe?

-------------------------------------

The US has won plenty of conflicts scince WWII.

------------------------------------------

And a lot of people would be asking why we would need to take on China while we were fighting NK. You risk China coming in on the side of NK if that happens.
-----------------------------------------

That may be inevitable anyway. It is ceratinly a possibility That China will back NK as it did in the 50's. We'll just have to see what they have to say in the sanction hearings.

Borachon
October 12, 2006, 11:59 AM
On the subject of EMP. Properly shielded electronics will surive EMP. All US weapon systems are tested in an EMP environment to see if they can function. Some 7 years of my military service was spent in R&D at WSMR,NM. You would be amazed at what the military does to equipment before it reaches our service members. EMP is one of those tests.

Is all Taiwanese military equipment sheilded in the same fashion?


At least a couple of members of Congress don't quite agree.

The major impact of EMP weapons is on electronics, "so pervasive in all aspects of our society and military, coupled through critical infrastructures," explained the report.

"Their effects on systems and infrastructures dependent on electricity and electronics could be sufficiently ruinous as to qualify as catastrophic to the nation," Lowell Wood, acting chairman of the commission, told members of Congress.

The commission report went so far as to suggest, in its opening sentence, that an EMP attack "might result in the defeat of our military forces."

The "Commission to Assess the Threat to the United States from Electromagnetic Pulse Attack" report is a pretty good one.

Keith Wheeler
October 12, 2006, 12:02 PM
At least a couple of members of Congress don't quite agree.

Thanks for the pointer. I'll be sure to include members of congress in all my future design reviews. I didn't realize they had so much technical knowledge!

Edited to add:

A fellow I know of high prominence in the electronic warfare world was at a congressional hearing. One threat he discussed was the so-called HERF gun -- High Energy Radio Frequency, a mild attempt at creating EMP like damage in a point target. A congressman said "this HERF gun, should it be on the Brady Bill?".

I'm not saying that members of congress can't be intelligent, hard working, ethical, well meaning people, but they tend to come from backgrounds with little to no training/experience in physics and technology.

Borachon
October 12, 2006, 12:09 PM
That may be inevitable anyway. It is ceratinly a possibility That China will back NK as it did in the 50's. We'll just have to see what they have to say in the sanction hearings.

I agree. It may develop out of any conflict with North Korea. China doesn't like the idea of North Korea disappearing and US/South Korean forces ending up on the Yalu River hundreds of miles closer to China then we are currently.

I think China is going to back off on major sanctions. If they back off, Kim probably calms down and then the ball is in America's court about what we will do. I don't think an attack by the US on NK's nuclear sites is likely though. Politicians don't want a nuclear war right before the election. :D

In fact, I think our politicians wish this one would just go away. Kim is the one who is setting the pace right now. Kinda scary....because whenever he has said "I'm going to do this!", he's done it. Says he's gonna launch missiles. Does it. Says he's gonna explode a nuke. Does it.
Now he's saying strong measures aganist Japan if sanctions come from that nation. And strong actions against the US if the UN does sanctions.

That's scary.

Borachon
October 12, 2006, 12:12 PM
Thanks for the pointer. I'll be sure to include members of congress in all my future design reviews. I didn't realize they had so much technical knowledge!

They don't. They're idiots. Otherwise they'd know don't use public computers to talk to little boys. :D

But the people that brief Congress ARE suppose to have technical knowledge. But I'll bow to your expertise on this and ask you straight out. Are you stating that United States forces are totally impervious to electro magnetic pulse weapons right now, at this moment?

Keith Wheeler
October 12, 2006, 12:26 PM
Are you stating that United States forces are totally impervious to electro magnetic pulse weapons right now, at this moment?

Nothing, not even Cheyenne Mountain, is totally impervious to anything.

What I'm saying is that EMP has been known about since Trinity. The FUDers are making out like this is a new threat. It's not. It's a known threat, and something that has been taken in to account in military hardware for a long time. An EMP weapon will not instantly push our military back to the cavalry days.

I have worked for and with firms that develop hardware for the military. This is nothing new. EMP was discovered as a side-effect of the old "plain-Jane" nuclear explosion. Again, this is nothing new. We've tested the effects of EMP on electronics for decades, and that knowledge is part of what goes in to our designs. I'm sorry if I'm being a bit vague, bit this is an issue that 1) is incredibly technical, and 2) I'm not comfortable going in to details about in this sort of forum.

71Commander
October 12, 2006, 12:49 PM
If North Korea attacks the United States, they're going to have a food SURPLUS without increasing supply. There won't be anyone left to eat what's there.

Only problem with this is that all the food will be cooked at the same time.:evil: Some of it can be found in the dark.:p

Borachon
October 12, 2006, 01:07 PM
What I'm saying is that EMP has been known about since Trinity. The FUDers are making out like this is a new threat. It's not. It's a known threat, and something that has been taken in to account in military hardware for a long time.

Knowing about a threat and countering it are two different things. What surprised me looking into this threat was how Congress had TWO meetings on it. One in 1997, another in 2004. What BOTH said...paraphrased...was that this is a threat and something ought to be done. That bothered me. If it was known in 1997, why hasn't something ALREADY been done?

I know military assets are going to be better protected. What concerns me is not that some military systems won't survive, but that the systems that THOSE systems rely on won't. The Aegis anti-missile system may keep its software and missile components intact...but the ship loses the electrical generator that runs the whole thing. The F-16 jets survive fine, but the elevator that lifts them from underneath the ship to the flight deck doesn't. That sort of thing. Or the GPS goes. Or the radar. Or the navigation system. Or the night vision. Some of these are very delicate systems on a good day.

It's all complicated electronics now. And the more parts you add to any system, the more that can screw up.

But we'll just have to wait and see if nukes start going off. If our stuff survives, we'll know we were ready. If it doesn't, we'll know we weren't.
Hopefully, you're right. I worry that you're wrong.

junyo
October 12, 2006, 01:07 PM
Sure. But listen to what you just said. North Korea (or China versus Taiwan) launches a nuclear weapon OVER a terrority and detonates it. It destroys NO infrastructure, kills directly only those people that rely on electricity to survive (hospital patients, maybe some traffic accidents etc) and adds only a minimal amount of radiation to the planets atmosphere....and in retaliation you are suggesting that we launch a nuke in return. I assume you mean against their population centers...correct me if I'm wrong.
Launching a nuclear weapon against North Korea...when none of our bases, equipment, or other assets have been directly nuked will NOT make any friends in China...and maybe not in Russia...and possibly not in any other nation on the planet. Politically, it might not be possible to attack NK with a massive nuke bombardment because NK had not directly attacked your forces.
The US might feel constrained by political concerns to respond in kind. So we explode a nuke over NK and NK goes dark. What effect would that have on N. Korean forces? They aren't dependent on sophisticated laser range finders, and night vision equipment to the same level we are. Guns and cannons and Katyusha rockets will still work. Our stuff and the South Koreans might not.First of all, correct me if I'm wrong, but the primary way that EMP toasts equipment is by the simple mechanism of inducing current within the circuitry of the affected item, and thereby burning out traces and overloading circuits. Therefore any army that wanted to fight at a post WWII level of technology would be pretty inconvenianced if their equipment was in the field and not well shielded. A lot of your communications go down and any vehicle with wiring and/or fuses is at least temporarily disabled. If the US simply fried enough power infrastructure to bring down the Norks air defense grid their army, pouring across the DMZ with fully functional rifles and artillery (on foot, communicating via runner, with the S. Koreans designating targets with the lasers that they're stashing in a lead lined bunkers as we speak), wouldn't last 10 minutes against a relentless bombing campaign that could be staged from outside of their effective attack range. And that's with conventional munitions.

