NEW: Follow the Editorial Staff on
StrategyPage Twitter Link


GROUND COMBAT +

AIR COMBAT +

NAVAL OPERATIONS +

SPECIAL OPERATIONS +

HUMAN FACTORS +

SPECIAL WEAPONS +

WARFARE BY THE NUMBERS +

LOGISTICS +

TOOLS +


Visit StrategyPage's US Cavalry Store



Leadership Article Index : Current 1999 2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009
 Latest
 News
 
 Most
 Read
 
 Most
 Commented
 Hot
 Topics

South Korea Plans To Invade The North

June 9, 2009: South Korea has made public what many have suspected for several years now. If North Korea attacks, South Korea is prepared to go north and attack, or invade, their neighbor. This is no surprise to those who have been observing the South Korean armed forces development after the end of the Cold War in 1991. During the same time, the North Korean armed forces have declined because of a bankrupt economy and no money for replacing obsolete equipment, or for training. Meanwhile, the booming economy in the south led to the growth of domestic arms industry, and the re-equipping the South Korean military with modern, and locally made, weapons.

Over the last two decades, South Korea has developed, and produced in large numbers, their own versions of the U.S. M-1 tank (the South Korean K-1 and K-2), the U.S. M-2 Infantry Fighting Vehicle (the South Korean K-21) and the U.S. M-109 self-propelled 155mm howitzer (the South Korean K-9), and much more. The South Korean used the American equipment as models, and then built on that.

South Korea also manufactures an Aegis destroyer (the KDX III class), a new class of frigate (FFK) and a light fighter/trainer jet (the T-50). South Korea offers most of this new gear for export, at a substantial discount to what their U.S. equivalents would cost, and backs them up with the South Korean reputation of producing sturdy and reliable industrial goods (everything from large ships to tiny micro chips). This provided South Korea with a decisive military edge over its aggressive northern neighbor, North Korea.

South Korea is also in the midst of a 15 year plan to transform their army from a large force of conscripts, to a smaller, high tech force containing many more, higher paid, volunteers. The south sees this, the "American approach" as superior and proven.

The southern generals  also believe that the North Korean military is in terminal decline. Over a decade of famine and extreme poverty has caused severe reductions in maintenance and training in the North Korean military. This has sharply lowered the combat capabilities of the northern force. Corruption and poverty has increased corruption and insubordination up north. In response to all that, South Korea staff officers have quietly been drawing up plans on how they would move into the north. This would happen either in response to an attack from the north, or, a collapse of the communist police state government up there.

Meanwhile, U.S. forces in South Korea have shrunk to the point where the U.S. no longer commands all forces there (as has been the case since the Korean War). South Korea commanders are taking over, and South Korean staff officers are drawing up new contingency plans.  

Still, many South Koreans don't really believe the better trained, led and equipped South Korean forces can defeat another invasion from the north. The American troops have been around for over half a century, and the U.S. has always said it would stand by its South Korean ally. But the numbers tell a different tale. At the end of the Korean War, in 1953, there were over 350,000 U.S. troops in South Korea. Within a year, that shrank to 223,000, and by 1955 it was only 85,000. By the mid-60s it was 63,000. By the mid 70's there were only 42,000. There it stayed for over two decades. Then came the September 11, 2001 and the war on terror. By 2004 the U.S. force in South Korea was down to 37,000. In 2006 that dropped to 30,000 and then 28,000. Air power continues to shrink as well, with U.S. warplane strength going from 60 to 45 aircraft in the last year alone. There is fear that the new U.S. president will cut the American force in South Korea to token (a few thousand troops) size. Meanwhile, more Americans are getting quite vocal about the need for any U.S. troops in South Korea at all. Enough is enough, and over half a century of paying to supply South Korea with a protective garrison should come to an end. More and more South Koreans agree, and senior military officers have made plans on what they are going to do.

submit to reddit
Send Link to a Friend
Next Article FORCES: Where Have All The Arab Sergeants Gone?


Email Me When A New Comment Is Made
Show Only Poster Name and Title     Sort in Reverse Order Posted

dba       6/9/2009 3:02:32 PM
"over half a century of paying to supply South Korea with a protective garrison should come to an end."

Half truth right there. Half or more of the operating cost of US garrison in ROK is paid for by ROK govt.  It's been that way for quite some time.  That includes stuff like paying for housing for an US Army officer (single guy) who lives in 2 or 3 bedroom apartment near the Han River which is definitely a prime spot.  Wasteful obviously.  I heard this from one who served there.  Probably it's not the case for every Office that's stationed there but I did hear such case myself.  

Not to mention the fact that USFK stopped paying for water/electricity long time ago.  From what I heard US govt having budget problems at some point just stopped paying.  

And the other big issue is FREE use of really prime real estate in the middle of Seoul by the HQ of US Garrison in ROK.  That land was practically useless when US first started using it but now it's very very pricey.  Cost of living/real estate value of Seoul is as high as Paris/Tokyo/NYC.  

Just FYI.
 
