BF2S Forums How would an occupation of North Korea go?

I know. They also have fuel issues. Those would be the first thing targeted by us. Still is a nice thing to show to an ignorant American calling for war.

Jay wrote:

Macbeth wrote:

I know. They also have fuel issues. Those would be the first thing targeted by us. Still is a nice thing to show to an ignorant American calling for war.

Well, our military has been planning for, and wargaming, a confrontation with a Soviet-style military for sixty years now. Our military has been purpose-built to combat an enemy heavy on cheap, fast armor and ludicrous amounts of artillery. Why the North Koreans bought so many tanks is beyond me though, Korea is mostly mountains and tanks are worthless there.

I imagine the Korean military going much the same as the Iraqi army in '91, which was the third (I think) largest in the world at that time. Ageing gear and piss poor training/discipline for the majority. And they relied on Soviet tactics as well. They have something like 180,000 SOF troops, but I imagine such a quantity, along with older equipment, severely affects their quality.

This thread reminds me of an international relations class I had. Some kid was arguing for war in iraq and went to the white board to compare his scenario of crossing the border of iraq to a german invasion of france across the maginot line. He was feverishly drawing topography and doing little doodles of troop movements like he was in some grand 2D game of risk with the ghost of adolf hitler.

Yeah, that's what this thread reminds me of.

M.O.A.B wrote:

Jay wrote:

Macbeth wrote:

I know. They also have fuel issues. Those would be the first thing targeted by us. Still is a nice thing to show to an ignorant American calling for war.

Well, our military has been planning for, and wargaming, a confrontation with a Soviet-style military for sixty years now. Our military has been purpose-built to combat an enemy heavy on cheap, fast armor and ludicrous amounts of artillery. Why the North Koreans bought so many tanks is beyond me though, Korea is mostly mountains and tanks are worthless there.

I imagine the Korean military going much the same as the Iraqi army in '91, which was the third (I think) largest in the world at that time. Ageing gear and piss poor training/discipline for the majority. And they relied on Soviet tactics as well. They have something like 180,000 SOF troops, but I imagine such a quantity, along with older equipment, severely affects their quality.

I wouldn't doubt their discipline, or training either, really.

that is actually spot on. how do you think an invasion of iran would go?

i wasn't having a go at you, mate.

Could someone rename this the East Asia discussion thread?

Secretary of State John Kerry told the press in Beijing that he discussed with Chinese government officials investing in America's infrastructure. Kerry called the security concerns "very, very few; very, very little.""We welcome Chinese investment in the United States. And a very, very small percentage of investment is subject to a process where we have a security evaluation because of the nature of the business or the particular location. But it’s very, very few; very, very little. And obviously, there are sometimes concerns when there’s a state ownership of a particular business because that raises a different set of considerations," Kerry said, in response to a question about what he said to encourage Chinese investment in America.

"But for true private sector private investment, we have countless opportunities and we welcome that investment. One of the things I’ve discussed with the State Councilor tonight was the possibility of China investing in infrastructure. We have proposals in the United States Congress to creature infrastructure bank. We have huge infrastructure needs in the United States for a certain series of projects like water projects, transportation projects, energy projects. Those are all revenue-producing projects. So they are projects from which pension funds and other kinds of investments can make a return on investment and everybody benefits. It’s a win-win-win. It’s a win for the investors, it’s a win for the countries, and ultimately it’s a win for the place where the infrastructure gets built.

This is an outrage to a lot of people actually. I don't see why. This sort of international cooperation and investment is a great peace keeping tool.

Occupation would not work out well.  I surmise the majority of the NK citizens have never even experienced an ounce of modern technology, world politics, social media, etc.

The integration of these things into their society would lead to widespread unemployment, riots, confusion.  It would literally take the combined effort of many countries and many dollars to train/update/un-indoctrinate their society to a level that is acceptable by western norms.  Even then, that would be years, probably even a decade away.

I feel for the NK citizens, I really do.  But the best course right now is for NK government to accept western influence and slowly grow their citizens skills.  Sure, some American corporations will take advantage of the situation for themselves (because come on, American's are capitalists at heart) but I think the end result is still better than what they have now.

Last edited by Nyte (2013-04-15 15:37:21)