What's new

Compare between the two Koreas military

Who will win?? I will try to pass on a non-biased judgment here, using my expertise as an Infantry Officer.....

First Question you need to ask, will Nuclear Bomb in plays? (I don't think NK have the skill the mininaturize the fission material for warhead) So, will Nuclear bomb in plays.

Second Question, who shoot first?

Pre-battle Assumption

You can discount both Navy (assume US do not response in Naval Blockade) both Navy do not have enough to lay a blockade on each other territorial water. So, as most both navy are used as Naval Bombardment for hard target on land.

Air Force, NK airforce currently have in ivnentory

40 Mig-29
50 Mig 23
200 Mig 21/F7B
100 Mig 19/F6
100 Mig 17/F5

South Korean Air Force have the following

60 F-15K
210 F-16 (All model)
70 F-4
170 F-5E

Assume the kill ratio

F-15K : 1.5 Mig 29UB, 2 Mig 23, 3 Mig 21/19/17
F-16 : 1 Mig 29UB, 1.5 Mig 23, 2 Mig 21/19/17
F-4 : 0.5 Mig 29, 1 Mig 23,21/19/17
F-5 : 0.5 Mig 29/23, 1 Mig 21/19/17

After the initial engagement, ROKAF will have the air dominance of

30 F-15K
85 F-16
0 F-4
0 F-5

South Korea achieve overall and regional air dominance.

----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Now, if war started by the North Korean Side. North Korean can probably penetrate 10-20 mile inland (Over Seoul, the capital)
before being driven back by combine effort of air and land force of South Korea. First day of the war would see the destroy of the air power of North Korea, and tactical communication hubs, transport hubs of North Korean near the Border of the south. Without them, NK will suffer a resupply problem and while ROKAF roam the sky and ramdomly attack supply column driven to the south. With a further defensive line in Inchon-Gyeonggi-Gangwon defense line, mark the begining of hill area. Unless NK have way to evade ROKAF CAP. this would be where the offenive line of NK drew. Would take appoximate 1 weeks to 20 days.

After the first 20 days. Where the attacking NK force used up 50-70% of supply, unless they are to fight hand to hand, they will need to withdraw. The ROK Army will push from 2 entry, covered by air support and artillery strike. 30 F-15K could have destroy 50up to 70 armored target per sortie with the effective engagement rate of 90%. plus another 85 plus F-16 can achieve a 40-50%destroy rate of North Korean armor.

That will leave NK down from 5000 MBT to effective 2400-3000 MBT. and face off with ROK Army's 2500 MBT. Assume the kill rate is 1 : 1 in the end, the South would have come out ahead in any plateau fight as ROKAF gain air superiority localling and nationwide.

By now, the North assult should be all but die down, there are two option for NK ground force. Either retreat back to NK or hold out and call for more troop, bring up the reserve. By this time, estimated troop loss will be about 20-25% for North Korea (based on the ratio attacker/defender 2:1 without aircover only artillery cover.) and ROK ground force will be about 10%. While in the air, ROKAF continue pounding the NK massing point and rally point, thus create more casualty for NK gorund force.

It should be note that without air cover, ground troop assembly rate are about 70-80% effective (assume 4 rally point with 4 entry route corresponding to NK Army station before the war. With ROKAF have 20% interdiction rate. There are literally no way NK can punch tho the 38 parallel again. Because either they need to move their AA defence ahead of the marching column, and set up and wait for infantry and armor to defend them, thus casue casualty on the AA, or they need to leave the AA defence behind and move their infantry and armored without any AA cover, thus cause casualty on them. In this case, losing a chuk of raplceable infantry would be much perferred than losing a chunk of non-replacaeble AA defenses.

So this indicated to a battle of attrition. See who lose more first, did NK lose enough troop or ROKAF lose enough aircraft first. In all, there are no futher chance for NK to move across the 38 again without putting out their AA defense as cannon fodder.

