See other War, War, War Articles
Title: Army chief: US able to fight NKorea if necessary
Source:
[None]
URL Source: http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20090529 ... _ca_st_pe/us_pentagon_nkorea_2
Published: May 29, 2009
Author: AP
Post Date: 2009-05-29 10:08:41 by christine
Keywords: None
Views: 265
Comments: 20
WASHINGTON – The United States could fight an old-fashioned war against North Korea if necessary, even while newer forms of conflict against terrorists and extremists continue, the Army's top officer said Thursday. Asked whether the United States would be prepared to fight if war broke out between South Korea and North Korea, Gen. George Casey replied, "The short answer is yes," then added that "it would probably take us a little bit longer to shift gears" away from the type of counterinsurgency fighting that now occupies the Army. Casey said his usual rubric for how long it would take the Army to gear up for a new "conventional" war is about 90 days. That doesn't mean it would take 90 days for the U.S. to effectively fight the North's million-man army, he said. "We'd move forces as rapidly as we could get them prepared," Casey said during an appearance at the Center for Strategic and International Studies. North Korea has threatened war following condemnation of its underground nuclear test this week, and the United States has a long-term commitment to South Korea's defense. "This is a combat-seasoned force" that can pivot quickly, Casey said. Defense Secretary Robert Gates, speaking to reporters as he traveled to the Far East for a conference with defense ministers, said North Korea's actions have not reached a crisis level that would warrant additional U.S. troops in the region. "What we do have, though, are two new developments that are very provocative, that are aggressive, accompanied by very aggressive rhetoric," Gates said. "And I think it brings home the reality of the challenge that North Korea poses to the region and to the international community." Casey, the Army's chief of staff, suggested that war with the nuclear-armed North might not be the old-style land war that U.S. forces stationed in South Korea were envisioned to fight. He did not elaborate, but he was presumably referring to the possibility that the North might use or threaten to use its proven nuclear capability. Casey focused on his plans to rearrange the Army around the "reality scenario" of sustained counterterrorism conflict. The reality of permanent war means the United States should have 10 Army brigades and Marine Corps regiments available for overseas conflict worldwide, he said. "It's not just Iraq and Afghanistan," Casey said. Including Iraq in his contingency planning is not to say that the United States won't honor its agreement with Iraq to pull forces from the country by 2012, he said. "We will execute the draw down plan that has been executed between our governments," he said. "I don't know that anyone knows what the security relationship and force level will be, if there are any, in Iraq," after the scheduled withdrawal of combat forces," he added. "That's very much to be determined."
Post Comment Private Reply Ignore Thread
Top • Page Up • Full Thread • Page Down • Bottom/Latest
#1. To: christine (#0)
No it cant. That is a total falsehood and he knows it.
This is just great news, we'll get in another shooting war with N. Korea with our goal being defending the 38th parallel again. My only question is whether we'll lose the same number of troops this time around??
_________________________________________________________________________ June 30 1950... "On 30 June 1950, the United States Army had an authorized strength of 610,900 but an actual strength of 593,167. There were 348,904 troops in the United States, 111,430 in the Far East, 88,956 in Europe, and the rest were in the Pacific, Caribbean and Alaska. The Army's force structure consisted of ten active divisions, four training divisions, and supporting troops. The General Reserve, kept in the United States for emergency assignments, consisted of five combat divisions and smaller units, a total of about 140,000 men. As a result of economy measures during the preceding years, all units were badly understrength, particularly those in the Far East.
I think the NKs would absolutely love that. De-fund the war effort: educate your kids to the MIC.
In June 1950, North Korea had 500,000 troops. They now have 1,500 000. By July letters of greetings from the government were going out by the thousands DAILY to young Americans that said they would never be drafted.
"The draft (August 1950 through July 1953) for the Korean War netted 1,569,141 men. For the entire era, which extended 18 months beyond the cease fire, draftees made up 30% of all those who served then. Some 83,858 Marines were drafted between August 1951 and October 1952. At the peak in January 1952, 12,220 leathernecks entered the Corps via ther Selective Service system. In the peak year of this war's draft, 1952, 561,770 men were inducted. By December 1952, 63% of soldiers actually serving in Korea had been drafted. In 1953, 59% of all Army enlisted men were draftees. For those that cry they wont go, nor their children wont go, I will say this... I saw young Americans in chains and irons flown to Korea to fight. They said the same thing.
Hell, 1950 is a ways back there. According to Wiki we have nearly one and a half million active now and some 880 thousand reserves. That puts us at number two, right after China. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_countries_by_number_of_active_troops Noko and Soko are fifth and sixth on the list. A real war there would be a butt-kicking on a historic scale. I hope I never see it.
Join 2x4 Tuesdays & protect your RKBA. You saw total military strength, not ARMY strength. North Korea has 1.5 million in their ARMY.
"Currently, the Army has an authorized strength of some 514,000 troops, with about 30,000 of that total a temporary rise approved by Congress in the wake of the 9/11 attacks. The Marine Corps has 180,000 personnel." Over half of those men are in Iraq and Afghanistan. Bush/Obumski have asked for an increase the first year of 75,000 grunts for the Army.