And I wasn't suggesting that we retaliate with a nuke, merely stating the possibility, however as policy I'd favor it. Over, on, in or near, if they used a nuke, or any WMD, we should erase them. And you want to bet that the other members of the nuclear club would have a huge issue with massive retaliation against a rogue state that had used a nuke for a first strike? The entire reason that nuclear deterance works is the unspoken promise that if you mess with a nuclear armed nation it's the last messing you'll do. The only issue that would arise would be a half a--ed strike that left the Norks in a position to lash out one last time, potentially against China or Russia, or a strike that decapitated the regime without killing a large chunk of the population and left a refuge mess for China. Would there be some lip flapping at the UN? Sure would, and it would have the exact same weight as the rest of the lip flapping. And in private everyone in the civilized world would thank whatever they believed in that we'd done it.

Art Eatman
October 12, 2006, 01:14 PM
I like the comment about China and North Korea: China is much more likely to be influenced by people from Bentonville, Arkansas than people from Pyongyang, North Korea.

:), Art

Keith Wheeler
October 12, 2006, 01:18 PM
I like the comment about China and North Korea: China is much more likely to be influenced by people from Bentonville, Arkansas than people from Pyongyang, North Korea.


Well, they are the new shadow government, don't ya know:

http://www.joplinglobe.com/local/local_story_148015054

Borachon
October 12, 2006, 01:20 PM
And you want to bet that the other members of the nuclear club would have a huge issue with massive retaliation against a rogue state that had used a nuke for a first strike?

Any strike that caused a radiactive cloud comprised of ex-North Koreans falling on Chinese ground would be a cause for the Chinese. :) Depending on the wind direction, Beijing might have to hide in bunkers.

If the nuke wasn't used against people, but only as an "EMP emitter", then I think a LOT of nations would have a problem with the US going full bore and attacking population and military centers in the North. Hitting them with an EMP nuke of our own wouldn't have the same political consequences as killing 10 million people in 30 minutes and would be a proportionate response.

After all, what would NK have done? They would have disrupted...or tried to disrupt...our military assets in the north Pacific theater, but avoided a direct attack on an Okinawa naval base, or Seoul, or wherever. A US nuclear response would NOT come back immediately. There would be a LOT of thought about it before we decided to shoot one ourselves and we probably wouldn't.

For the record, I agree with you. We should, as a matter of policy, let it be known that nuclear attacks....even indirect EMP attacks....will represent a nuclear attack on the United States.

Borachon
October 12, 2006, 01:30 PM
I like the comment about China and North Korea: China is much more likely to be influenced by people from Bentonville, Arkansas than people from Pyongyang, North Korea.

Economic interest are definately going to go into any Chinese response right now. The Chinese are having to walk a tightrope between keeping the US happy and keeping strong trade, and keeping North Korea alive as a political entity so that the South Koreans and US don't end up with a base right on the Yalu River.

They probably really AREN'T too happy with Kim right now. But just because you had a spat with your brother and don't like him right now doesn't mean you're gonna let somebody else come and knock him around.

I think its a toss up 50/50 right now which way China will go on sanctions. And I don't give good odds at all that China will back the US if it comes down to a NK and US war. Fact I'd bet on China fighting the US, or at best staying neutral.

More likely than not, we'll see a waterdown list of sanctions that the US can call a victory and that Kim can live with and it will all die down in another week. But if Kim thinks he's getting shafted...well....he'll do something.

Parking an old North Korean, Libirian-registered frieghter off California and launching a Scud over Kansas and detonating it would earn him a place in the history books.:)

quatin
October 12, 2006, 01:47 PM
1. North Korea is not currently in the throws of a long-running civil war inside its territory AND invasion by a world power - those will kinda depress your economy.

2. You might want to google "cultural revolution", and see how many tens of millions of people have died, before making such an egregiously incorrect statement.

That's entirely one sided. You are defending a military dictator, who had an extensive criminal past and who forcibly took control of China by paying off mercenaries and blackmailing/bribing warlords to control provinces. His rule was totalitarian and much like Iraq catered to the wealthy. His lavish spending (especially on all his concubines) and disgust of the Chinese culture alienated the rest of the population. He would crush any party/force he demed a threat and you think censorship is bad now. The final blow to him was when he decided to ignore the Japanese invasion in 1931 and chase down his long time rivals. Most of Manchuria was easily conquered due to this strategy he dictated. Chiang had to be forced by one of his own generals to make peace with the Communists to fend off Japan. Even during the war he spent most of his time underground to let the Communists take the brunt of the fighting so he could make a come back after the war. If his rule was even marginally beneficial, the people wouldn't rise up. Civil wars don't just occur if everything is nice and dandy.

The Cultural Revolution was an extreme overreaction to Chiang Kai Shek's personal image of China. Everything remotely "western" was destroyed, because of how Chiang catered to the west over his own people. I do remember a quote he said that "The only thing Asian of me is my face". The wealthy were stripped of their property, because of their support for Chiang and the immunity to law they enjoyed due to it. Granted it was one of the worst periods in Chinese history, there was a reason to it. It happened here in the US as well after the Revolutionary war when British supporters were stripped of their property. Also, most of the people who died during this period was from the great famine (from drought), Mao was too much in denial to seriously address. However, given the choice, China would be another totalitarian Iraq today if Chiang was allowed to continue his rule.

Correia
October 12, 2006, 01:50 PM
EMP, it's the new Zombie Biker Puma Bear.

Manedwolf
October 12, 2006, 02:00 PM
Parking an old North Korean, Libirian-registered frieghter off California and launching a Scud over Kansas and detonating it would earn him a place in the history books.

Why bother launching a missile when they could just take a bulky current test nuke, keep it on the freighter, and sail into one of our lovely still-unsecured harbors, then set it off?

jcoiii
October 12, 2006, 02:00 PM
What caliber for EMP?

buzz_knox
October 12, 2006, 02:01 PM
The Cultural Revolution was an extreme overreaction to Chiang Kai Shek's personal image of China. Everything remotely "western" was destroyed, because of how Chiang catered to the west over his own people.

Not quite. It was Mao's effort to regain control after the failure of the Communist Party after the utter failure of his Great Leap Forward plan. It wasn't about eliminating western ideas (which in many ways the Great Leap Forward had been intended towards adopting). It was about eliminating those who did or might oppose him, and creating a cult of personality in which every good Chinese quoted from his little red book as if it was holy scripture, all with the intent of showing you were a good enough Communist not to get killed.