Will the South Counter attack is another issue

Shouldn't you draw the possibility of NK stopping their advance in Seoul to make a strong point for retreat and resupply? Most blitzkrieg style's main target is Capital, then from the Capital city the invading army will take the major provincial cities one by one. Most likely the NK ground troops will cover up their forward bases with AA weapon. Assuming that NK Air Force are completely destroyed in the first day of war which indirectly pounded the number of ROKAF fighters, the most possible option is to save the remaining aircraft for defending main industrial cities like Ulsan.

Heavily defended forward bases with AA weapons will spare NK troops from major destruction from the air, not to mention that NK troops will probably use the strategy that similar to "Benteng Stelsel" strategy after conquering Seoul, sorry I don't know how to pronounce it in English, benteng stelsel is and old Dutch strategy to defeat Indonesian Kingdoms in 18th century, and then the strategy was replicated and modified by Indonesian army during independence war. The strategy is to build a connected line of fortifications in strategic locations along the supply route, each fortification will be equipped with AA weapons and AT weapons, diminishing the threat from the air and providing a secured line of telecommunication and reinforcement as well as providing protection from any ground advances that intend to retake the city or conquered area and supply routes, the forts are often used as spotter for artillery batteries. Per 5 "benteng" (fortification) there will be a base of 3-8 howitzers in the middle of those 5 forts line to counter enemy's artillery, the forts are acting as the spotter. The artillery base will move to cover each new fortifications on the front line. The strategy was proven effective for the attacking side that does not have sufficient air power, considering that NK will use similar strategy, wouldn't it become a threat to ROKAF's remaining aircraft? Then effective engagement rate will be decreased fast down to less than 60%, considering that the Benteng Stelsel strategy may quickly limit the engagement area of ROKAF itself and may kill some ROKAF fighters trying to attack NK's supply convoys.

Besides, the strategy will spare NK's MBTs because their MBTs will be marching and paving their way deeper into SK's pocket with the protection of the fortifications in each flank. Unless ROK's armored divisions take out these fortifications, there will be no way for ROK to outflank NK's MBTs and gain ground superiority by air engagement, leaving ROK's MBTs one way to face the NK's armored led advances, a frontal attack which, like you say, is 1:1, favor NK with their 5000 MBTs compared to 2500 MBTs that ROK has.

Why assume that NK forces will just go march ahead without setting out any strong points along the defensive line they have taken?
 
Who will win?? I will try to pass on a non-biased judgment here, using my expertise as an Infantry Officer.....

First Question you need to ask, will Nuclear Bomb in plays? (I don't think NK have the skill the mininaturize the fission material for warhead) So, will Nuclear bomb in plays.

Second Question, who shoot first?

Pre-battle Assumption

You can discount both Navy (assume US do not response in Naval Blockade) both Navy do not have enough to lay a blockade on each other territorial water. So, as most both navy are used as Naval Bombardment for hard target on land.

Air Force, NK airforce currently have in ivnentory

40 Mig-29
50 Mig 23
200 Mig 21/F7B
100 Mig 19/F6
100 Mig 17/F5

South Korean Air Force have the following

60 F-15K
210 F-16 (All model)
70 F-4
170 F-5E

Assume the kill ratio

F-15K : 1.5 Mig 29UB, 2 Mig 23, 3 Mig 21/19/17
F-16 : 1 Mig 29UB, 1.5 Mig 23, 2 Mig 21/19/17
F-4 : 0.5 Mig 29, 1 Mig 23,21/19/17
F-5 : 0.5 Mig 29/23, 1 Mig 21/19/17

After the initial engagement, ROKAF will have the air dominance of

30 F-15K
85 F-16
0 F-4
0 F-5

South Korea achieve overall and regional air dominance.

----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Now, if war started by the North Korean Side. North Korean can probably penetrate 10-20 mile inland (Over Seoul, the capital)
before being driven back by combine effort of air and land force of South Korea. First day of the war would see the destroy of the air power of North Korea, and tactical communication hubs, transport hubs of North Korean near the Border of the south. Without them, NK will suffer a resupply problem and while ROKAF roam the sky and ramdomly attack supply column driven to the south. With a further defensive line in Inchon-Gyeonggi-Gangwon defense line, mark the begining of hill area. Unless NK have way to evade ROKAF CAP. this would be where the offenive line of NK drew. Would take appoximate 1 weeks to 20 days.

