# 12,000 Troops to leave Korea



## MAJOR_Baker (1 Jun 2004)

I just read that more troops are leaving Korea and the South Koreans are worried....too Bad! :warstory:


----------



## Ex-Dragoon (1 Jun 2004)

Kind of ironic they are worried considering all the demonstrations they have had against the presence of US troops in South Korea. They got what they wanted they should be happy and live with it. Poetic Justice.


----------



## Pikache (1 Jun 2004)

Well, 'Yankee go home' attitude is nothing new, considering history between US and Korean peninsula from the beginning of World War II.


----------



## Smoothbore (1 Jun 2004)

Why is the US pulling forces out of Korea? What is the root cause? North Korea is currently the most unpredictable and dangerous nation in the world and is in possesion of nuclear weapons..well, at least one, that can go airborne..possibly, nevertheless still a serious threat.


----------



## D-n-A (2 Jun 2004)

They need more troops in Iraq, thats why.


----------



## Infanteer (2 Jun 2004)

I don't think this is really an issue.

-   South Korea possess a cutting edge military that could probably kick the tar out of the North Koreans in days.

-   North Korea is backwards and starving.   50 years ago, the war became a stalemate when the South and the North (both backwards and starving) beat the piss out of eachother.   Now South Korea is a world player (economically) and North Korea is a relic.

-   You have a regional superpower (China) who doesn't want a war (damaged trade relations and a MASSIVE refugee crisis) and a potential world military power in Japan (they could do it over night) who would bitchslap anyone who tried to disrupt regional status quo by throwing Tae Po Dongs around.

Sounds to me like the Americans could have left years ago and no one would have gave a fat rat's ass.


----------



## Pikache (2 Jun 2004)

Well, you never know what a lunatic do if he feels he's against the wall and nothing to lose.

Kim Jong Il may look like a loser, but he's a prettty smart guy to take over North Korea and hold it after his dad's death.

But with an economic crisis (and too many of North Koreans starving), if he feels that he's royally screwed anyways, he may just opt for a war...


----------



## Danjanou (2 Jun 2004)

I don't think its a matter of the South Koreans needing the US troops in country (what is it? 2nd  Inf Div and an Air Wing IIRC) to help defend themselves against an invasion from the North. As noted they have a large, capable and modern military, I think they see the US as more of a symbolic deterrant.

Ole Kim Jong Il may be crazy, but he ain't stupid. An attack against the ROK with US troops on Korean soil would probably be seen as an attack on the US, and they're a bit touchy these days about that in case you haven't noticed. However an attack on a Korea w/o US forces present could be carried off as a "local" war. Sure the US have treaty obligations to come to South Korea's aid, but there is a big difference in having forces in place and shipping them across the Pacific.

Maybe Kim is dumb enough to think he can grab the whole peninsula before the US can hustle back. Unlikely yes, but try telling him that.

The Political and Military leadership of South Korea are probably aware of this and would prefer even a token US presence to act as a symbolic deterrant kind of like the old "trip wire" of US/NATO forces in Europe during the Cold War


----------



## Infanteer (2 Jun 2004)

A Token.

Funny, that's what one US Official said about the original Canadian contribution to Korea; actually it was "three tokens".


----------



## Ex-Dragoon (2 Jun 2004)

*you are forgetting about the exchange rate......3 for 1 * 

Agreed it takes 3 American soldiers to equal 1 Canadian soldier. Glad you are coming around Sherwood .


----------



## Danjanou (2 Jun 2004)

Actually our presence there really is a token one. IIRC don't we still have one or two UN pers there because of the fact that technically the war isn't over? Then again maybe someone remembered them after almost 50 years and brought them home.


----------



## Pikache (2 Jun 2004)

S_Baker said:
			
		

> Regardless of how it plays out IMHO (I was stationed there) we need to leave post haste!  There is no reason for US forces to be there and I am of the opinion that if attacked South Korea can take care of it all by their lonesome, the Koreas are not worth one American life, besides I am sure the United Nations with France and Germany's lead can figure it out, lately they seem to have all the answers!  :warstory:



*cough*

Considering how much US economy is tied to South Korean economy, I think you might want to rethink.

Certainly Truman thought American boys was worth sending to Korea, if not to resist the commie horde.


----------



## Pikache (2 Jun 2004)

Or put it this way; South Korea has an economy that's probably top ten or so in the world.

If that economy goes kaput, it effects all the economy in the world, esp. East Asia (Japan, China, etc). 

Considering US trade in that area, guess how much US purse is going to get hurt.

In mid 90s, IIRC, Thailand's economy went kaput and it sent East Asia's economy into recession.


----------



## Infanteer (2 Jun 2004)

Stability on the Korean peninsula is definitely key to East Asian productivity.  However, I am not to worried about the American withdrawl, for I think in the last while Beijing has a bigger leash on Kim Jong Il right now than anything else.  I have a feeling North Korean military members remember the only reason the peninsula isn't unified is that 1,000,000 Chinese came screaming over the Yalu.  Would they be prone to act knowing this may not happen a second time?


----------



## Military Brat (3 Jun 2004)

There really isn't any practical need for American soldiers to be stationed on the peninsula. There are only 30,000 or 40,000 based in Korea right now, and realistically, if Kim Jung Il gave the orders to invade the South, they would be promptly mowed down in a matter of hours. There is no way 30,000 or 40,000 soldiers, no matter the technology they have at their disposal,  can hold off a 1 million man army so fiercely loyal to their leader. The only real barrier for any advancement by the North in the first stages of any war would be the South Korean military, a 650,000 man, modern and technologically advanced military with a "don't give up an inch" mentality. But I think the North Koreans are often underestimated in their capabilities. Sure, they don't have the technologies of their foes, but they do keep their old weaponry stockpiled around the country in case of war. Yes, most of their equipment is Soviet era junk and Chinese "hand me downs", but they are a very easy to please folk, they can go a day with a cup of rice, they can march for miles on end each day. In comparison, us in the Western world, we have many more logistical needs.