As for the famines, the casualties didn't result from Mao's inaction, they resulted from his actions in the Great Leap Forward. He attempted to bring China firmly into the 20th Century and becoming an industrial power by ignoring farming and requiring everyone to partake such spurious activites as having backyard foundries. People died because the penalty for disobeying his orders was condemnation and death.

Art Eatman
October 12, 2006, 02:03 PM
quatin, would you check back to my Post #62, and respond, please?

:), Art

robertbank
October 12, 2006, 02:13 PM
Given about a third of your National Debt is held by China I doubt China will ever be a threat to the U.S. and is probably your biggest ally. Well the latter might be a stretch but they are covering your o/d at the bank right now. The US might be fighting in Iraq but the Chinese are writing the cheques against GWB's IOU's.

North Korea will get away with this as long as the rest of the world allows it to happen and they will. Look at Pakistan and what happened there when the world wringed their hands when they got the bomb.

Might be easier to cut a deal with the Chinese to turn NK into a glass factory and get it over with. The Liberals would whine and write books into the next century but the threat would be done with.

Take Care

Bob

Keith Wheeler
October 12, 2006, 02:19 PM
What caliber for EMP?

Based on the ability of the EMPs to nullify all modern technology, probably something in a smooth-bore musket, or maybe even a match-lock.

quatin
October 12, 2006, 02:52 PM
quatin, would you check back to my Post #62, and respond, please?

Yeah, that's not fair comparing Taiwan vs China post civil war, because China had to deal with a war torn country with no foreign support. Taiwan had to deal with a now small population with heavy foreign aid and pretty much had to obey the west in order to have their survival line.

Not quite. It was Maos' effort to regain control after the failure of the Communist Party after the utter failure of his Great Leap Forward plan. It wasn't about eliminating western ideas (which in many ways the Great Leap Forward had been intended towards adopting). It was about eliminating those who did or might oppose him, and creating a cult of personality in which every good Chinese quoted from his little red book as if it was holy scripture, all with the intent of showing you were a good enough Communist not to get killed.

As for the famines, the casualties didn't result from Mao's inaction, they resulted from his actions in the Great Leap Forward. He attempted to bring China firmly into the 20th Century and becoming an industrial power by ignoring farming and requiring everyone to partake such spurious activites as having backyard foundries. People died because the penalty for disobeying his orders was condemnation and death.

I just have to disagree, it now comes on how you interpret what Mao was trying to do with the Cultural Revolution. It may be a combination of revenge/communist doctrine/control. The Cultural Revolution was so senseless and pointless it's hard to dictate what the real goal was. One thing I know for certain was part of it was about eliminating western influences. People were banned from playing the violin because classical music was "western". Also, the great famines did occur during that period, there were real droughts. Explain it however you want, but one person can't possibly personally execute 30 million people and still not suffer a rebellion. I'm not saying that the party didn't jail opposition, they did and most of them died in jail, but this claim of "executing 20-30 million people" is an exaggeration.

beerslurpy
October 12, 2006, 03:37 PM
My take:
EMP not a threat
Very capable EMP bombs have been around since the 80s in the US arsenal. But you can harden stuff against EMP and I think it is safe to assume that our carriers are hardened against that sort of thing.

Taiwan not in immediate danger
Chinese have inadequate sea and airlift capability to effect an invasion. If they somehow acquired this ability without us knowing, they still lack the ability to defeat current Taiwanese assets capable of destroying such transport craft before they land. I have heard estimates of 1-2 million chinese miltary losses plus enormous amounts of material to succeed in an invasion. That would completely empty out their military from top to bottom and flatten their economy to boot. If any sort of retaliation occurs, they will be that much worse off. If the US steps in, expect china's economy to take 50-100 years to recover IMO.

China's army not actually that big
China's army is mostly a big government run boy scouts/4H program for political indoctrination. A significant portion of the PLA is involved in agriculture and industry for the financial enrichment of the generals. Lots of wasted energy there. Being able to march and drill is different being able to fire and maneuver against people trying to kill you. They have a few hundred thousand real troops.

Japan not in real danger
Japan could get hit, but not hard enough to do permanent damage. If they did, there would almost certainly be an irrationally strong response from the US. Japan might begin rearming again.

Japan not as advanced as you might think
Remember that the japanese are copiers and refiners, not innovators. They are taking baby steps towards powered armor and color-changing fabrics, but they are a LONG way off from something portable that can be used without an enormous amount of preparation.

I have seen their "thermoptic camo" and it only looked convincing from one narrow angle, it required an external computer and cameras to judge the background and it definitley wasnt portable. What the US wants is a lot more complicated.

beerslurpy
October 12, 2006, 03:39 PM
Mao spent years selling his country's food to the soviets in return for factories and technological help. As a result, 30 million chinese starved to death and 30 million were shot resisting his tyranny. His goal was simple- a dominant place in the world for China. He was after raw power, nothing more complicated than that.

The current chinese government is no less evil.

quatin
October 12, 2006, 03:52 PM
Mao spent years selling his country's food to the soviets in return for factories and technological help. As a result, 30 million chinese starved to death. His goal was simple- a dominant place in the world for China. He was after raw power, nothing more complicated than that.

He should be paranoid. China was colonized, raided and beaten down by Europe & US (boxer rebellion). Afterwards it was invaded by Japan. Don't you think national security would be a priority after that? Mao did force the continuing export on grain even during the famine, to keep up his "reputation" of a successful China. The worst of the famine was in 1958, one of the worst weathered years of the time. There were also several natural catastrophes 3 years prior to it. It was a stupid self-bolstering idea to continue exports, but there was still a famine, even if Mao was in self-denial it was happening doesn't mean you should be in denial that it happened too.

Bartholomew Roberts
October 12, 2006, 05:30 PM
Mao probably set China back 50 years or more... imagine where we would be today if China had actually developed like a normal economy during Mao's reign.

As for the BS-Plan... I'll leave the EMP aspects for those more knowledgable.


China has roughly 3000 attack and bomber aircraft scattered throughout the three branches service (globalsecurity.org). Although the data on this questionable. Globalsecurity shows a DECREASING inventory of fighters and bombers over the years for China. If some older aircraft are still in service, or could be brought back into service, China could possess 5 to 6 thousand fighters and bombers.

Well here a few questions to ask: How many aircraft have sufficient range to reach Taiwan and have any significant loiter time there? What is the sortie rate of the PLAF? How many airfields are located close enough to be used in an attack on Taiwan and what is their maximum capacity?

How many aircraft can China put into action once those restraints are considered?

The fleet arrives. Let's say this fleet is composed of the landing craft in the military and 100 merchant vessals. Roughly 150,000 men. (1000 troops per merchantman) China possesses access to far more merchant vessals than this. 100 would be easy for them to commandeer (if that's even necessary) and to outfit.

So a purpose designed amphibious lift ship can only hold 100-250 troops; but a merchant ship pressed into service will hold ten times that number? Why even bother building amphibs then? I think your speculation there is exceedingly optimistic. Also very optimistic is your assumption that the existing amphibious lift capability is around 50k. Pretty much every study I've read on the subject suggests an amphibious lift capability of 30k troops max at current levels with a projected growth to 60k by 2015.

