Agreed. Korea is just used as an excuse to fight the "two regional conflicts" (the first being something in Europe or the Middle East). The S. Korean army is larger than ours, and N. Korea is a joke. If N. Korea attacked, I would be impressed if they could start up half their tanks and aircraft. I would be impressed if they could provide ammo and food for their troops after a week.
We seriously need to draw down hard in Korea. As the tensions with China potentially grow, I see our presence on the peninsula as a waste of troops. The South Koreans can defend themselves, and in any serious hostility between the USA and China, they'll declare themselves neutral before the sun has set that day.
The Korean War has never been ended, and Korea has not been reunified (as many want), because Korea is the gift that keeps on giving to the Pentagon providing an excuse to keep- troops on the peninsula (ROK military much stronger than DPRK) and airbases one air-hour from Beijing and Shanghai. According to the 1954 Armistice Agreement foreign forces should have been pulled out, no military exercises and talks to end the war.
Sixty years? Enough is enough. South Korea is an economic powerhouse, selling a lot of Hyundais and Kias in the US for one thing, but the US still commands the ROK military and treats ROK like a colony.Cut it loose. Yes, time to leave. Why should US taxpayers finance this anomaly.
Bad idea to leave just because our ambassador got a few scrapes. People might think we are wusses, pink ties aside.
North Korea will use tactical nukes. It will be very bad when war breaks out in Korea.
If war breaks out there, it will likely come at the same time as war breaks out in several other places, if our enemies have any brains. If there is a war in the mideast, Ukraine goes regional, a few strikes on the homeland, and China starts grabbing contested areas, South Korea will be on their own anyway for all practical purposes. Hope saner heads prevail, but if you take the vector in each area that is the way things are heading. It's like the 1930's all over again.
I agree, the current world is filled with more "hot spots" than a Southern California wild-fire. When one, or more likely many, of these conflicts go national or regional, we will want to have at least a presence in the more secure locations of the world for a variety of reasons.
The idea that we need to draw down our foreign presence in order to have higher levels of domestically based troops is somewhat faulty. If any one conflict were to deteriorate or escalate to the point that it needed US involvement, we would grow our armed forces again to deal with the threat(s). [Fact is, we should have never drawn down to where we are now and I guarantee there will be many ready to get back to more comfortable troop levels, given the current world's geopolitical/military situation.]
If we did just because of the attack then this would increase the number of attacks world-wide as it tells our enemies that violence & intimidation work.
It works the same for negotiating with terrorists & paying ransom.
Yes, but that's old thinking. Would those planes ever get over the Yellow Sea" I don't think so. They'd be in PRC cross-hairs as soon as the left the peninsula. Would any "journalist" ever even suggest this truth in the US mainstream media? No, so the US stumbles along (despite Solomon's accurate posting) while hyping the scary North Korea "threat" as a major reason for the US pivot (divot) to Asia-Pacific.
Meanwhile, the State Department has issued a worldwide travel caution for US citizens. Stay home, it basically says. I guess Lippert couldn't do that.
From what I've heard about the British army the current plan is to cut down the numbers and then throw money and resources at the remainder. Basically they want a decent sized force of the "best of the best" to use on the front-lines while building up reserves to call out to deal with other duties.
Osan is likely the place the latest top classified drones are sent to. You bet whatever that replaced the RQ-170 is flying from Osan.
Look at China, they are willing to offer Kim Jong Un's head on a platter to have the US troops kicked out. Why give away for free what China values so much? The withdrawal of the US troops that is?
I was getting at air attack not air surveillance, on which their are probably no limits by aircraft and satellites. But as I look into it, it appears the US only has fighter wings and not bombers at Osan and Kunsan. Is that right? No US bombers in Korea?
dude are you serious? nothing classified is flying out of Osan. first to be totally honest, S. Korea has a problem with infiltrators and N. Korean sympathizers. second, you can bet serious money the Chinese have that base under constant monitoring and there just aren't the facilities there to handle classified aircraft. you want to know where the classified missions for the Pacific are being flown out of? yeah. GUAM.
the only thing the USAF has in S. Korea are a few older fighters. all the good stuff in the Pacific for them....all the stuff that's designed to hit China is at Guam. everything else is basically fodder.
oh and lets talk about US forces in S. Korea realistically. they're all up near the DMZ! HOW STUPID IS THAT??? the N. Koreans are supposedly going to launch the most massive artillery barrage in the history of man when they decide to push across the border and i would bet that we will lose people because they're being used as a trip wire instead of host nation forces.
its craziness in a handbag....oh and repositioning your forces so that they can not only survive the initial attack but retake territory is not "Cutting And Running"...