After the first 20 days. Where the attacking NK force used up 50-70% of supply, unless they are to fight hand to hand, they will need to withdraw. The ROK Army will push from 2 entry, covered by air support and artillery strike. 30 F-15K could have destroy 50up to 70 armored target per sortie with the effective engagement rate of 90%. plus another 85 plus F-16 can achieve a 40-50%destroy rate of North Korean armor.

That will leave NK down from 5000 MBT to effective 2400-3000 MBT. and face off with ROK Army's 2500 MBT. Assume the kill rate is 1 : 1 in the end, the South would have come out ahead in any plateau fight as ROKAF gain air superiority localling and nationwide.

By now, the North assult should be all but die down, there are two option for NK ground force. Either retreat back to NK or hold out and call for more troop, bring up the reserve. By this time, estimated troop loss will be about 20-25% for North Korea (based on the ratio attacker/defender 2:1 without aircover only artillery cover.) and ROK ground force will be about 10%. While in the air, ROKAF continue pounding the NK massing point and rally point, thus create more casualty for NK gorund force.

It should be note that without air cover, ground troop assembly rate are about 70-80% effective (assume 4 rally point with 4 entry route corresponding to NK Army station before the war. With ROKAF have 20% interdiction rate. There are literally no way NK can punch tho the 38 parallel again. Because either they need to move their AA defence ahead of the marching column, and set up and wait for infantry and armor to defend them, thus casue casualty on the AA, or they need to leave the AA defence behind and move their infantry and armored without any AA cover, thus cause casualty on them. In this case, losing a chuk of raplceable infantry would be much perferred than losing a chunk of non-replacaeble AA defenses.

So this indicated to a battle of attrition. See who lose more first, did NK lose enough troop or ROKAF lose enough aircraft first. In all, there are no futher chance for NK to move across the 38 again without putting out their AA defense as cannon fodder.

Will the South Counter attack is another issue

Shouldn't you draw the possibility of NK stopping their advance in Seoul to make a strong point for retreat and resupply? Most blitzkrieg style's main target is Capital, then from the Capital city the invading army will take the major provincial cities one by one. Most likely the NK ground troops will cover up their forward bases with AA weapon. Assuming that NK Air Force are completely destroyed in the first day of war which indirectly pounded the number of ROKAF fighters, the most possible option is to save the remaining aircraft for defending main industrial cities like Ulsan.

Heavily defended forward bases with AA weapons will spare NK troops from major destruction from the air, not to mention that NK troops will probably use the strategy that similar to "Benteng Stelsel" strategy after conquering Seoul, sorry I don't know how to pronounce it in English, benteng stelsel is and old Dutch strategy to defeat Indonesian Kingdoms in 18th century, and then the strategy was replicated and modified by Indonesian army during independence war. The strategy is to build a connected line of fortifications in strategic locations along the supply route, each fortification will be equipped with AA weapons and AT weapons, diminishing the threat from the air and providing a secured line of telecommunication and reinforcement as well as providing protection from any ground advances that intend to retake the city or conquered area and supply routes, the forts are often used as spotter for artillery batteries. Per 5 "benteng" (fortification) there will be a base of 3-8 howitzers in the middle of those 5 forts line to counter enemy's artillery, the forts are acting as the spotter. The artillery base will move to cover each new fortifications on the front line. The strategy was proven effective for the attacking side that does not have sufficient air power, considering that NK will use similar strategy, wouldn't it become a threat to ROKAF's remaining aircraft? Then effective engagement rate will be decreased fast down to less than 60%, considering that the Benteng Stelsel strategy may quickly limit the engagement area of ROKAF itself and may kill some ROKAF fighters trying to attack NK's supply convoys.

Besides, the strategy will spare NK's MBTs because their MBTs will be marching and paving their way deeper into SK's pocket with the protection of the fortifications in each flank. Unless ROK's armored divisions take out these fortifications, there will be no way for ROK to outflank NK's MBTs and gain ground superiority by air engagement, leaving ROK's MBTs one way to face the NK's armored led advances, a frontal attack which, like you say, is 1:1, favor NK with their 5000 MBTs compared to 2500 MBTs that ROK has.