Finally, one advantage amphibs do have over merchantmen is that they can LAND troops instead of merely transporting them. Do you really want to bet your entire assault on being able to successfully seize and hold harbors intact with a tiny fraction of your landing force while the rest of the force spends several days disembarking?

Within 12 to 36 hours, I'd estimate you could have 200,000 Chinese troops in Taiwan.

Spoken with the optimism of someone who has never tried to get 20 people organized towards a common goal, let alone 200,000 :) I doubt you could even unload the initial 100,000 troops in 36 hours. Take a look at the historic problems faced during WWII (http://www.jstor.org/view/00263931/di962577/96p0002q/0) by nations with far greater specialized amphib capability than the Chinese possess.

Quote:
A series of computer simulations conducted by the ROC Ministry of National Defense in 2004 predicted that, in the event of a full scale invasion by the PRC, Taipei would fall after almost three weeks. It also showed that the ROC Air Force would be eliminated by about the fifth day. However, the simulation results indicate that the PRC would lose about two-thirds of all its military forces in the process. The results of the simulation are hotly debated since they came at a time when the Legislative Yuan was debating one of the largest arms procurement packages in recent years.

What this doesn't tell us is what did ROC consider a "full scale invasion?" Without knowing what capability they attributed to the Chinese, it is difficult to extrapolate whether the scenario was based on current day projections or on China 20-years in the future.

Finally as regards the "Distract us with North Korea and attack Taiwan" scenario that originally started this sidebar discussion, why would initiate a plan now that involves the loss of 2/3 of your military forces, nuclear weapons, and destabilizing every economy in your current list of trading partners?

Internet discussion forums are basically the only place the Chinese will be invading Taiwan anytime in the next 10 years.

rbernie
October 12, 2006, 06:06 PM
Are you stating that United States forces are totally impervious to electro magnetic pulse weapons right now, at this moment?All strategic and most all theater-level weapons or communications systems that have been deemed as mission essential during a trans-attack or post-attack scenario are EMP hardened and tested as such. It's real and it happens (and it's really really cool to watch).

Are your average antiquated PRC-77's or AN/VRC-12 invulnerable to EMP? No. But if it's important enough of a weapons or comm system, you bet your sweet backside that EMP hardening and testing was part of the SOW/spec for that system (e.g SINCGARS and the forthcoming JTRS Cluster 1). In short, in-country EMP isn't a huge issue for the US warfighter.

What was being discussed during the Congressional briefings is that the US infrastructure in general (e.g. circuit- and packet-switched networking, electrical generation within the CONUS) is not specifically EMP hardened. There is no doubt that the DoD warfighting capability *does* have some interdependancies upon these systems. (Cheyenne Mountain and Site R and other such fun places might be able to generate their own juice, but places like Tinker and Davis and MacDill still need local juice to keep the hangers running.)

But I doubt that NoKorea is in a position to take down the US electrical grid any time soon.

JohnBT
October 12, 2006, 08:05 PM
"North Korea Declaring War against USA"

Interesting title, but shouldn't it say "Threatening to Declare War" or "Might Declare War"?

John

dragongoddess
October 12, 2006, 08:54 PM
for those with an inquiring mind check out the term faraday cage.
Also if you want to take out equipment with EMP your missile guidance systems are going to have to be accurate. And then there is that problematic Inverse Square Law that applies to a point source of linear waves.

Borachon
October 12, 2006, 08:56 PM
Very capable EMP bombs have been around since the 80s in the US arsenal. But you can harden stuff against EMP and I think it is safe to assume that our carriers are hardened against that sort of thing.

I've always loved that phrase, "safe to assume". I use it myself quite a lot.
Of course, I'm not a threat to regional stability in Eastern Asia with my finger on a nuke either. :D

Japan not as advanced as you might think
So all those fancy new things they produce in Japan that only end up here two or three years after they sweep thru Japan aren't advanced?:what: They got recordable DVD's before we did. Hand held pocket computers before we did.
Japan is a very advanced nation in my opinion.
If they decide to build a nuclear weapon and a delivery system they can have it ready inside of three months. (and make it smaller and cheaper too :D ) Ninety days from now. They've already got the nuclear material (18 tons of it...enough for thousands of weapons), and a space program use to launching payloads into space. That they have chosen not to build nukes and missiles is a political decision, not because they lack the capacity to do so.

Being able to march and drill is different being able to fire and maneuver against people trying to kill you.
With a population of 1.2 billion, China has access to a reserve of roughly 250 million military age men (I'm sexist...I'm leaving out the women). Probably more than this figure actually. Mandatory military service for males is required. Conscripts serve 3 to 4 years in the military. China's active military isn't as large as some other military's in the world, but it's reserve is HUGE. Just like Israel's...per capita anyway.
If China went to war and lost 1% of its population, that would still be 12 million men. 12 million of the most bumbling slack jawed illiterate cannon fodder, armed with pitchforks, would still be a formidable force for any nation to deal with. Trust me...they won't be armed with pitchforks. And China is use to losing far more men during war time. World War II cost China 30 million. The Cultural Revolution probably killed about the same. Huge population death doesn't scare China like it does us.
Actually the Chinese reserves get more training and serve longer than many other Armies. They probably aren't slack jawed idiots (well...some of them will be.)

Borachon
October 12, 2006, 09:16 PM
How many aircraft have sufficient range to reach Taiwan and have any significant loiter time there? What is the sortie rate of the PLAF? How many airfields are located close enough to be used in an attack on Taiwan and what is their maximum capacity?
Absolutely no idea. In spite of my repeated attempts,and quite blatant bribery attempts, Chinese military leaders have not yet seen fit to brief me on military capabilities within the PLA. :)

But...the distance between some of the nearest Chinese mainland airbases and Taiwan is about 110 miles, 120 miles etc. Most of the fighter and close support bombers I've heard of can cover that distance in about 15 to 30 minutes. Figure Taiwan is 250 miles long, and 90 miles wide...so....they ought to be able to fly, hit a target and return to base within 90 minutes....assuming that nothing shoots them down in the process.

And although I am a blooming idiot in terms of what China has....globalsecurity is not. Here's their opinion.
Rather than Taiwan facing 10 times its number of aircraft in a hypothetical attack by China -- solely based on a count of the total number of PRC and ROC aircraft in their entire inventories -- Taiwan will at worst face only 3 times its number of aircraft in a hypothetical attack by China -- based on a count of the number of revetments at airfields within range of Taiwan. Factoring in the far inferior quality of China’s aircraft versus Taiwan’s, China will be extremely unlikely with 3-1 odds to successfully achieve air superiority against Taiwan. The short to medium range PRC airfields (<= 600 km from Taiwan) -- those within striking distance of Taiwan -- experienced a slight increase (10%) in the number of revetments (from 342 to 373) during the thirty-year period from circa 1970 to 2000. These airfields could support a maximum of 1,119 combat aircraft, assuming each revetment could hold up to three combat aircraft.

Further down:
It was reported in 1995 that there were normally some 177 PLAN/AF fighters stationed at the 13 bases within a 250-mile radius of Taiwan, including J-5 and J-6 fighters and Q-5 and H-5 bombers. At a radius of 250 to 500 miles of Taiwan, there were said to be more than 20 bases with nearly 1,300 combat aircraft [FBIS-CHI-95-141, 24 July 1995].

