If We Surge 30-50,000--What if NK moves on SK, China moves on Taiwan??

[Blackhatjack]

It will take massive 'holdovers' of troops scheduled to be headed home, deployment of every warm body available, and signing up lots of new recruits, to 'surge' 30,000 to 50,000 troops in Iraq. Colon Powell and top Brass have already admitted as much. Troops in reserve to 'surge' in Iraq just do not exist. We are on the verge of a 'broken Army' with disasterous implications to follow.

So if Kim Il Jong ever thought about invading S. Korea, there could not be a better opportunity. Plus, what are we going to do if China decides to take out Taiwan with a massive invasion, while we continue to send naval support to the Iran region to pressure Ahmadinejad?

These opportunities do not exist with an intact American military fighting force. We can thank Bush and the NeoCons for changing our standing in the world.

If one or both of these scenarios play out, can there be any doubt that a 'draft' is not far behind?

[TheCowsCameHome]

1. You can be sure the rest of the world is watching very carefully

Especially our enemies.

[Kelly Rupert]

2. Neither are really problems.

Taiwan does not require US assistance to repel China; numerous wargames have confirmed this. In order to invade, you need a navy. In order to preserve a naval invasion, you need air superiority. Taiwan has air parity at the least, air superiority most likely. Consider US support from the Pacific fleet and our Japanese and South Korean bases--as well as Japanese support--and a Chinese invasion of Taiwan is utterly doomed.

The DPRK could overwhelm and defeat the ROK at the moment--our force there is only a token one. The problem would be *holding* it--a new Korean war would play out almost exactly like they old one. Americans would then spend the next month or two destroying everything in Korea capable of hiding a weapon, before a NATO force invades the peninsula and wipes out Kim's regime. Very likely we'd cut a deal to get China in on it too, with NATO reestabilishing the ROK and China deposing Kim and instating a saner DPRK.

[Blackhatjack]

4. Respectfully disagree ....

China has already conducted tense wargames off the coast of Taiwan, and has created a massive flotilla just for this purpose. Reliable sources have reported that the Chinese have constructed on the mainland mirror image sets of all Taiwanese critical strongholds, and have 'gamed' assault strategies. Taiwan is totally dependent on the US naval and air support to hold China at bay.

So when the need arises to bring China to the table in dealing with North Korean agression, what does China want in return from the US?? China understands the strategic needs of the US, and the weakness of the US in light of such a scenario.

The North Korean invasion would make it impossible to distinguish North from South in a small geographic area, so we would be unable to use our most lethal weapons to repel the threat. Who wants to go in and sort this disaster out on a block by block basis, much like what we have done in Iraq?

Both are real problems --and anyone who thinks we can 'trust' the Chinese to back US interests is fooling themselves. Kim Il Jong is a maniacal 'loose cannon' that no one can control. He is already sure that he US will attack him. This situation just plays into his hands.

[Kelly Rupert]

8. I have yet to read of a wargame that ended in anything but a Taiwanese victory,

even assuming that there is absolutely no American or Japanese support. And our current army commitments to Iraq, as painful as they are, do not take anything away from our Pacific naval/air force projection. China may fantasize about an invasion of Taiwan, but know perfectly well that it's just a fantasy for the next few decades--even without considering their likely defeat, they know their economy needs ours as much as ours needs theirs.

A DPRK invasion would be messy, yes. It would involve massive civilian casualties. In Seoul, not one stone would lay atop another within 48 hours of the first shot being fired. Our bombing raids would kill more civilians than soldiers--not that we could tell the difference. But, much like the Taiwan situation, Iraq changes nothing. Either way, the solution isn't manpower; our strategy would remain the same. Either way, it's going to be air power followed by a NATO invasion in the south and a Chinese invasion from the North. (Suppose America is engaged in open war with Iran at the moment of a DPRK invasion. The deal we cut with China might have to involve reunifying the peninsula and allowing the Chinese to place their puppet up in Seoul instead of ours. Either way, it's in China's favor to play along with NATO instead of with Pyongyang).

Kim Jong Il isn't maniacal. He's a sane, rational (though egotistical) man who is well aware of his nation's position in the world. He may lead a flamboyant private life, but the actions of the DPRK are nothing but calculating. He won't trade his country for a stupid attempt to take on the world by force. His army, like his nuclear weapon, is a bargaining chip and last resort, not a Plan A.

[aquart]

3. We can't muster the numbers. No idea why they think they can.

[Warren Stupidity]

5. Defeat the meme. It is an ESCALATION.

They are deliberately trying to confuse people. In response to the voter's demands for an end to the Iraq war, the arrogant War Party criminals are proposing to escalate the war. They are attempting to confuse people about what they are doing by using words other than ESCALATION to describe their new crimes.

NK is not going invade SK. China is very unlikely to move to take Taiwan.

[lonestarnot]

11. Escalation is the word, no other.

[Perky]

6. If either of those events happen

The whole world is fucked.

[whistle]

7. That's what Dick Cheney wants to have happen so they can use

...nuclear weapons claiming that the military just can't provide sufficient armed troops around the world. All part of PNAC

[Kelly Rupert]

9. I wasn't aware that the Project for a New American Century

had as a central theme the death of all mankind.

[tyedyeto]

10. Surging?

We will not be surging, we will be escalating and deploying more of our forces than we are now.

Don't get caught up into today's talking point re: surge.

It is another way of telling the citizens of this country that we will be sending more of our younger generation to war.

[GreenZoneLT]

12. What if the Martians attack, too!!!111??!1

Settle down.

1) South Korea could kick the crap out of North Korea, and North Korea knows it. The SK army is only half as big as the North's, but better armed, trained and motivated. And they've been moving toward rapprochement for some time. NK is much more likely to try some sort of suicide attack on a U.S. military ship, or lob missiles at Japan, if they nut up.

2) China isn't going to attack Taiwan and risk major sanctions from their No. 1 trading partner. Even if they did, Taiwan has an excellent self-defense force that could hold out until the carrier battle groups arrive. That's a naval war; where we send Army troops don't effect it.

3) This surge idea is being shot down by every uniformed officer in the military. The Pentagon's against it, Abizaid's against it, Casey's against it. Not going to happen.