Why assume that NK forces will just go march ahead without setting up any strong points along the defensive line they have taken?
 
There's no strong evidence that surrendering capital would serve the purpose of defending the whole country, for the advancing army, getting a city deep inside the defending army's territory will become a huge checkpoint and retreat point for them and a big lose for the defending army, everything is controlled by the capital city, do you think setting up secondary command center in, let's say Ulsan or Incheon, will be less than 2 weeks? enough for the advancing army to pursue the retreating defending army and take another advance deeper into the defending army's pockets.
You gotta be sh1tting me with that question. :lol: Do you really really believe that the South Korean government do not have relocation plans ALREADY IN PLACE in the event of a war? Nothing at all about the continuation of government? Succession plans? This is an excellent example of non-experience and ignorance imposing themselves onto others and expects to stick.

I never said that NK army should cross the minefields without leaving signs like ninja, what matters is how long NK can keep SK off balance by replicating surprise attack method. Besides, not all places are mined, border gates for example, yes the attack would alert the whole country but quick armored led attack will keep SK off balance. France knew the German Panzer divisions are coming through Ardennes, there was even a minor tank battle near Dumont, but France didn't take the risk of loosing the defense along the Maginot line to reinforce the France army around Dumont and Sedan because they thought that the attack through Ardennes is a diversion. SK would do the same thing like the French did, I bet SK will not loosen its defense points along the border before knowing which one is the main spearhead, and like I said before, knowing which one is the spearhead in Blitzkrieg style will take weeks for the defending army.
Hitler went AROUND the Maginot Line. Further, the fortifications were not consistent as the French believe the forest would serve as part of the Maginot. Whereas the DMZ minefield is quite across the entire Korean peninsula.

Laos and Cambodia, yes but you didn't answer my last question, what makes you think that politics will not be involved in future Korean war? Do you even realize that Politic is the one that keep North Korea exist until now? It is not impossible for Politics to do the same favor in times of war.
You clearly do not have the necessary amount of knowledge about the Vietnam War to understand the political dynamics.

If the Ho Chi Minh Trail was inside Viet Nam, it would have been impossible for the North to support the Viet Cong guerrilla in the South. The entire trail would have been under constant air and ground assault whereas when it was in Laos and Cambodia, it was mostly air, not ground forces, that attacked the trail. South Vietnamese troops could not enter Laos and Cambodia.

So what kind of political maneuverings are there that North Korea could play to keep a supply route running from North to South that and would have that route unmolested?

Wow...!!! Talk about desperation...
 
...

Depends on who fire the first shot. And even then, victory is not guaranteed. You really think NKR is going to escape unscathed?


...


:lol:

Do you expect NK not to fire the "first shot" that actually is NK's Nth shots, where N>>1?

The following just a few of the N:

24koreaspan-cnd-articleLarge.jpg


North Korea fired artillery shells onto the South Korean island of Yeonpyeong on Tuesday, forcing many of its residents to flee.
By MARK McDONALD
Published: November 23, 2010

http://www.nytimes.com/2010/11/24/world/asia/24korea.html?pagewanted=all&_r=0

_47883805_jex_698715_de27-1.jpg


A North Korean submarine's torpedo sank a South Korean navy ship on 26 March causing the deaths of 46 sailors, an international report has found

BBC News - 'North Korean torpedo' sank South's navy ship - report

What can Sk do? Nothing!


What can US do? Nothing!


What can China do? Nothing! Oh, no. China actually did something: calling for constraints from all sides. :cheesy: So Sk can invest more on China. :rofl:


The fundamentalist is just funny... 1st shot? :hitwall:
 
You gotta be sh1tting me with that question. :lol: Do you really really believe that the South Korean government do not have relocation plans ALREADY IN PLACE in the event of a war? Nothing at all about the continuation of government? Succession plans? This is an excellent example of non-experience and ignorance imposing themselves onto others and expects to stick.

