Armchair Generals: Iraq and North Korea.

Status
Not open for further replies.
G

George Hill

Member
Joined
Dec 22, 2002
Messages
6,842
Location
Uintah Basin, UT
We have two major situations on our hands.
First is Iraq. Now, we all know what will go down when it's time to pull the trigger in Iraq. So let's look at the situation from the other side of the coin. From Iraq's perspective:
You know the US is coming. It's just a matter of time. Say, you have about 2 months to prepare. What would you do to ready and counter against the US?
(What we are looking for here is any shred of possible hope for Iraq to come out on top of this one. I know there is not, but let's use our imagination!)

The second senario is much more grim. And its real. North Korea has threatened a First Strike on the US.
http://www.guardian.co.uk/international/story/0,3604,889600,00.html
Let's take a look at that seriously... What NK's capabilities are, what they can hit, what effect that would have on the US as a whole, and what our response would be, with effects on NK. (Don't forget CHINA in this equation)

Show your math.
 
Iraq.

Generals are probably....
Converting currency into Gold
Staying in touch with Triple A travel
Going to bug out of the country at the first smell of kordite.

North Korea
Tell China to tell the NK's to knock it off.
If first stirke is immenent, obliterate the whole place.
Leave behind nothing. Tell the Chinnese they can have the
place in about a thousand years.
 
Well if they nuke Los Angeles, I won't be too upset. ;)

We need to take Korea out first, they are more of an immediate threat than Iraq, since they claim to have nukes already.

Of course, I don't have any idea what I am talking about, so just ignore me and move on. :D
 
(What we are looking for here is any shred of possible hope for Iraq to come out on top of this one. I know there is not, but let's use our imagination!)
Click to expand...

I'm doubtful that even Saddam Hussein has delusions of victory. What he has are plans for a posthumous place in world history.

As T. E. Lawrence (Lawrence of Arabia) said, "There is no glory in a sure victory, but much might be wrested from a sure defeat."

This guy is willing to go down, but he wants to take as many of us with him as possible. I'd guess Iraq will be filthy with booby-traps, self-destruct devices, and the like. He will scorch his own earth, if he has the chance...
 
Iraq is done in four weeks tops. NK will not strike first. That is a bluster piece in order to garner reaction from the liberal pigs here at home. Total economic boycott is called for.

The Chinese, even with their numbers and weapons, could not stand up to the superior American firepower. Further the economic damage to China would be immense. China will have to keep the NK's in line or we will regardless.
 
On Iraq, I'm basically with Rickster. If I was an Iraqi general, I'd have long since moved as much money as possible into offshore bank accounts. Then moved it around a bunch of times to try to make it harder to find. Passports in various names from various countries, and several bugout routes prepared. Residential property in discrete countries already purchased.

Korea is a harder problem. They've got a real military, unlike Iraq, that is likely to fight if commanded to do so. I don't think they'll strike first. If I was them, I'd be working real hard to put together nuke weapons. Rumor is they already have 2 or 3. If I was them, I'd do an underground test to make sure that the US knows they're operational. Then I'd have plans for blowing up one in Seoul, and the other in a major city in CONUS, probably smuggling it in via a container.

We really don't want to go to war in Korea again. The carnage in Seoul would be horrid. And the reaction of the Chinese to a large US invasion of North Korea might not be predictable.
 
Guys...

First question is "WHAT WOULD YOU DO TO DEFEND IRAQ?"

Looking at the US's military plan... we would have to deny the US of it's Air Superiority. I'd gamble heavily on air defense measures from MANPADS to big AA Missles. Throw out all the fighter jets I had and try to go toe to toe with everything the AA didn't knock down.
Against the US's other strengths... Armor. I'd arm teams with plenty of anti-tank missiles. If we won the air... and the US doesn't have it. Then we could use the air. Arm my planes with AG missils and use them to hit tanks and logistical targets. The US Army's Infantry is tough... but it takes a long time to walk across the desert.

Hmmm... it would all hinge on winning the air. With huge purchases of new fighters, and rigorous training...
Iraq could be a hard nut to crack... but it will crack.
 
Not so much to worry about with Iraq, as Hussein will stand every Iraqi citizen in front of himself to be killed before he kills himself. I figure Iraq to be under fire in less than 25 days.
PDRNK is going to be different.
The communist Chinese are not going to do much with the Koreans, because they like it when we are worried about something.
I doubt a major land attack to ROK will happen, but I would be keeping a very wary eye out for any unprotected US personnel or equipment. The USS Pueblo snatch happened out of the blue. The North Koreans are a lot like playing chess with a beginner-you just don't know what they are going to trot out, but you can bet there will be no warning. Also understand the North does have ballistic missiles-can't reach the US with them, but they can certainly reach Japan. Don't know their accuracy, but if we are sending naval task forces into the area, they should be considered potential targets.
 