Anyone who promotes "Let's just get out of Korea" don't understand what they are giving up.
The biggest Chinese embassy is located in Washington DC. The second biggest Chinese embassy is located in Seoul. That's how much effort the Chinese are placing in its Korea diplomacy, in hopes of driving a wedge between Korea and the US so that the US withdraws its troops and move back its forward operational bases from Chinese shores by at least 1,000 km.
So why give such a big present to the Chinese government for free?
The use of TLAs for British armoured and cavalry regiments is pretty much the norm, KRH(King's Royal Hussars), RDG(Royal Dragoon Guards), QRL(Queen's Royal Lancers) etc etc
As to their quality as a unit, they have seen combat in Afganistan but like most of the British army without their armoured vehicles.
These exercises are most likely part of re qualifying and reinforcing traditional war fighting skills after more then a decade of counter-insurgency focused training.
I have heard from the late Jacques Littlefield (military collector) that their military vehicles suffer from the same reliability problems as their automobiles.
KRH is short for the King's Royal Hussars, their main veh is the Challenger 2 main battle tank 62.5 tonnes without reactive armour which would add another 10 tonnes to it's weight. The KRH are a fairly new British Army regiment, formed in 1992 by amalgamation of The Royal Hussars (Prince of Wales's Own) and the 14th/20th King's Hussars, they are based in Wiltshire.
To offtopic but in the topic...
ReplyDeleteAgustaWestland FINALY start production of AW609
http://www.agustawestland.com/-/aw1236
and of that list only three have come anywhere near a degree of production.
ReplyDeleteAgreed. Korea is just used as an excuse to fight the "two regional conflicts" (the first being something in Europe or the Middle East). The S. Korean army is larger than ours, and N. Korea is a joke. If N. Korea attacked, I would be impressed if they could start up half their tanks and aircraft. I would be impressed if they could provide ammo and food for their troops after a week.
ReplyDeleteStill an awesome car, but I get what you are saying, the comparison might very well (still) be valid for the military vehicles.
ReplyDeleteI would be impressed if they could provide food for anyone after a week...
ReplyDeleteWe seriously need to draw down hard in Korea. As the tensions with China potentially grow, I see our presence on the peninsula as a waste of troops. The South Koreans can defend themselves, and in any serious hostility between the USA and China, they'll declare themselves neutral before the sun has set that day.
ReplyDeleteThe Korean War has never been ended, and Korea has not been reunified (as many want), because Korea is the gift that keeps on giving to the Pentagon providing an excuse to keep- troops on the peninsula (ROK military much stronger than DPRK) and airbases one air-hour from Beijing and Shanghai. According to the 1954 Armistice Agreement foreign forces should have been pulled out, no military exercises and talks to end the war.
ReplyDeleteSixty years? Enough is enough. South Korea is an economic powerhouse, selling a lot of Hyundais and Kias in the US for one thing, but the US still commands the ROK military and treats ROK like a colony.Cut it loose. Yes, time to leave. Why should US taxpayers finance this anomaly.
Bad idea to leave just because our ambassador got a few scrapes. People might think we are wusses, pink ties aside.
ReplyDeleteNorth Korea will use tactical nukes. It will be very bad when war breaks out in Korea.
If war breaks out there, it will likely come at the same time as war breaks out in several other places, if our enemies have any brains. If there is a war in the mideast, Ukraine goes regional, a few strikes on the homeland, and China starts grabbing contested areas, South Korea will be on their own anyway for all practical purposes. Hope saner heads prevail, but if you take the vector in each area that is the way things are heading. It's like the 1930's all over again.
I agree, the current world is filled with more "hot spots" than a Southern California wild-fire. When one, or more likely many, of these conflicts go national or regional, we will want to have at least a presence in the more secure locations of the world for a variety of reasons.
ReplyDeleteThe idea that we need to draw down our foreign presence in order to have higher levels of domestically based troops is somewhat faulty. If any one conflict were to deteriorate or escalate to the point that it needed US involvement, we would grow our armed forces again to deal with the threat(s). [Fact is, we should have never drawn down to where we are now and I guarantee there will be many ready to get back to more comfortable troop levels, given the current world's geopolitical/military situation.]
Bad pun warning ahead....
ReplyDeleteYou've been warned
We should never "Cut & Run", told you it was bad.
If we did just because of the attack then this would increase the number of attacks world-wide as it tells our enemies that violence & intimidation work.
It works the same for negotiating with terrorists & paying ransom.
Don Bacon
ReplyDelete> Yes, time to leave.
You explained yourself why the US wouldn't leave.