In any war, toe to toe, the South Koreans would be a formidable match for the North, but with the aid of the Japanese, Americans and presumably many other countries, minced meat would be made of Kim Jung Il's communist paradise in weeks if not days. Kim Jung Il knows that, he isn't stupid by any means, he isn't going to go looking for a war. I think his main reason for pursuing nuclear weapons is the fact that it will give him a bargaining chip in talks with the US. He knows he can manipulate the world community into giving him oil, food, etc. in return for abandoning his nuclear program. He also knows the US is less likely to invade him if they know he has nuclear weaponry. 

In any event, to win the hearts and minds of the North Korean people, all the US would have to do is drag a ham sandwich behind their vehicles.


----------



## scm77 (4 Jun 2004)

Military Brat said:
			
		

> There really isn't any practical need for American soldiers to be stationed on the peninsula. There are only 30,000 or 40,000 based in Korea right now, and realistically, if Kim Jung Il gave the orders to invade the South, they would be promptly mowed down in a matter of hours. There is no way 30,000 or 40,000 soldiers, no matter the technology they have at their disposal,  can hold off a 1 million man army so fiercely loyal to their leader.



That's not true.  The US could just get all there AC-130 Gunships and various fighters and bombers and mow them all down before they even cross the border.


----------



## Spr.Earl (5 Jun 2004)

S_Baker said:
			
		

> Since this is a CDN Army Board, how about instead of a "token" US presence, we change that to a "token" Canadian presence >   I do like the new icons ;D


Sherwood I was in Inchon back in 73 and met a few G.I.'s from the A.A.M. base and had a good time on base in the Mess even with my long hair.Most of the guys were draftee's but did enjoy Korea on the whole. 
I'd go over.


----------



## Military Brat (7 Jun 2004)

scm77 said:
			
		

> Military Brat said:
> 
> 
> 
> ...



I see no reason why the US would pre-emptively attack North Korean military installations by air. There would have to be a full blown war, or intelligence that one is about to begin (the North Koreans have communications that are almost impossible to crack from what I've heard and read), and they would have to scramble those fighters, bombers and gunships from the good ole US of A. If/when the North attempts an invasion of South Korea, thousands, if not hundreds of thousands of soldiers from the North will have marched their way into the South before the US arrives on the scene in any large force. But after the Americans arrived, it would be the end of Kim Jung Il, the North would promptly be kicked back into their socialist utopia and overwhelmed by air, land and sea into surrender. 

But I don't think war is going to break out anytime soon on the peninsula, the North Korean government seems content (for the time being) using propaganda to try and entice the populous of the South into uniting the two Koreas under 1 umbrella. But the South isn't stupid, it will never happen that Kim unites the 2 countries and the North is becoming more isolated every day it seems. Their only really ally in the region is China, since they hate the Japanese, and they hate the South Koreans. In a war, I think China would side with the US because they know there is no way Kim can win a war against the US of A and they wouldn't want to ruin relations over a crazy dictator, since I do believe the Chinese get a substantial amount of aid from the United States.


----------



## Spr.Earl (8 Jun 2004)

We give China aid also!!


----------



## Smoothbore (9 Jun 2004)

The North Korean army is obsolete. Their most advanced MBT is the Soviet T-62 that has been only moderately modified over 30 years, while the South Koreans have an armoured force consisting of sophisticated K1 and K1A1's that can pop the turret off any thing the N. Koreans can muster-up. The only significant threat are the thousands of multiple rocket launchers (mostly Grad) within striking range of Seoul. If any conflict were to occur, it would be a sensless loss of life for both sides and total defeat for the North. This is however highly unlikely, as mentioned earlier China cannot afford a destabilized Korean Peninsula and will step in hard to prevent such a distaster.


----------



## Hawaii Mike (5 Jul 2004)

Once the two brigades of the 2nd division that are in Korea have left, there won't be much in the Pacific to respond to PDRK (or PRC, for that matter) aggression with.

Both brigades of 25th division in Hawaii are deployed; 3rd brigade at Ft Lewis is non-deployable
3rd Marine Division is a hollow force; has been for years.  Most of its strength was stripped for Iraq
29th Brigade of Hawaii National Guard is being activated for deployment in December-January time frame

You see, most US ground combat power in the Pacific is gone (or shortly will be)


----------



## LeeYang (7 Jul 2004)

I find people in China are more concerned about Tiwan than Korea. Korea likes to yell and scream, but they will do nothing.


----------



## Spr.Earl (8 Jul 2004)

LeeYang said:
			
		

> I find people in China are more concerned about Tiwan than Korea. Korea likes to yell and scream, but they will do nothing.


I find that rather odd thing to say,thought it would be the other way around in regards to Taiwan.


----------



## Sheerin (20 Jul 2004)

If N. Korea corssed the 38th parallel and PLA and PLAN launched an invasion of Taiwan, would the US be able to assist both allies at the same time or would they have to sacrafice one for the other... and if so who would be let go?


----------



## Jarnhamar (20 Jul 2004)

I've always heard the US is set up to fight two major wars on two different fronts. I would assume this is taking into consideration all their currently deployed soldiers.  That being said, the US seems to have a lot of trouble finding troops for Iraq, alone. This is after major hostilities are considered over. Artty troops being re-rolled as infantry etc.. How could they actually support two major wars?


----------