Without the possibility of controlling the skies there can be no chance of victory for Iraq.

If I were Sadam I would surrender the country and my office of authority with provisions of a 1 billion dollar pay off and complete and total international immunity for myself and my family. I would then leave Iraq and live out the rest of my life touring the luxury spots of the world aboard my 300’ super yacht.

If that did not work I would immediately declare war on France and upon their surrender would assume control of that country and move my seat of power.

Viva la Fraq!
:D
 
I think the only chance for Saddam is for booby trapping the cities and let the US have the sandbox. He could turn it into a war of attrition by using civilians as human shields-no, not the birdbrains who went over there, but children and anything else which would fan the flames of public opinion against the war.
Saddam has no air force, unless Iran is willing to rent their planes back to Iraq.
Saddam has no infantry-maybe he could get the Samali's to farm out.
Saddam has no navy that I am aware of.
 
Saddam cannot go toe to toe with the US military, and unless he is a fool, he knows that.

He will use suicide bombers in the US, and WMD on our military in Iraq.

Hit NYC, LA, Chicago, Dallas, Atlanta, Boston, and St Louis, and see the USA implode in fear and anarchy.
 
You guys think this is gunna be sooooooo quick and easy!! Well, so was "police action" in a little place known as Korea 51 years ago.

O'l Dugout Doug MacArthur THOUGHT he had it all sown up, exactly when he told Truman he would have it done, and BOOM!!!! Chinese!! Thousands of them!! Apparently, they didn't take kindly to our picking on their "fraternal socialist brother"!! It took a lot of American lives and more time than Doug anticipated!!
Well, enough encapsulated history and to the situation at hand.

Those who cannot remember (or are never taught) history are condemned to repeat it!!!

There is a little and almost never mentioned news report that surfaced some time ago regarding SEVEN MILLION "volunteers" sitting across the border in Iran. (and those are just the ones that the reporter knew about) Just waiting the order from their Imam to "strike at the heart of the Zionist pig".

I use the term "volunteers" for a diliberate reason. Remember those aformentioned Chinese...

In the words of (then actor) Sen. Fred Thompson: Son, this could get ugly real quick and people are going to die!!!

---The Hunt for Red October
 
I've been pondering this very subject for the last day or so. Who is more dangerous? A guy who has the bomb, or the guy that wants the bomb?
My only response so far has been to trust that both can be dealt with intelligently, efficiently & quickly. Neither situation would be best served it they turned into prolonged military engagements.
 
Saddam has two choices. He can be dead, either by his own people or by us. Or he can stock up on his Viagra and go into exile.

He may or may not actually believe he can defeat the US, but his military does not hold that delusion. I don't think they want to commit mass suicide by doing something stupid like using WMD. His civilian population may not know of what happened in Kuwait, but the military that managed to get out of Kuwait alive know exactly what the US can do to ground troops.

Given the choice of what Saddam *may* do if they do not obey him and what the US *will* do if they decide to fight, I really believe they will choose not to fight.
 
I'd gamble heavily on air defense measures from MANPADS to big AA Missles. Throw out all the fighter jets I had and try to go toe to toe with everything the AA didn't knock down.
Click to expand...
There's no way they can defend Iraq and no way they can deny the US air superiority. We've been enforcing the no fly zone for a decade. They've been trying to shoot down US and British aircraft for all of those 10 years and to date they haven't gotten a single one.

During the Gulf War and now in Afghanistan, attacking coalition aircraft have stayed above 10,000 feet, out of the range of manpads. The laser-guided bombs that we depended upon in the Gulf War required that the aircraft fly below the cloud layer. The new GPS guided bombs can be dropped from an aircraft at 30,000 feet miles away from the target.

Medium and high altitude SAMs are radar guided. The Iraqi air defense guys have long since learned that turning on their radars simply results in their eating a HARM missile. The US will open the war on Iraq with major strikes at Iraqi anti-aircraft command-and-control assets, probably using large numbers of cruise missiles, UAV decoys, and stealth aircraft. So the Iraqis probably won't even have the option of "let's go for broke, turn on all the radars and go toe to toe" because the network will be shattered before they know the war has started.

Iraq has few flyable aircraft and their pilots, who were poorly trained in the Gulf war, have even less flight hours now. Remember that in the Gulf War, when Iraq had many more aircraft than they do now and their pilots had many more flight hours, Iraqi pilots did not have a single victory in the skies -- the few coalition aircraft that were shot down were lost to anti-aircraft fire.

If they even can take off (i.e., if we haven't destroyed their runways), they won't have radar guidance (which was always an integral part of the Soviet doctrine to which they trained), so they will be flying blind against our AWACs guided fighters, who will have better training, better aircraft, and better missiles. In other words, it would be nothing less than suicide and the Iraqi pilots surely know that. They may try to lure us into a flak-trap -- i.e., launch a fighter to approach US aircraft, but before the US aircraft can engage, the Iraqi fighter retreats at high speed, low level, right into a flak trap primed to turn on their radars and launch missiles. That could result in the loss of a few US aircraft, but it is not a way to gain air superiority.

Defending Iraq against the US armed forces is simply suicide. They can't win. The could use biological and chemical weapons to cause large numbers of horrific casualties.
With huge purchases of new fighters, and rigorous training...
Click to expand...
No one will sell Iraq new fighters and if they did, they'd be awfully hard to smuggle into the country. And there's basically no way they can do rigorous training, due to the no-fly zones.
 
denfoote: I agree that North Korea would be anything but easy.

Iran? No way they will come to the aid of Iraq. Not a chance. They fought the Iraqis for eight years in a vicious war. Thousands of Iranian soldiers lie in hospitals, crippled from chemical weapons attacks. According to one report I read not a day goes by in Tehran without an obit in the paper about a soldier who just died from chemical weapons injuries suffered in the 1980s.
 
After reading the title of this thread I'll reserve my comments for later, after all a true Monday Morning QB only gives pointers after the **** hits the fan and there is plenty of time for review to see what didn't work, thus giving him the advantage of never having to truely test himself under fire. :neener:
I'll post after the white flag is flown with my brillant solution to the dummies mess ups :D
 
Sadaam will want to create as many mass casualties as possible. Problem is he will not know where US forces are. Ergo, in theatre casualties will be his own people. He will want the US to get sucked into urban combat which will not occur. I suspect most of the Iraqi army will advance to the rear assist in a coup.

NK is a wild card. I always thought NK was a second front against the US. The reason for advertising their nuclear prowess is to extort aid from the US. They need help. I suspect the reason for demanding aid is the NK military is getting a little grumpy and forcing Maximum Leader to get economic aid. If things go bad the US can militariy counter any move ( didn't say stop it). The B-2 bomber was designed specifically to take out high value targets with a minimum of support. A carrier task force could force the NK's to keep their heads down.

China does have dirty skirts. It is entirely possible they would do something quite stupid also. A subtle message could be delivered when for some unknown reason all 4 of China's brand new subs simply disappeared. They have a shiny new aircraft carrier that could just as easily strike an underwater obstacle and sink.

In any case I fully expect to see a large number of terrorist events in the West in the run up to US action. Sadaam will try to thump Isreal to incite the Arab world. The biggest terrorist threat to Israel is from Hezbollah who has amassed considerable rocket power. I can see Hezbollah attacking Israel. I recently read an article which said Israel has quietly passed word to the Syrians that if Israel is attacked by Hezbollah, Israel will settle the Syria question in a forthright and unambigious manner since Syria is Hezbollah's base of operations against Israel.

Iraq will not the only place where there will be military action. I see a strong possibliity of world wide combat. Hope not, but the makin's are there.
 
I recently read an article which said Israel has quietly passed word to the Syrians that if Israel is attacked by Hezbollah, Israel will settle the Syria question in a forthright and unambigious manner since Syria is Hezbollah's base of operations against Israel.
Click to expand...
Wouldn't surprise me. IIRC, at the end of the '73 war there was basically nothing between the Israeli tanks and Damascus.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Similar threads

K
  • Locked
War in Korea and US Ammo Prices
2
Replies
49
Views
2K
Sam1911
S
C
  • Locked
VMI alumni KIA in Iraq
Replies
0
Views
649
cookhj
C
W
  • Locked
North Korea: Calling their bluff.
Replies
7
Views
1K
Bahadur
B
N
  • Locked
Members of the CIA are for letting North Korea test launch!
Replies
4
Views
431
Fosbery
F
W
  • Locked
Guns,Butter and Iraq:The Politicizing of the Iraq War
Replies
1
Views
348
Justin
Justin
Back
Top