Again, it should be remembered that I'm of the opinion that Taiwan's air defense capability could be retarded by an EMP attack prior to any invasion....an opinion that is not shared by the majority of people on this board who view EMP as being akin to blown sand, or a muddy field in terms of being a combat problem. If I'm right (and they are wrong) the 3-to-1 capability of China might jump to 30 to 1 if Taiwanese airplanes aren't capable of flying for one reason or another.

Borachon
October 12, 2006, 09:17 PM
for those with an inquiring mind check out the term faraday cage.

3rd wave EMP effects can bypass a Faraday cage, can they not?

Edit:
Sorry. I had to look up the term again. It's not 3rd wave...it's "late time effect".

Taken from here: http://www.milnet.com/e-bomb.htm
Detonating the EMP device in the air or near the top floors of a skyscraper maximizes the effects. Defenses include Faraday cages (similar to screening in that which is to be protected), however other effects, including one called "late time effect" may be able to get pass the Faraday cage protection.

Then again...maybe China wouldn't even need to go nuclear to get the EMP effect. http://www.unitedstatesaction.com/emp-terror.htm
There is, however, another part to the E-bomb story, one that military planners are reluctant to discuss. While American versions of these weapons are based on advanced technologies, terrorists could use a less expensive, low-tech approach to create the same destructive power. "Any nation with even a 1940s technology base could make them", says Carlo Kopp, an Australian-based expert on high-tech warfare : "the threat of E-bomb proliferation is very real". POPULAR MECHANICS estimates a basic weapon could be built for only $400 ....
To ignite an E-bomb, a starter current energizes the stator coil, creating a magnetic field. The explosion (A) expands the tube, short-circuiting the coil and compressing the magnetic field forward (B). The pulse is emitted (C) at high frequencies that defeat protective devices like Faraday Cages ....

The Indian military has studied FCG devices in detail because it fears that Pakistan, with which it has ongoing conflicts, might use E-bombs against the city of Bangalore, a sort of Indian Silicon Valley. An Indian Institute for Defense Studies and Analysis study of E-bombs points to two problems that have been largely overlooked by the West. The first is that very-high-frequency pulses, in the microwave range, can worm their way around vents in Faraday Cages. The second concern is known as the "late-time EMP effect," and may be the most worrisome aspect of FCG devices. It occurs in the 15 minutes after detonation. During this period, the EMP that surged through electrical systems creates localized magnetic fields. When these magnetic fields collapse, they cause electric surges to travel through the power and telecommunication infrastructure. This string-of-firecrackers effect means that terrorists would not have to drop their homemade E-bombs directly on the targets they wish to destroy. Heavily guarded sites, such as telephone switching centers and electronic funds-transfer exchanges, could be attacked through their electric and telecommunication connections ....

Hugo
October 12, 2006, 09:41 PM
If China really went crazy/stuipd and attacked Taiwan, I bet 1/3 or 1/4 of the population would take advantage of the perfect opportunity.

The mood on the streets would probably be something like this.
"Hey where did all the thugs/army go? They're attacking Taiwan?!? Are they #*$&ing nuts!! My aunt/uncle/cousin/grandfather lives there!! The hell with this, time for a revolution. Remember Tienemin Square!!!"

Most of the people in China are very pissed with the horrible pollution (poisoned drinking water and rivers recently) and insane corruption. Kicking people out of their homes to build Olympics Facilities that will go unused immediately after and cost tons of $$$$$ is making the people pretty ticked too. I bet the expensive (wonder what that costs? :) ) manned space program clearly using copies of Russian Spacecraft kind of dulls the "Wow, we're in space, occasionally, for a few hours....." factor too.

Borachon
October 12, 2006, 09:44 PM
For example, consider this quote from an official newspaper of the PLA: “Some people might think that things similar to the ‘Pearl Harbor Incident’ are unlikely to take place during the information age. Yet it could be regarded as the ‘Pearl Harbor Incident’ of the 21st century if a surprise attack is conducted against the enemy’s crucial information systems of command, control, and communications by such means as... electromagnetic pulse weapons.... Even a superpower like the United States, which possesses nuclear missiles and powerful armed forces, cannot guarantee its immunity... In their own words, a highly computerized open society like the United States is extremely vulnerable to electronic attacks from all sides. This is because the U. S. economy, from banks to telephone systems and from power plants to iron and steel works, relies entirely on computer networks.... When a country grows increasingly powerful economically and technologically... it will become increasingly dependent on modern information systems.... The United States is more vulnerable to attacks than any other country in the world.” (Zhang Shouqi and Sun Xuegui, Jiefangjun Bao 14 May 1996)

Okay...that's enough about EMP. South Park is on.

Thin Black Line
October 12, 2006, 11:20 PM
NK uses a low-yield nuke on us, we turn them into a parking lot with many
high-yield nukes. They know this. They won't attack us. Quit buying the
AM radio hype. We handled far more with the soviets for decades. This
is like a SWAT team going from facing a platoon of trained snipers to some
loud-mouthed little thug with a .25 pocket pistol.

NK is a non-issue for the US. In fact, isn't this still considered a UN issue?
Why should it be our issue? Why continue to make it ours? Just because
some idiot on the radio or TV tells you it should be? I'm an American,
not cannon-fodder for the Global-cop army.

Let the Japanese develop their own nukes and counter them. Just like the
world let the Paks develop them to counter India. There, problem solved.

Taiwan and China? Pffft. Why not worry about Tibet then?

rbernie
October 12, 2006, 11:40 PM
The second concern is known as the "late-time EMP effect," and may be the most worrisome aspect of FCG devices. It occurs in the 15 minutes after detonation. During this period, the EMP that surged through electrical systems creates localized magnetic fields. When these magnetic fields collapse, they cause electric surges to travel through the power and telecommunication infrastructure. This string-of-firecrackers effect means that terrorists would not have to drop their homemade E-bombs directly on the targets they wish to destroy. Heavily guarded sites, such as telephone switching centers and electronic funds-transfer exchanges, could be attacked through their electric and telecommunication connections .... More bunk in the form of pseudo-science, and from such a reputable source at that. ;)

As far as I understand this stuff, the described effect can be useful only if the sites interconnect their potential grid to each other (aka 'floating ground') instead of using the Earth as a common potential reference, or if the filtering already in commercial use to reduce localized EMI effects is overloaded and blows 'shorted' rather than 'opened'. Neither of those scenarios are likely, since they've been designed around for fifty years. NOBODY designs EMI filtration to blow 'short' and nobody designs facilities interconnects with floating ground instead of using good ol' Ma Earth as the common potential.

Of course, since most of the telco interconnects these days are fiber, the real vulnerability to the communications grid is on the power side and in the local copper loop.

tyme
October 13, 2006, 12:21 AM
If the nuke wasn't used against people, but only as an "EMP emitter", then I think a LOT of nations would have a problem with the US going full bore and attacking population and military centers in the North. Hitting them with an EMP nuke of our own wouldn't have the same political consequences as killing 10 million people in 30 minutes and would be a proportionate response.
Good luck targeting NK with a high-atmosphere EMP without frying stuff in South Korea, Japan, and China and Russia too.