You gotta be sh!tting me with that assumption, I have never said that SK don't have evacuation and relocation plan. Even a prepared place takes weeks to be fully operational, you clearly a dumb officer trying to reason with your own imagination of how dumb the communists and how smart the non-communists. I never said that there will be no continuation of government, what I said is it takes time for that place to be in operation, and the amount of time needed to establish a new command center is enough to give the advancing army more opportunities to keep punching through its way deeper to the SK's defense pockets.


Hitler went AROUND the Maginot Line. Further, the fortifications were not consistent as the French believe the forest would serve as part of the Maginot. Whereas the DMZ minefield is quite across the entire Korean peninsula.

God, this a clear example of army guys who fail at logic and can differentiate which one is the point and which one is the reference, my point is, surely there are some points where minefields are not exist, border crossing for example.


You clearly do not have the necessary amount of knowledge about the Vietnam War to understand the political dynamics.

If the Ho Chi Minh Trail was inside Viet Nam, it would have been impossible for the North to support the Viet Cong guerrilla in the South. The entire trail would have been under constant air and ground assault whereas when it was in Laos and Cambodia, it was mostly air, not ground forces, that attacked the trail. South Vietnamese troops could not enter Laos and Cambodia.

So what kind of political maneuverings are there that North Korea could play to keep a supply route running from North to South that and would have that route unmolested?

Wow...!!! Talk about desperation...

You clearly do not have the necessary amount of knowledge to understand the simplest point in my writing.

By bringing Ho Chi Minh trail effort, my point is, the trail supply line is not impossible for North Korean with bigger capability than NVA to perform supply run through trail. Besides, the supply lines will mostly be behind the NK's main line of resistance. SK ground troops can't simply just blow NK's supply convoys up without passing NK's line, thus SK will rely on its Air Power to bypass NK's MLR and destroy SK's supply routes which pretty much similar to what happened with Ho Chi Minh trail.

Don't ask me back to cover up something you can't answer and twist the question, I never said that their supply routes will not be unmolested, and I did not specifically say that politics may directly spare their supply routes, thus I don't want to play with my imagination to think what kind of political maneuver that NK will play, but politics will surely take part in that war and may possibly favor North Korea.


Wow...!!! Talk about desperation...


All right, here's a thing, whatever you want say it is fine, it is my last post for you. You clearly find a hard time to understand what I just wrote, and possibly I am experiencing the same thing you are. So whatever you want to write about this future Korean War, I shall agree with you as long as it doesn't mention godzilla or Superman in your assumptions.
 
Shouldn't you draw the possibility of NK .................?

Actually, i had not finished, i only give out 1 possibility, wait until i finish my point, then i will answer your question. IN pure military point of view.

Scenario 2 - South Korea Strike first.

The prospect of SK strike first will stem in a massive quick 2 pronge assault with First Operation Command task to punch thru to Pyongyang for the tactical objective to decapacitate the Cental government, while the Seoncd Ops COmmand will invade and try to take the Highlnad in Kangwon province.

First order of business is to use short/medium range artillery to bombard the Northern Installation, making sure the incursion will be taken as safely as possible. Second fold would be air strike. THird fold would be SSM from Naval Ship.

First with all objective achieve, and the ROKAF took air superiority. First Strike Gorup (first Op Command) will begin a drag and draw warfare with the 1,2 infantry corp in the North West while the second do the same with the North East.

We cna expect more or less the same resupply problem but we can also expect less and sparodic resistence as the city area is far and beyond and with little populace as resistence. Soon enough the NK ground force will use their mechanise corp to push into the defence network and forming a siege pocket with absolute SAM umbrella help with artillery and limited local air support. (Given the ROKAF cannot move in northern airfield quick enough and lose some of the air dominance advantage.)

However, with pocketed defence, what the south can do is to focue on each pocket one by one. WIth little or no hinderence of supply of ROK army form the NK air force. The war will be basically dragged on for years, if not ten of years.

At this moment. NK Ground troop can again have 1 of the 2 method. Either keep the pocket resistence and take on a attrition war once again. Which the longer the NK waited out, the less chance of winning as supply dewindle (Supply are not suppose to be enough even at the begining of the war given the current femish situation in NK). It is nearly impossible to have NK to support a multi-front dug in war for longer than their southern counterpart.