And even I can see it, and I never served. If I was the NK dictator, I'd see this as a great time to invade. Seoul could fall with a day or 2, and there is nothing short of nuking NK that would stop them. Drop nukes on NK and China won't just sit back and relax with a nice cup of tea. China is trying to play the Nice Guy by supposedly trying to get NK to back down, but I dont believe them for a second. And if I was in the Iraqi resistance, once NK invaded, I'd come out to play. Same for Afghanistans resistance. That's how I see it. Anyone disagrees, tell me where I went wrong. .
It's a forum post, not a doctoral thesis. Click for Privacy and Preparedness files
Thanks for your perspectives. They are always on the mark. I'd like to start a thread on the strengths of the various players here, but I have to leave soon. Noko has a lot of strengths, not the least which are sheer numbers, and they have a lot of land equipment that is well adapted to the terrain. However, their air wings are relatively weak, and their soldier are smaller than their southern counterparts and employ equipment that is to some extent antiquated from what I gather. I'd like to wargame this here, not because I want to see a war, but to see whether a war is likely or even possible, which will only occur out of miscalculation or when both sides see the possibility of an advantageous outcome.
Join 2x4 Tuesdays & protect your RKBA. I dont know your age but regardless you are dead on target. To me it is like seeing 1950 replay all over again. Exact same poker players at the table, stakes are higher and the players have changed tactics a bit, but the results will be the same if anyone calls the others bluff.
That is a dreaded word in poker and war. North Korea/Russia/China know full well the US is OVEREXTENDED in the ME and is bluffing when they ante up. The question is, will the three decide to go for broke on the cheap while we are bleeding to death in the ME????????? If I were them.... I WOULD GO FOR IT NOW RATHER THAN LATER BECAUSE THE US HAS NO ALLIES, NO FRIENDS.
I'm 44. I never understood why SK kept their capital so close to the ultra-militarized zone. Maybe taking a capital city isnt what it used to be? IIRC, they already are within artillery range. And as far as the NK military goes, they get dibs on the food, over and above the civilians. I remember seeing a story where they were teaching citizens how to eat grass. People probably join so they don't starve. .
It's a forum post, not a doctoral thesis. Click for Privacy and Preparedness files
Ones age is important as it is a barometer of history he has lived. That means no one can con you into a falsehood that you witnessed and lived on your own.
only Israel and Britain (although i don't know where they'd stand as regards NK, China, and Russia), correct?
The smooth criminal transition from Bush/Cheney to Obama
Should a conflagration begin in Asia, Americans would be shocked at how soon our "friends" deserted us. Israelis are self serving people and would never fight their communist bretheren. Britain has nothing and would do nothing. We are speaking of a ground war of attrition now, not a nuclear war.
Those that chained those kids are the real enemy, not the NKs. If my son told them to shove their chains (he would), I'd be standing right with him. Would that stop the process? Probably not. Might is start the Resistance, maybe. Those odds work for me.
It would not. Reflect on how much stronger and oppressive the Federal government is now vs 1941 thru Iraq???????
The FedGov is more oppressive by many, many degrees. On the flip side, this nation has never felt their oppression more than it does now, the illusion of fighting for "God and country" went the way of the Dodo thanks to the 'net, and we're a people who are armed to the teeth. I don't know about anyone else, but I wouldn't waste a .223 on a poor deer.
The United States could fight an old-fashioned war against North Korea if necessary,
#2. To: christine (#0)
"This man is Jesus,” shouted one man, spilling his Guinness as Barack Obama began his inaugural address. “When will he come to Kenya to save us?”
-Schweizerische Schuetzenzeitung (Swiss Shooting Federation) April, 1941
#3. To: christine (#0)
#4. To: christine, Cynicom, all (#0)
WASHINGTON – The United States could fight an old-fashioned war against North Korea if necessary, even while newer forms of conflict against terrorists and extremists continue, the Army's top officer said Thursday.
#5. To: Jethro Tull (#4)
#6. To: Jethro Tull, christine, randge, all (#4)
#7. To: Cynicom (#3)
www.righttokeepandbeararms.com
#8. To: randge (#7)
#9. To: randge (#7)
#10. To: Cynicom, all (#1)
No it cant. That is a total falsehood and he knows it.
It's a fine line between being too specific and long winded and therefore too irritating to bother to read, and being too cryptic and therefore too irritating to try to interpret.
#11. To: Cynicom (#9)
www.righttokeepandbeararms.com
#12. To: PSUSA (#10)
That's how I see it. Anyone disagrees, tell me where I went wrong.
#13. To: randge, PSUSA (#11)
miscalculation
#14. To: Cynicom (#12)
It's a fine line between being too specific and long winded and therefore too irritating to bother to read, and being too cryptic and therefore too irritating to try to interpret.
#15. To: PSUSA (#14)
#16. To: Cynicom (#13)
I WOULD GO FOR IT NOW RATHER THAN LATER BECAUSE THE US HAS NO ALLIES, NO FRIENDS
#17. To: christine (#16)
only Israel and Britain (although i don't know where they'd stand as regards NK, China, and Russia), correct?
#18. To: Cynicom, all (#6)
For those that cry they wont go, nor their children wont go, I will say this... I saw young Americans in chains and irons flown to Korea to fight. They said the same thing.
#19. To: Jethro Tull (#18)
Would that stop the process? Probably not.
#20. To: Cynicom (#19)
Reflect on how much stronger and oppressive the Federal government is now vs 1941 thru Iraq???????
Top • Page Up • Full Thread • Page Down • Bottom/Latest