[late time effect] EMP effects can bypass a Faraday cage, can they not?
Initial EMP from either a nuke or a conventional gadget is almost entirely reflected by a solid metal surface.

I think what that article is concerned about (even though it talks mostly about conventional EMP) is that nuclear detonations cause longer-term EMP in several different ways, depending on whether it's a low-altitude or high-altitude detonation. That lower-frequency EMP induces large currents in exposed conductors, including first-line EMP shielding itself. That current will generate EM radiation that can disrupt the electronics, unless maybe there are multiple layers of shielding.

See http://www.fas.org/nuke/intro/nuke/emp.htm

The options for a nuclear power are these:
1. Detonate a nuke at low altitude and get a strong but very localized effect -- largely secondary to the disastrous physical effects of a nuke.
2. Launch a thermonuclear bomb on a rocket and detonate it in space. Unfortunately, that knocks out everyone's electronics, which won't be a problem for North Korea because their citizens live in the dark ages anyway, but it would be a disaster for China because they'd have civil unrest in cities in addition to having to fight a war.

And any sort of high-altitude EMP would _really_ piss off Japan. Both NK and China would want to think hard about the long-term consequences of a militarized Japan.

Borachon
October 13, 2006, 11:04 AM
Finally, one advantage amphibs do have over merchantmen is that they can LAND troops instead of merely transporting them.

Yep. Very true. And entirely militarily correct.
China suffers a shortage of amphibious landing craft though. So using only amphib vessals would make transportation of large numbers of troops impossible.
They do possess a number of cargo and merchant vessals. So if they decide to attack Taiwan anytime soon, that's what they'd have to use. They do have a number of small craft like hovercraft and small boats that could ferry troops ashore. You are right though that this would take time. To move 200,000 troops ashore though shouldn't take more than 20 hours. How did I arrive at that figure? 200,000 troops divided by the 100 (the number of troops a small ferry from the merchant man to the shore could hold) divided by the number of such ferries, which I'm estimating at 100...although actually the Chinese have close to three times as many, but it would probably take more than an hour to load and move the troops, but with 3 times as many ferries it ought to work out somewhere like that. Tanks and jeeps and other equipment could take longer. But it would be enough to establish a bridgehead.

Understand that I'm not suggesting China is about to attack Taiwan today. I'm merely saying that the "impossibility" of China attacking Taiwan may not be true either. It would demand a lot of careful forethought and planning, but that it is not outside the capability of China to do.

There are a thousand other concerns right now that would keep China from attacking Taiwan. Economic concerns being one. Having their troops tied up attacking Taiwan when they might be needed in Korea to fight in a NK/US war is another.

NK uses a low-yield nuke on us, we turn them into a parking lot with many high-yield nukes. They know this. They won't attack us. Quit buying the AM radio hype. We handled far more with the soviets for decades. This
is like a SWAT team going from facing a platoon of trained snipers to some
loud-mouthed little thug with a .25 pocket pistol.

I'm sure if we asked the SWAT team who they'd rather face....a career criminal who knows what he's facing and knows his own capabilities (ie the Russians) or face a loud mouth punk who thinks he stands a chance (ie North Korea), I'm pretty sure the SWAT team will tell you the punk is more dangerous. He doesn't know the score. He doesn't realize he stands no chance and that it's time to give up. He's the kind of guy who hides under the floorboard, lets the Swat team walk over him, and then shoots up from underneath with his .25. Does he die one second later? Often, yes. Or does the SWAT team take a couple of casualties and fall back? Sometimes that happens too.

If North Korea announced today that they are doing a nuclear test tomorrow and that it would prove to the world that they possessed nuclear weapons, and then launched a missile that exploded a nuclear weapon as an airburst halfway between South Korea, Japan and Okinawa, what would the US do?

More likely than not this type of airburst would put out a big EMP (it could be positioned for just this effect) but very few people would die. North Korea could then scream "Ooops!". "We're soooo new to this nuclear thing. We didn't understand what would happen." (Riiiight....)

Is the US going to turn them into a parking lot because they generated an EMP pulse over Okinawa? According to most of the electrical engineers here, we wouldn't because their "accidental" placement and firing of the nuke would have little or no effect. Can the US justify to the rest of the nuclear armed nations of the world turning NK into a parking lot at this point? I don't think so. Even if the nuke fried every electrical component onboard every one of our ships, and left our jets totally ruined, we probably still wouldn't launch a nuclear weapon against North Korea. No one (or very few) people would have died because of the North Korean "accidental" EMP generated pulse. The most we would do in retaliation....the most we COULD do politically....is generate a pulse over NK. That's tough to do without hitting parts of South Korea and Russia and China. After that we could launch a conventional war....assuming our assets in the region actually still functioned after being EMP'd.
Think of it this way. SWAT teams COULD go door to door, arrest hundreds of citizens at a time, and intensively process them "downtown" for hours and hours until they found the one subject they were looking for. They have the material capability to do that...but the political will to do it isn't there.
Unless North Korea hits us directly with a nuclear weapon, I don't see us launching nukes on them.


Swat officer shot. Suspect lives.
http://www.abcactionnews.com/stories/2006/07/060726swat.shtml

Another one shot. Suspect not even shot.
http://www.officer.com/article/article.jsp?siteSection=1&id=29276

Another one shot.
http://www.policeone.com/SWAT/articles/79704

4 more shot
http://www.emergency.com/gwntshot.htm

Another
http://www.press-enterprise.com/newsarchive/1998/11/01/909897392.html

Shot in the foot
http://www.policeone.com/policeone/frontend/parser.cfm?object=News&operation=full_news&id=72177

Actually the amount of these type of stories surprised me. Even more surprising is the number of Swat team members shot and killed during training exercises. Those stories outnumber criminal attacks by a mile.

North Korea may be a wannbe thug with one big gun going up against the Ninja Master of Democracy...but they'll probably get the first shot. And sometimes, the thugs hit what they shoot at.

Correia
October 13, 2006, 11:46 AM
Borachon,

So to sum up your posts on why China will overpower Taiwan:

1. They will use a weapon system that has never been used before which will: A. Work perfectly the first time. B. Cause no problems whatsoever for them. C. Totally disable our forces (even though we've been preparing for this kind of thing since 1952 or so). D. Totally disable all of Taiwan's weapon systems (even though they bought them from us, see C. )

2. Then they will achieve air superiority because of #1 and a combination of: A. Having thousands of extra obsolete aircraft. B. Being able to field them way out of proportion to their logistics and available airfields. C. Shoot down Taiwanese F16s and US carrier based F18s with crop dusters and cargo planes with guys with AK47s lashed under the wings. D. The Aegis missile cruisers (the world's best anti-aircraft platforms) will probably not work because of the super EMP or perhaps their crews will be devoured by genetically engineered Chinese aquatic super-pumas, either way, we'll disregard the giant multi-ship Aegis shield.

3. Then they will move several million troops across the ocean on barges, cargo ships, and rafts made of styrafoam beer coolers. We will assume that the super EMP will cause the Taiwanese to be too stupid to burn their piers so that these non-amphibious craft will be able to offload. That's assuming that US carrier based forces aren't shooting them in the open ocean like fish in a barrel.