Or try to pull out everything and start a 1950 Korean War style counter attack, using North Hamgyong Province as their final province. This will be the place i will pick if i were to back into a corner and hav to do the final regroup. One side facing the ocean while being the northern most province and with a shared border of China and Russia. That mean they got better chance to be supplied by either the Chinese or Russian if they decided to twill the deal.

Chosing tactical withdraw seems like a better solution than trying to hold it out, given the fact NK should start with less supply than SK, and the NK air interdiction virtually does not exist. A full length war will not be good to the NK. While at the North Hamgyong, it presented their supply line will be the shortest and the enemy supply line will be the longest. It stand a chance to absorb the first few wave of enemy attack and start a full blown counter attack either by a point break out or an inchon style landing back in Chosin.

Depend on how many man, hardware and supply make it back to North Hamgyong, the winning chance of the ultimate victory should be anywhere between 25% to 40%, and that is before US engage any troop in the region. And the number is extremely genourous to the North Korean.

What would Nuclear Weapon come into play??

Strangely, not much. As we assume the NK miniturization skill is not enough to put the missile, and there are currently no air delievery platform that NK could use to drop the nuke.

That took the nuke out of offensive stance. The only way they can do is either launch them using conventional way (Ie. via artillery, short range rocket. The tactical ability to put their nuke anywhere they want is virtually non-existence in NK, the best use of their nuclear weapon will be use them defensively and detonate them when a large bulk of enemy is closing.

However, this would not have much change depend on how many bomb they could made or how many of thsoe are in usable condition. Estimate 1 single nuclear device will take down 10,000 casualty when used defensively. They have to had about 20 bomb to have any significant effect on ROK Army.

In all. In either case, the probablity of NK winning is slim, with there are more devastation if NK invaded SK first, depend on the attack route SK choose and the effectiveness on counter attack. You are looking at 25-45% economic destruction on the whole SK with at least 10-20% of SK land (Especially the Northern part of SK) would have beome dead land. While the NK population is sparse. The damage done to their own community will be small. Estimate a 50-70% economic destruction. But with little as 10-20% land destroy (Not counting if NK detonate Nuke in their own land)

It would have been a costly victory but a victory none the less in this situation.
 
Shouldn't you draw the possibility of NK stopping their advance in Seoul to make a strong point for retreat and resupply? Most blitzkrieg style's main target is Capital, then from the Capital city the invading army will take the major provincial cities one by one. Most likely the NK ground troops will cover up their forward bases with AA weapon. Assuming that NK Air Force are completely destroyed in the first day of war which indirectly pounded the number of ROKAF fighters, the most possible option is to save the remaining aircraft for defending main industrial cities like Ulsan.

Heavily defended forward bases with AA weapons will spare NK troops from major destruction from the air, not to mention that NK troops will probably use the strategy that similar to "Benteng Stelsel" strategy after conquering Seoul, sorry I don't know how to pronounce it in English, benteng stelsel is and old Dutch strategy to defeat Indonesian Kingdoms in 18th century, and then the strategy was replicated and modified by Indonesian army during independence war. The strategy is to build a connected line of fortifications in strategic locations along the supply route, each fortification will be equipped with AA weapons and AT weapons, diminishing the threat from the air and providing a secured line of telecommunication and reinforcement as well as providing protection from any ground advances that intend to retake the city or conquered area and supply routes, the forts are often used as spotter for artillery batteries. Per 5 "benteng" (fortification) there will be a base of 3-8 howitzers in the middle of those 5 forts line to counter enemy's artillery, the forts are acting as the spotter. The artillery base will move to cover each new fortifications on the front line. The strategy was proven effective for the attacking side that does not have sufficient air power, considering that NK will use similar strategy, wouldn't it become a threat to ROKAF's remaining aircraft? Then effective engagement rate will be decreased fast down to less than 60%, considering that the Benteng Stelsel strategy may quickly limit the engagement area of ROKAF itself and may kill some ROKAF fighters trying to attack NK's supply convoys.