Quote    Reply

Slim Pickinz       6/9/2009 7:57:56 PM
Cut down on the extravegance but keep the forces there. If the NKs are going to fail, it will be within the next 5 years. Those A-10s out of Osan will be badly needed when the South "eventually" decides to push north. They've been waiting for just that opportunoty. If the NK's invade or otherwise attack SK (artilller barrage on Seoul), the south koreans and americans reiniforcements will be at China's border in 3 months.
 
 
Quote    Reply

Gerry       6/9/2009 10:53:34 PM
US troops have been a thorn for both the South Koreans and the US as well. Its popular with many people to be anti US, while at the same time politicians encourage the US to stay. There is no longer any significant reason for US ground troops to remain in South Korea.
 
US military stockpiles can be maintained by contractors and Airforce fighters and bombers are available for relocation from Japan as well as Guam.
 
The US will no longer 'rush' US ground troops to a n invasion by the North, and will use aircraft in their place. The South Koreans will be called upon the next time to defend their own country. Of which they are more than capable of doing.
 
The only issue will be the intervention of the Chinese should the South Koreans cross the 38th parallel to the north. If it is clear the north provoked or invaded the south, it will not be an issue. If it becomes a matter of who started the war first, the Chinese may intervene as their right to protect the north from aggression.
 
Quote    Reply

dba       6/10/2009 2:38:43 AM

US troops have been a thorn for both the South Koreans and the US as well. Its popular with many people to be anti US, while at the same time politicians encourage the US to stay. There is no longer any significant reason for US ground troops to remain in South Korea.

 

US military stockpiles can be maintained by contractors and Airforce fighters and bombers are available for relocation from Japan as well as Guam.

 

The US will no longer 'rush' US ground troops to a n invasion by the North, and will use aircraft in their place. The South Koreans will be called upon the next time to defend their own country. Of which they are more than capable of doing.

 

The only issue will be the intervention of the Chinese should the South Koreans cross the 38th parallel to the north. If it is clear the north provoked or invaded the south, it will not be an issue. If it becomes a matter of who started the war first, the Chinese may intervene as their right to protect the north from aggression.


US should keep ground troops in SK.  Doesn't have to be big but it should stay there.  The reason is that withdrawing the troops may give wrong signal to NK, if it's still around somehow.  Some say NK started the Korean war in 1950 when US gave wrong signal that SK wasn't part of the US's line of defense against communism in the Pacific RIM area.  I think it was Secretary of State Stimson who said so in a speech.  A few months later NK launched the invasion into SK.
 
Quote    Reply

Wicked Chinchilla       6/10/2009 7:01:20 AM
There was also a public map at that speach which defnied our sphere of influence/protection.  Someone neglected to include South Korea in said map.  Stupid excuse for an invasion but it has been sighted as one reason.
 
Quote    Reply

Slim Pickinz       6/10/2009 3:44:48 PM
Cut down on the extravegance but keep the forces there. If the NKs are going to fail, it will be within the next 5 years. Those A-10s out of Osan will be badly needed when the South "eventually" decides to push north. They've been waiting for just that opportunoty. If the NK's invade or otherwise attack SK (artilller barrage on Seoul), the south koreans and americans reiniforcements will be at China's border in 3 months.
 
 
Quote    Reply

Gerry       6/10/2009 10:27:55 PM




US troops have been a thorn for both the South Koreans and the US as well. Its popular with many people to be anti US, while at the same time politicians encourage the US to stay. There is no longer any significant reason for US ground troops to remain in South Korea.



 



US military stockpiles can be maintained by contractors and Airforce fighters and bombers are available for relocation from Japan as well as Guam.



 



The US will no longer 'rush' US ground troops to a n invasion by the North, and will use aircraft in their place. The South Koreans will be called upon the next time to defend their own country. Of which they are more than capable of doing.



 



The only issue will be the intervention of the Chinese should the South Koreans cross the 38th parallel to the north. If it is clear the north provoked or invaded the south, it will not be an issue. If it becomes a matter of who started the war first, the Chinese may intervene as their right to protect the north from aggression.






US should keep ground troops in SK.  Doesn't have to be big but it should stay there.  The reason is that withdrawing the troops may give wrong signal to NK, if it's still around somehow.  Some say NK started the Korean war in 1950 when US gave wrong signal that SK wasn't part of the US's line of defense against communism in the Pacific RIM area.  I think it was Secretary of State Stimson who said so in a speech.  A few months later NK launched the invasion into SK.
I  feel so bad that you have bought into the 'revisionist history' of how the war in Korea started.
Kim il Jong (as well as Sigmann Rhee) had both been trying to get their side to start a war to unite all of Korea. The US denied arms for the South Koreans to do so, and only provided limited support. Russia sent in many advisors to help create a 'Stalinest ' regime with absolute control. Kim convinced Stalin that he could unite Korea within three weeks if given enough support. Stalin while at first reluctant, finally agreed and provided many Russian T-34 tanks and ground vehicles.
 