(also we'll asssume that our super advanced spy aircraft and world's best spy satelites didn't detect a million troops massing on the coast)

The Chinese troops that do manage to hit the beaches will not have any heavy weapons, and will be basically light infantry. However we will assume that all Taiwanese armor, mechanized forces, and artillery were neautralized by #1. (note 1C).

4. The Chinese will do this because it benefits them so greatly to lose their entire army, ruin their economy, lose all of their trading partners, probably collapse their government, and invite nuclear war against the US. In return they will get a tiny island filled with valuable electronics and manufacturing industires (whoops too bad they slagged it all with #1!)

Did I get that all right?

If you will excuse me, I've got to get back to digging my fallout shelter in the backyard. :)

junyo
October 13, 2006, 12:03 PM
If North Korea announced today that they are doing a nuclear test tomorrow and that it would prove to the world that they possessed nuclear weapons, and then launched a missile that exploded a nuclear weapon as an airburst halfway between South Korea, Japan and Okinawa, what would the US do?

More likely than not this type of airburst would put out a big EMP (it could be positioned for just this effect) but very few people would die. North Korea could then scream "Ooops!". "We're soooo new to this nuclear thing. We didn't understand what would happen." (Riiiight....) Soooo, the world would believe that they're bright enough to build and launch an effective EMP tuned nuke, yet not bright enough to comprehend the effects of such a weapon. Everyone on the whole planet is too stupid to figure that out, except you. And the world is more comfortable letting a nation of starving desperate savants figure out nuclear weapons via trial and error, over some of the most valuable real estate on the planet, rather than allow the US to take action? That's your line of conjecture. Dude, we sooo need to play poker.

Two pages ago we were beating a dead horse, this is now a pile of pulp with a saddle.

quatin
October 13, 2006, 12:21 PM
2. Then they will achieve air superiority because of #1 and a combination of: A. Having thousands of extra obsolete aircraft. B. Being able to field them way out of proportion to their logistics and available airfields. C. Shoot down Taiwanese F16s and US carrier based F18s with crop dusters and cargo planes with guys with AK47s lashed under the wings. D. The Aegis missile cruisers (the world's best anti-aircraft platforms) will probably not work because of the super EMP or perhaps their crews will be devoured by genetically engineered Chinese aquatic super-pumas, either way, we'll disregard the giant multi-ship Aegis shield.

Check this out...
http://www.spacewar.com/reports/Ballistic_Missile_Defense_Key_To_Defending_Taiwan.html

Sunburn missiles, even the Aegis is not a "missile proof" system, it's "missile resistant". It only takes one missile to slip through and take out a ship. I believe the Russians designed it to take out US air craft carriers.

Also..
http://www.nwc.navy.mil/press/Review/2001/Autumn/art3-au1.htm

China has one of the world's largest anti-air artillery supply. If Taiwan deploys their aircraft, they would suffer massive loses especially in such a concentrated area in the Taiwan Strait. What little China has in an air force would go largely unchallenged afterwards(at least by air).

In spite of all this, I have to agree that China is not capable of taking over Taiwan constructively. There's a lack of air power, naval power and amphibious capabilities, that is crucial to HOLD territory. However, let's realize China is not planning a physical take over of Taiwan, yet. China is building weapons of "intimidation", such as long range artillery that can reach over the strait of Taiwan.

http://www.wisconsinproject.org/countries/china/missile-miles.htm

If you look at Chinese military spending, there is a very small dribble going towards an offensive air force, an offensive blue water navy and amphibious forces. China's military is largely defensive. Funding has been changed recently however, with China purchasing Russian J-14 fighters and Sorynemy Class destroyers. This situation may change 20-30 years from now if funding continues.

In terms of N.Korea, you have to admit. If N.Korea did not make a nuke, Bush would not have said for CERTAIN we won't invade. A nuke is a large bargaining chip. It's a whole new ball game now.

farscott
October 13, 2006, 12:27 PM
If North Korea announced today that they are doing a nuclear test tomorrow and that it would prove to the world that they possessed nuclear weapons, and then launched a missile that exploded a nuclear weapon as an airburst halfway between South Korea, Japan and Okinawa, what would the US do?

More likely than not this type of airburst would put out a big EMP (it could be positioned for just this effect) but very few people would die. North Korea could then scream "Ooops!". "We're soooo new to this nuclear thing. We didn't understand what would happen." (Riiiight....)Couple of thoughts:

1) This type of EMP event would cause lots of casualities due to its impact on civilian infrastructure. After all, we are talking about the power grid being damaged in South Korea and Japan, cars stopping on congested roads, the loss of airliners, medical equipment failing, inability to coordinate emergency responses, etc. An EMP weapon could be considered a WMD and could require a forceful response.

2) As another of those pesky engineers who deals with EMC, I can second the individuals who have stated that the weapons systems that need to be hardened against this type of weapon have been hardened. Is the protection perfect? Of course, it is not, but it is a lot better than the pessimistic forecasts in this thread.

3) Using an EMP weapon would be taken by South Korea and Japan as an act of war. As we are their allies, we would also conclude the same thing. No one is going to buy the "Oops, we did not know that was going to happen" excuse since EMP is somewhat of a well understood phenomenon. China still wants our money, so I think they could be persuaded that a little regime change in NK might be good for everyone, especially China.

NK having nukes does not concern me as much as other problems we are facing, such as illegal immigration, the problems in Iraq and Afghanistan, and our (governments and individuals) tendency to spend more than we make.

tyme
October 13, 2006, 01:30 PM
4. The Chinese will do this because it benefits them so greatly to lose their entire army, ruin their economy, lose all of their trading partners, probably collapse their government, and invite nuclear war against the US. In return they will get a tiny island filled with valuable electronics and manufacturing industires (whoops too bad they slagged it all with #1!)

Did I get that all right?
Don't forget that China itself is becoming a major player in the high-tech manufacturing industry, so any advantage it would get by recapturing Taiwan is dwindling. If they did attack Taiwan, a significant portion of Taiwan's high-tech industry would probably be slagged, and the U.S. obviously wouldn't help rebuild it if China were successful. :)

It would have to be purely a matter of national pride. Personally, I think it's pathetic. They've just recently gotten back Hong Kong with no shots fired, which is so much more important. An occupied Taiwan would not be very productive.

Borachon
October 13, 2006, 01:57 PM
1. They will use a weapon system that has never been used before which will: A. Work perfectly the first time. B. Cause no problems whatsoever for them. C. Totally disable our forces (even though we've been preparing for this kind of thing since 1952 or so). D. Totally disable all of Taiwan's weapon systems (even though they bought them from us, see C. )

I've never said China would attack the United States. Taiwan's military is not part of the US command.

The weapon system that has to work is a nuclear blast. China has successfully detonated nukes on several occasions. And launched satellites into space. Which means they can launch warheads LONG distances.