Besides, the strategy will spare NK's MBTs because their MBTs will be marching and paving their way deeper into SK's pocket with the protection of the fortifications in each flank. Unless ROK's armored divisions take out these fortifications, there will be no way for ROK to outflank NK's MBTs and gain ground superiority by air engagement, leaving ROK's MBTs one way to face the NK's armored led advances, a frontal attack which, like you say, is 1:1, favor NK with their 5000 MBTs compared to 2500 MBTs that ROK has.

Why assume that NK forces will just go march ahead without setting out any strong points along the defensive line they have taken?

The art of blitz is not control or sieze their capital as quickly as possible. The art of blitz is to roll enemy over as soon as possible with limited siezing as possible.

The tactic you say does not do well on a offending army. Yes, if they stop and consolidate their defence, they can put out a effect umbella against ROKAF. However, what you must count on is, for every asset you dig in, you need to surround it with other asset. It thus blog down your whole army. As an Army in advance. it would not be as good.

Also, you need to take the experience from Isreali when they play with Egyptian SAM umbella. You can easily counter this by spearheading 1 point, where the fortification is the weakest and devote most of your equipment and puch thru it. This type of Pocket-Continus fighting have a deadly weakpoint is, you have to spread your force out.

Say you have 5000 tanks and 200 SAM. you need about 10 tank for each SAM. But in reality, it would serve you best for you to deploy your SAM seperately so it get the maximum coverage. Doing so will "dilute" your armor force. you no longer have a continueous line of 5000 tank, but a sector of 10 tank on each SAM. It will not be 5000 vs 2500, but rather 1000 vs 500 in one sector. and 500 vs 250 in another.

What the enemy only need to do is, concentrate their force to punch a hole in it, destroy the SAM on those area, when man and equipment rush thru that hole. You will start diverging the hole into other part of the line from 2 or 3 sides. With the hole big enough to have a safe passage for the jet, it will render your pocketed defencive line useless.

Plus, as i said, Supply is on SK side. NK would not have enough to hold and build their defence bit by bit. Food and ammunition running out by the second, NK should be the one with a schedule. It will only play into the South hand if they were to wait and establish their defences.
 
You gotta be sh!tting me with that assumption, I have never said that SK don't have evacuation and relocation plan. Even a prepared place takes weeks to be fully operational, you clearly a dumb officer trying to reason with your own imagination of how dumb the communists and how smart the non-communists. I never said that there will be no continuation of government, what I said is it takes time for that place to be in operation, and the amount of time needed to establish a new command center is enough to give the advancing army more opportunities to keep punching through its way deeper to the SK's defense pockets.
And how long is that? At least you are aware enough of your own ignorance that you avoided putting down a figure. I will use the US as example. For US, the succession of government goes through the Cabinet...

1. Vice President of the United States
2. Speaker of the House of Representatives
3. President pro Tempore of the Senate

Cabinet
4. Secretary of State
5. Secretary of the Treasury
6. Secretary of Defense
7. Attorney General
8. Secretary of the Interior
9. Secretary of Agriculture
10. Secretary of Commerce
11. Secretary of Labor
12. Secretary of Health & Human Services
13. Secretary of Housing & Urban Development
14. Secretary of Transportation
15. Secretary of Energy
16. Secretary of Education
17. Secretary of Veterans' Affairs
18. Secretary of Homeland Security

At any time, at least one Cabinet member will be away from the Capitol to ensure rapid succession of government. For governments like South Korea and the once West Germany who are/were always so close to war, you can bet your ignorance @$$ that they have the same protocols and that they perform annual exercises to familiarize everyone with their roles.

But while you tried to sound knowledgeable but still avoided putting down a figure, I will: 48 hrs. That is the maximum time it will take for the South Korean government to continue its authority in the event of a war at the worst scenario that the President and some Ministers are dead.

What you are trying to put forth is that somehow if Seoul is captured that the entire South Korean government will immediately entered into suspended animation, ripe for North Korea to conquer the rest of the country. Further, while civilian authority is being relocated and secured, the military have its own procedures on how to conduct a war while that civilian authority is being relocated and secured from the front, and those procedures are highly autonomous and do not need Presidential attention.