North Korea refused support from Mao's China at that time because of previous chinese invasions of Korea. (Mao had offered many divisions in support of Kim, prior to the invasion) (ref: Russian archives released since 1990)
 
The 'Stimson' speech is often given as an excuse by apologists for why the war happened. Often said 'by not mentioning South Korea in the defense of communism in the pacific rim, it was a signal for a go ahead by the North Koreans and Russia to invade'. Kim was going to invade regardless, and did so. It was the North Koreans (with no real provocation) who invaded South Korea, across the 38th parallel, in june of 1950, with massive Russian support.
 
Forget your professors "it was our own fault" theory. He was probobly a draft resistor to begin with, and has suffered many years of guilt feelings and needs to justify why everything the US does is wrong.

 
Quote    Reply

jastayme3       6/12/2009 1:42:07 AM









US troops have been a thorn for both the South Koreans and the US as well. Its popular with many people to be anti US, while at the same time politicians encourage the US to stay. There is no longer any significant reason for US ground troops to remain in South Korea.







 







US military stockpiles can be maintained by contractors and Airforce fighters and bombers are available for relocation from Japan as well as Guam.







 







The US will no longer 'rush' US ground troops to a n invasion by the North, and will use aircraft in their place. The South Koreans will be called upon the next time to defend their own country. Of which they are more than capable of doing.







 







The only issue will be the intervention of the Chinese should the South Koreans cross the 38th parallel to the north. If it is clear the north provoked or invaded the south, it will not be an issue. If it becomes a matter of who started the war first, the Chinese may intervene as their right to protect the north from aggression.














US should keep ground troops in SK.  Doesn't have to be big but it should stay there.  The reason is that withdrawing the troops may give wrong signal to NK, if it's still around somehow.  Some say NK started the Korean war in 1950 when US gave wrong signal that SK wasn't part of the US's line of defense against communism in the Pacific RIM area.  I think it was Secretary of State Stimson who said so in a speech.  A few months later NK launched the invasion into SK.

I  feel so bad that you have bought into the 'revisionist history' of how the war in Korea started.


Kim il Jong (as well as Sigmann Rhee) had both been trying to get their side to start a war to unite all of Korea. The US denied arms for the South Koreans to do so, and only provided limited support. Russia sent in many advisors to help create a 'Stalinest ' regime with absolute control. Kim convinced Stalin that he could unite Korea within three weeks if given enough support. Stalin while at first reluctant, finally agreed and provided many Russian T-34 tanks and ground vehicles.

 

North Korea refused support from Mao's China at that time because of previous chinese invasions of Korea. (Mao had offered many divisions in support of Kim, prior to the invasion) (ref: Russian archives released since 1990)

 

The 'Stimson' speech is often given as an excuse by apologists for why the war happened. Often said 'by not mentioning South Korea in the defense of communism in the pacific rim, it was a signal for a go ahead by the North Koreans and Russia to invade'. Kim was going to invade regardless, and did so. It was the North Koreans (with no real provocation) who invaded South Korea, across the 38th parallel, in june of 1950, with massive Russian support.

 

Forget your professors "it was our own fault" theory. He was probobly a draft resistor to begin with, and has suffered many years of guilt feelings and needs to justify why everything the US does is wrong.





I am not sure that is all that much of an explanation. It is like the Outlaw saying it was the Marshal's fault there was a gunfight because the Outlaw heard the Marshal would be out of town and decided to rob the bank.
 
Quote    Reply

dogberry       6/12/2009 7:01:38 PM
Dean Acheson gets credit for leaving South Korea outside American's defense boundary, not Stimson.
 
Kent
 
Quote    Reply

kirby1       6/14/2009 1:17:20 PM
So President Trumans' secstate skips mentioning that South Korea as an ally, and the North understands this to mean "We really don't care if you bomb and blitzkrieg the crap out of them."?
 
That's a smelly Casus Belli.
 
As far as a Korean War part II goes, things could get interesting considering the current political climate. I think China will leave the Norks to hang if they have justification. They have too many ties with the US to jump in on behalf of North Korea if the Norks are in the wrong. But if we do something stupid, the PRC will jump in for the PRK. Can't allow the Americans and other foreigners to be screwing around in thier backyard. 
 
If China does find itself in a position to standby while the North gets shived, we'll probably be forced to sideline Taiwan just to keep PRC uninvolved, the way we had to keep Isreal out of the Gulf war to keep our Arabian allies happy.
 
 
 
Quote    Reply





New Strategy - Wargames at Discount Prices
1.Modern Air Power: War Over the Middle East
2.Commander: Napoleon at War
3.Close Combat: Watch am Rhein
4.Gallic Wars
5.Fast Action Battle: The Bulge

100+ Computer and Board games all with free shipping.
 
 
 

StrategyWorld.com© 1998 - 2009StrategyWorld.com. All rights Reserved. StrategyWorld.com, StrategyPage.com, FYEO, For Your Eyes Only and Al Nofi's CIC are all trademarks of StrategyWorld.com Privacy Policy