" airbases one air-hour from Beijing and Shanghai."
Earl Tower
ReplyDelete> We seriously need to draw down hard in Korea.
But that's exactly what Chinese wants the US to do. Why do you want the US to do what Chinese want so bad?
Galvars
ReplyDeleteNorth Korean war manual calls for raiding Southern supermarkets for food and gas stations for gas.
Yeah...but we actually do that first one...and the Europeans do both.
ReplyDeleteYes, but that's old thinking. Would those planes ever get over the Yellow Sea" I don't think so. They'd be in PRC cross-hairs as soon as the left the peninsula. Would any "journalist" ever even suggest this truth in the US mainstream media? No, so the US stumbles along (despite Solomon's accurate posting) while hyping the scary North Korea "threat" as a major reason for the US pivot (divot) to Asia-Pacific.
ReplyDeleteMeanwhile, the State Department has issued a worldwide travel caution for US citizens. Stay home, it basically says. I guess Lippert couldn't do that.
Don Bacon
ReplyDelete> Would those planes ever get over the Yellow Sea
According to reports, the RQ-170 was flying out of Osan long before it showed up in Kandahar.
From what I've heard about the British army the current plan is to cut down the numbers and then throw money and resources at the remainder. Basically they want a decent sized force of the "best of the best" to use on the front-lines while building up reserves to call out to deal with other duties.
ReplyDeleteAnd before Iran caught one. Your point is...?
ReplyDeleteDon Bacon
ReplyDeleteThe US does fly out U-2 and a number of classified drones from Osan airbase. Who knows where they are going.
Don Bacon
ReplyDeleteOsan is likely the place the latest top classified drones are sent to. You bet whatever that replaced the RQ-170 is flying from Osan.
Look at China, they are willing to offer Kim Jong Un's head on a platter to have the US troops kicked out. Why give away for free what China values so much? The withdrawal of the US troops that is?
I was getting at air attack not air surveillance, on which their are probably no limits by aircraft and satellites. But as I look into it, it appears the US only has fighter wings and not bombers at Osan and Kunsan. Is that right? No US bombers in Korea?
ReplyDelete@SlowMan
ReplyDeletedude are you serious? nothing classified is flying out of Osan. first to be totally honest, S. Korea has a problem with infiltrators and N. Korean sympathizers. second, you can bet serious money the Chinese have that base under constant monitoring and there just aren't the facilities there to handle classified aircraft. you want to know where the classified missions for the Pacific are being flown out of? yeah. GUAM.
the only thing the USAF has in S. Korea are a few older fighters. all the good stuff in the Pacific for them....all the stuff that's designed to hit China is at Guam. everything else is basically fodder.
oh and lets talk about US forces in S. Korea realistically. they're all up near the DMZ! HOW STUPID IS THAT??? the N. Koreans are supposedly going to launch the most massive artillery barrage in the history of man when they decide to push across the border and i would bet that we will lose people because they're being used as a trip wire instead of host nation forces.
its craziness in a handbag....oh and repositioning your forces so that they can not only survive the initial attack but retake territory is not "Cutting And Running"...
Anyone who promotes "Let's just get out of Korea" don't understand what they are giving up.
ReplyDeleteThe biggest Chinese embassy is located in Washington DC. The second biggest Chinese embassy is located in Seoul. That's how much effort the Chinese are placing in its Korea diplomacy, in hopes of driving a wedge between Korea and the US so that the US withdraws its troops and move back its forward operational bases from Chinese shores by at least 1,000 km.
So why give such a big present to the Chinese government for free?
So the bombers might be (could be) on a contingency basis.
ReplyDeleteThe use of TLAs for British armoured and cavalry regiments is pretty much the norm, KRH(King's Royal Hussars), RDG(Royal Dragoon Guards), QRL(Queen's Royal Lancers) etc etc
ReplyDeleteAs to their quality as a unit, they have seen combat in Afganistan but like most of the British army without their armoured vehicles.
These exercises are most likely part of re qualifying and reinforcing traditional war fighting skills after more then a decade of counter-insurgency focused training.
I have heard from the late Jacques Littlefield (military collector) that their military vehicles suffer from the same reliability problems as their automobiles.
ReplyDeleteKRH is short for the King's Royal Hussars, their main veh is the Challenger 2 main battle tank 62.5 tonnes without reactive armour which would add another 10 tonnes to it's weight. The KRH are a fairly new British Army regiment, formed in 1992 by amalgamation of The Royal Hussars (Prince of Wales's Own) and the 14th/20th King's Hussars, they are based in Wiltshire.
ReplyDelete