So what this means is that if Seoul is captured and if the President and some Ministers are dead, the South Korean military is still fully capable of prosecuting the war, even if it is a purely defensive one, while civilian authority succession plan is underway.

God, this a clear example of army guys who fail at logic and can differentiate which one is the point and which one is the reference, my point is, surely there are some points where minefields are not exist, border crossing for example.
Right...And those crossings are soooooo large that they can move battalions and divisions while the South Korean military stood by in shock. :lol:

You clearly do not have the necessary amount of knowledge to understand the simplest point in my writing.
Too simple to be relevant, as in simple from not serving a single day in the military.

Don't ask me back to cover up something you can't answer and twist the question, I never said that their supply routes will not be unmolested, and I did not specifically say that politics may directly spare their supply routes, thus I don't want to play with my imagination to think what kind of political maneuver that NK will play, but politics will surely take part in that war and may possibly favor North Korea.
Yeah...Somehow the North Koreans will managed to convince the South Korean military to leave that supply line alone.

All right, here's a thing, whatever you want say it is fine, it is my last post for you. You clearly find a hard time to understand what I just wrote, and possibly I am experiencing the same thing you are. So whatever you want to write about this future Korean War, I shall agree with you as long as it doesn't mention godzilla or Superman in your assumptions.
You already made up your mind in spite of common sense, so drop the pretense of trying to engage in a 'discussion'. Anyone who is a serious student of military affairs, which does not include you, will not ignore the importance of dominance in the 3rd dimension -- air power. This is where even South Korea alone can achieve, let alone when allied with US. Further, the waters on both sides of the peninsula will be controlled by that same alliance. North Korean troops will be trapped.

Fish in a barrel, baby...!!! :lol:
 
South :- If war happens it will affect our economy and cause lots of causalities and make us loose an edge in business...SOUTH IS NOT AFRAID OF LOOSING BUT IT IS AFRAID of loosing precious life of its soldier nothing else.WE have a lot to loose but North is in like a do or die situation only China is supporting it with only a finger tip support.
 
:lol:

Do you expect NK not to fire the "first shot" that actually is NK's Nth shots, where N>>1?

The following just a few of the N:





What can Sk do? Nothing!


What can US do? Nothing!


What can China do? Nothing! Oh, no. China actually did something: calling for constraints from all sides. :cheesy: So Sk can invest more on China. :rofl:


The fundamentalist is just funny... 1st shot? :hitwall:
I guess when you have no military experience at all you would construe anything as a 'first shot'.
 
South far surpasses North in all facets of conventional war fare technology. But in a war S.korea has everything to lose. Even without nukes N.korea has 10-20000 soviet's era hidden artillery pointed at seoul that is just 40km away from the militarized border. Those decade of artillery pieces would still pulverize Seoul in the first hours of war. These N.koreans have too much of old junks that can definitely hurt unless USAF and RKAF does preemptive strike on North risking nuclear war from lunatic north. That's the reason why a developed south always get blackmailed by an inferior impoverished north.

South far surpasses North in all facets of conventional war fare technology. But in a war S.korea has everything to lose. Even without nukes N.korea has 10-20000 soviet's era hidden artillery pointed at seoul that is just 40km away from the militarized border. Those decade old obsolete artillery pieces would still pulverize Seoul in the first hours of war. These N.koreans have too much of old junks that can definitely hurt unless USAF and RKAF does preemptive strike on North risking nuclear war from lunatic north. That's the reason why a developed south always get blackmailed by an inferior impoverished north.
 
How so? If you are not aware, it's a probably a proxy war waged by China and Russia. NK is the best country to try out China's new weapons.
Neither would China nor Russia wants the US as their next door neighbor.
 
Surprise surprise, you wouldn't know would you? How could you? You live in Tunisia, a 4th world country. lol
I am guessing Nk's have nuclear tunnels too like China does. You think they are stupid? Think again.
They aren't a bunch of people from camel land running around looking for turbans.

Not forgetting their plastic surgeons. They just can't live without that drug.
 
Back
Top Bottom