Mortars can't touch America. NK has a huge conventional army. They can't move it around or feed it very well, but it's there.

Can East Asia afford collateral damage? Do we consider it collateral damage? Japan recently rearmed. China builds islands in South China Sea.

And I was saying I'm not sure Japan, SK, and China are considered "collateral" damage to the US (or whomever is running things). Those might be acceptable, or even preferred, outcomes.

I assume you are not asking if it is "my" preferred option (spoiler alert: nobody relevant is asking for my input)

Might be. SK and NK are vassal states of China. China sabre-rattling. China has used their rabid-dog ally NK as a club to threaten the world for decades. If China can't leash their dog, does the US* care if China (or China's vassal states) gets bit?

*There is no monolith "US," so I am referring here to a faction in the gov't/MIC that wants China contained.

SK is American through and through. Look at their military and society. Very Americanized. The US wont want SK to get fucked up because that would open the door for china to get a bigger foothold. Plus if a regime change happens the US will probably want a SK type government to be established in a "united" Korea. But that's in China and Russia allow it.

Yes, culturally SK is very Americanized. Sadly, they are connected to Russia and China via land, and separate from America by an ocean.

I get that but it doesn't change who they are "allied" to. IF war breaks out and China or Russia tries to take over SK we will officially have WWIII. Everybody knows it. I think SK is off limits as far as Russia and china go but if NK gets destabilized I totally see a Chinese puppet government getting stood up.

In the Great Game realpolitik, SK is disposable. The football getting kicked back and forth by two great teams (powers). Right now the US is in possession of the football, but by the nature of the game, that football will change hands (someday, not saying this is the day or the issue that will cause this transfer).

SK is interested in remaining tied into the Maritime Empire (British maritime rule with the US, Euro, and Israel as the prime members).

China and Russia have always been part of the Continental Power Bloc (along with Persia)(and the swing power is Eastern Euro/Germany, currently in the EU).

At some point, when the Maritime Empire weakens enough, SK will have to return to the Continental Power Bloc.

Because of that, I am not sure WWIII will break out (unless the whole thing is a pretense for starting WWIII, in which case the whole convo is moot).

Gotta love geo-politics

With Central Asia being the true prize. The Koreas are a path to Central Asia, but are not The prize (they are A prize).

Well we already have the foothold in east Asia. How many rolls before we get the bonus?

There are tens of thousands of Americans in South Korea.

Mostly military, all with funds to evacuate in the face of the build-up of conventional military hardware.

The conventional hardware has been there since the 1950's

We have military personnel there for a reason and won't be evacuating any troops in advance of a conflict.

Troops won't be evacuated, no. I assumed you were referring to Americans in a civilian sense.

Yea the ex-pats, non-military, have money and can flee given any run-up of conventional forces.

Which yes, are largely in place already in terms of hardware. The artillery and such are set-up. The men and logistics needs to ramp-up.

South Korea is pretty much the main reason the US even gives a shit about North Korea at all. SK being under attack would be taken as collateral damage to the US.

I think China is the prime fulcrum of the NK scenario, with SK being a pawn or prize or other negotiating advantage. Next to China, SK is nothing.

in what way? The US has no direct control over China. SK is the one nation in the region where the US does have a significant number of troops, influence and control. It is the US's presence in SK that allows them to even attempt to dictate anything in the region.

We're largely agreeing, just differing on scale of importance. To me, SK is the tool that allows the US to dictate. NK is the tool China uses to dictate. Together, China and US use the Koreas to push/pull influence in the region: SK has our bases, NK is rabid dog with China holding the leash.

The Koreas are pawns. Yes the King cares if he loses a pawn, but the pawn isn't critical to the game. Sacrificing a pawn for the win is totally acceptable.

We have enough conventional weapons to blow a hole to the core of the planet where North Korea is. Then we can push all our trash into it and the pollution from solid waste people is solved.

Both Russia and China have given the USA an ultimatum wrt this, which is why the USA hasn't done anything, and won't.

I'm willing to pay for boat tickets....

Fucking holograms in the supermarket....then they better learn to kick ass and chew gum.

The entire city of Seoul and its 25 million people is within 10 to 25 miles of the NK border. If the shit hits the fan in Korea then I would not want to be anywhere near Seoul.

No one wants to talk about why they wouldn't at least try to slowly move the population center away from the border so this wouldn't be an issue. The whole thing is a total farce.

This is artillery we are talking about, we can turn South Korea into Rhode Island and still be able to make a considerable impact on the situation.

I have heard that moving a city of 25 million people on a peninsula to a place outside the range of conventional artillery is not a trivial thing to do.

If we drop one bomb on the north you can start counting the South Korean casualties in the millions.

And that would include tens of thousands of American citizens.

We also have 10 of thousands of troops near the boarder at this moment with a new missile defense system.

Mortars won't go to far. Larger artillery yes they would.

Yes. Those are very similar to the Tower artillery systems that we use with 1st Mar div 3/11. Anything that can be shot out of those can be brought down. Only reason I say that is i was with 3/11 at one point.

Nah man I could go on forever about this stuff. Just don't wanna derail this post for ya. Always pm me for future questions though bud.

The weapon system is designed like a gattling found that targets with a sensor and would shoot down any and many projectiles. We have them on just about every naval ship.

at least seoul, its close to the border

The US military is not going to do anything that could possibly provoke an artillery attack from the North. Millions of South Koreans would be dead within hours. That's a completely unacceptable outcome.

Seriously, Kim would have to nuke Japan or something before we'd ever fight that war.

The Nautilus Group did a rather nice study of how a conventional artillery attack against Seol may play out. The report paints a less dire picture:
https://nautilus.org/napsnet/napsnet-special-reports/mind-the-gap-between-rhetoric-and-reality/

Ah very nice. I posted this the other day. Glad to see it posted again. Slightly older but still relevant.

Trump sends the fury, then the South Koreans receive the fire, then we send some fire in retaliation and nuclear winter will make the global warming debate pretty moot.

If they run out of conventional shells maybe the north will lob something else?

http://thebulletin.org/sea-sarin-north-korea’s-chemical-deterrent10856

But does it work? Would they be able to sustain the supply lines? Two very big IFs

I was listening to a CSPAN discussion between a senate committee and who ever in the government plans that shit. And it looks like there are several scenarios that could happen. One we move in and win, two whatever whatever.

But the general consensus and what the world has agreed to base operations around, is that in we were to attack North Korea, just in a few days they can kill millions of South Koreans with just conventional weapons. And that's with our military performing its best.