Totally disable our forces? No. A lot of equipment within the US military is shielded...or buried under ground or in bunkers. Much of it would survive. But some support mechanisms like electrical generators, radios, digital computer chips, computer monitors etc...might not. There is a LOT of support infrastructure that would need to be protected. That means LOTS of money. And how high a level do you put on it? Some EMP protected systems were rated to survive a 1 megaton nuclear blast. So the Russians just upped their weapons designed to use EMP attacks to 3 megatons, or 5, or 10. Stated crudely, we put a circuit breaker around our equipment, and they just upped the voltage to defeat it. Cost them next to nothing, but would cost us hundreds of billions to protect against it.
And in TWO House of Representative briefings on Electromagnetic Pulse, the Generals sent to the meetings have acknowledged that it was a problem but that active study of just how big a problem hasn't been done.
Which would you want policy makers to do? Ignore it and just assume we'll be okay?

Taiwan didn't purchase ALL of its weapons from us. And totally destruction of Taiwan's military would not, and could not, occur. Some systems would survive. But even a partial destruction of coordination...knocking out the power supply....stranding the train system....stopping the use of private cars and trucks....all of these combined could make troop movements (at the very LEAST) difficult to coordinate. If Taiwanese troops have got to march 250 miles to the battle, pulling their artillery behind them, it will be a different sort of battle than if they can haul it there by truck. Shoot, even getting the word out that something had happened might be a problem. All the televisions, telephones, and radio have quit. Public announcements that the nation is at war? Who would hear them? How would the soldiers know what their orders were? How would they get there if they did know?

Soooo, the world would believe that they're bright enough to build and launch an effective EMP tuned nuke, yet not bright enough to comprehend the effects of such a weapon. Everyone on the whole planet is too stupid to figure that out, except you.


I didn't say anyone would BELIEVE them. I said that people who don't want to see a nuclear war start will clutch at ANYTHING to keep it from starting. One argument would be "Well, they didn't actually drop a nuke on our soil or our troops..." Tell me there wouldn't be people arguing that!

I honestly don't think the world CARES if South Korea, North Korea, China, Japan and the US all end up in a war with each other. 9/10ths of the world wouldn't even look up from their coffee. What they WOULD care about is if radiation levels in the atmosphere spike to lethal levels if the US and China and North Korea (maybe Russia) end up hurling nukes at each other.

Or do you seriously believe that we would nuke all of North Korea if NK exploded a bomb over international waters at 70,000 feet?
Once any nation starts lobbing nukes around, there is no telling who will side with who, or where it could end. China is already backing off tough sanctions and doesn't support military action. What happens if the US attacks NK? I don't know. And unless you're a highly placed official in the Chinese military or political apparatus, you can't know either.

But my suspicision is if we put a nice radioactive cloud over there terrority comprised of dust that use to be North Korea, they WON'T be happy. One reactor in Russia blew and it had people complaining for 15 years. 25 ground pounding nukes in North Korea drifting over their terrority won't PO the Chinese? C'mon.

You wanna play poker? Let's go for it.

Borachon
October 13, 2006, 02:05 PM
Don't forget that China itself is becoming a major player in the high-tech manufacturing industry, so any advantage it would get by recapturing Taiwan is dwindling.

My original reason for taking this position was in response to someone saying that China COULD NOT attack Taiwan with ANY chance of success. I'll repeat this again. I do NOT believe China is about to attack Taiwan. Political, economic, and military considerations would seem to show China has no intention of doing so. What I'm suggesting though is one possible way that China COULD attack Taiwan, and stand a very good chance of not only winning, but of winning in a relatively rapid fashion. (Two or three weeks.)
Do I think it is likely? No.

Now ask me if I think it's possible the US and China could end up in a shooting war if the US and North Korea go to war.....


C. Shoot down Taiwanese F16s and US carrier based F18s with crop dusters and cargo planes with guys with AK47s lashed under the wings.
:D Seriously though, take a look at some of their military equipment before you make that comparison.

Borachon
October 13, 2006, 02:09 PM
If N.Korea did not make a nuke, Bush would not have said for CERTAIN we won't invade. A nuke is a large bargaining chip. It's a whole new ball game now.

Obviously not for a lot of our fellow posters here. To them, a nuclear weapon doesn't seem to change anything.

RLsnow
March 14, 2008, 02:36 PM
you think North Korea is a worry?

try sharing a border with them damn russians!



im kidding, sorry....*is ashamed*


(oh shootity shooty shoot! dont know how i found the thread bu was convinced it was "new" my deepest apologies)

Animal Mother
March 14, 2008, 02:44 PM
Point taken, but this is certainly a necropost.

Rachen
March 14, 2008, 03:59 PM
Remember comrades, if there is an enemy you should really be concerned about, it is Japan.
Chinese did not subject thousands of your brave men during World War II to hideous and unspeakable horrors of bioweapons experiments. We did not launch a sneak attack on your land. We did not torture and kill almost a hundred thousand of your men in the Pacific. Neither did the North Koreans

We Chinese hate the Japs' guts so much that anyone who as much as wears Jap paraphernalia while they are in China will get so severely beaten that they will require extensive hospital stays. HOW COULD ANY OF YOU ADVOCATE FOR JAP REARMAMENT!!!!!!!! HOW!!!!!!! DURING THE WAR IN THE PHILLIPINES, ALMOST 3000 OF YOUR MEN WERE SHIPPED OFF TO HARBIN, NEVER TO BE SEEN AGAIN. THERE THEY WERE USED IN "MEDICAL" EXPERIMENTS AND KILLED AFTERWARDS!

And look at what they did in Nanjing and other places. I wish I could have fought in the War like my brave Great-Uncle. I wish I could have been able to wear the Communist grey uniform and kill the Jap invaders with a broadsword. My Great-Uncle told me a story where after a fight in 1943, he was completely drenched in Jap blood, from his cap to his boots. Every single man in his unit were covered with blood and carried broadswords dripping with blood. My Great Uncle personally hacked 25 Japs to death during that fight. The Communist Chinese 8th Army killed over 5000 Japs during that battle. That means these 5000 would not have been transferred to the Pacific, where they will do even more harm to your boys.

hnk45acp
March 14, 2008, 04:06 PM
Zombie thread! Quick get the shotgun!

exar
March 14, 2008, 04:42 PM
I wish I could have been able to wear the Communist grey uniform and kill the Jap invaders with a broadsword

IBTL!!!!:banghead::fire:

Titan6
March 14, 2008, 05:00 PM
launch a sneak attack on your land. We did not torture and kill almost a hundred thousand of your men

Guess you must have missed the whole Korean War thing. Two of my Uncles and one Aunt fought in that one. They mentioned something about a whole bunch of Chinese people killing everyone in sight and a sneak attack but it was all real unclear.

Maybe this thread will die soon as well.

RLsnow
March 14, 2008, 05:03 PM
terribly sorry again for necromancing this all :O

Nobody's_Hero
March 14, 2008, 05:30 PM
Oh, relief, this is a 2 year old thread. I was worried that this would cancel the Beijing Olympics.

Don Gwinn
March 14, 2008, 09:13 PM
Uhhhh . . . . yeah.

If you enjoyed reading about "North Korea Declaring War against USA" here in TheHighRoad.org archive, you'll LOVE our community. Come join TheHighRoad.org today for the full version!