- Joined
- Jun 10, 2005
- Messages
- 26,879
- Reaction score
- 12,684
- Location
- Highlands Ranch, CO
- Gender
- Male
- Political Leaning
- Independent
You're still discounting the South Koreans. They have a technological advantage over the North Koreans, and they have almost as many men. Since we only have 28,500 troops in South Korea, we would fight a defensive war, trading time and space to inflict massive casulties on the North Koreans. They won't be able to sustain the losses, and then we push them back. But we still have less than 30,000 troops against over a million. The South Koreans would grind the North Koreans away with attrition, and we'd clean up whatever was left.
I'm not discounting the South Koreans. 28,000 American troops would grow in the event of war. They will not sit on the Korean peninsula without the ability to agress properly. All of our forces in Okinawa are positioned for this encounter (they largely do not deploy to Iraq or Afghanistan). There would also be mass Marine deployments from the West Coast. Our numbers would grow towards 50,000. This is the doctrinal plan and keep in mind that I'm not even talking about Army numbers. And it happens to fit into the schedule, because I MEF (West coast) is being replaced with II MEF (East coast) in Afghanistan as we type.
Everyone's got this idea that the military is "broken" because a few Army generals shot their mouths off and short changed their own branch a few years back. The Pentagon released reports declaring the state of equipment and it implied that we were on the verge of collapse. Well, it never happened, because this was never true. Iraq was years later brought to "victory" and our mission in Afghanistan is being pumped up this coming year to cap off our stay there.
Last edited: