DPRK Battle Plan - Page 2




 
--
 
February 5th, 2007  
major liability
 
 
Quit blaming South Korea for the threat North Korea poses. I would love to see all of the NK officials and military dead, but unfortunately that will cause too much collateral damage.
February 5th, 2007  
senojekips
 
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by major liability
Quit blaming South Korea for the threat North Korea poses. I would love to see all of the NK officials and military dead, but unfortunately that will cause too much collateral damage.
Perhaps I'm missing something here. Nobody's blaming anyone. Just stating what they think to be correct.

So long as Seoul is within artillery range (and possibly missiles) it will be a serious deterrent to anyone starting anything.

Nobody expects the South to physically remove the city to another location, what was suggested many years ago was that they start to decentralise their assets. To all intents and purposes this has not happened.
February 5th, 2007  
Gator
 
 
Here is a pre-Iraq War view.


Quote:
Monday, Jun. 13, 1994
What If... ...War Breaks Out In

By Jill Smolowe

In war scenarios, planners tend to anticipate the worst -- ceding infallibility to the enemy's forces and equipment -- or hope for the best, imagining a near perfect performance by their own troops. But these schemes are only guesses. War games cannot calculate what is in the hearts or minds of an enemy force. Will they fight with conviction and tenacity or surrender easily? Will they have enough food, oil and ammunition or leave troops famished and demoralized in the field? Such imponderables, as much as military blueprints, are the true keys to victory.
As the struggle over North Korea's nuclear capability crept a step closer to confrontation last week, men paid to think about the possibility of a war sketched dramatically different scenarios. In the worst case -- a computerized war game done in 1991 by one Pentagon analyst and never officially accepted -- an unstoppable North Korean force sweeps across the 150-mile-wide Demilitarized Zone, pushes south through disorganized defenders and reaches the southeastern port of Pusan within four weeks, just in time to block the arrival of U.S. reinforcements. The Korean peninsula reunifies -- with the seat of power in the northern capital of Pyongyang.
In current Pentagon analyses, the North Korean incursion across the DMZ is stopped within three weeks by a superior U.S. air campaign. American troops land at the North Korean port of Wonsan, an Allied noose encircles Pyongyang and topples strongman Kim Il Sung within four months. The Koreas reunite -- with the seat of power in Seoul.
The scenarios share this gloomy prediction: high costs for all sides. Both Koreas would suffer deaths and injuries in the hundreds of thousands, while the U.S. force, which could build to 400,000 over a two-month period, might sustain 20,000 casualties. "It's going to be a bloody, bloody mess if it happens," warns a Pentagon official. "A real tragedy."
Based on what the most pessimistic analysts and current Pentagon planners know about the size and deployment of North Korea's forces and arsenals, and the intent and capability of Allied forces, they agree on this:
-- If a war erupts, it would be because North Korea fires the first shot. / Although the Pentagon steadfastly refused last week to rule out a pre-emptive attack, Washington's actions -- or nonactions -- in South Korea supported the Clinton Administration's stated policy of making no move that might be misinterpreted as a provocation. Even as the war of words quickened, top Pentagon officials saw no reason to evacuate either the 11,000 military dependents of the 35,000 U.S. troops stationed in South Korea or the other 12,000 American civilians residing there.
-- Despite U.S. satellites and other intelligence-gathering assets, the warning time of a North Korean attack will be negligible. A year ago, military officials predicted a weeklong alert. General Gary Luck, the senior U.S. commander in South Korea, cautions that his forces will have as little as 12 hours' warning. A congressional defense expert whittles that still lower, predicting that advance notice "is as long as it takes to load and fire an artillery shell: about 10 seconds."
-- The opening barrage of Pyongyang's attack would be one of the largest in modern history. The North will not lack manpower to wage the initial onslaught. More than two-thirds of the 1.2 million-strong army are deployed within 60 miles of the DMZ, amply equipped with tanks, self-propelled artillery and armored personnel carriers to enhance their mobility. "Their heavy firepower, forward deployment and high state of combat readiness constitute a cocked gun pointed at South Korea," says Walter Slocombe, a top Pentagon official.
-- The fighting would be deadly. Nearly 90% of South Korean and U.S. regulars are positioned within 35 miles of the DMZ, in easy range of the North's huge assembly of artillery. U.S. Defense Secretary William Perry acknowledges that its weapons are larger and better than anything owned by Iraq's Saddam Hussein. They include hundreds of 240-mm rocket launchers and 170-mm Koksan guns, among the longest-range artillery weapons in the world. North Korea's 10,000 artillery pieces plus the rocket launchers can fire up to 20 million rounds of high explosives, fuel-air explosives and chemical weapons in a single day. Its 120 Soviet-designed Scud and FROG missiles could sustain an hour-long barrage.
-- The Allies would fight back hard. Their three long, thin lines of defense -- dubbed FEBA (Forward Edge of Battle Area) Alpha, Bravo and Charlie -- are a network of tank traps, fortifications and trenches that mark the front lines as they stood when the first Korean War ended in July 1953. Seoul, which is only 35 miles from the DMZ, has invested heavily in the lines, especially the Alpha line, which crosses the Munsan and Chorwan valleys -- where North Korea would probably push through. Since April, the U.S. has dispatched a battallion's worth of Patriot missiles to South Korea and replaced older Cobra helicopter gunships with new, more potent Apaches. Pentagon officials say all key ports and airfields are being fine-tuned for action. Fuel supplies and depots are being topped off at maximum capacity. The U.S. has withdrawn older iron bombs and replaced them with laser-guided weapons and other "smart bombs" of the kind that performed so well during the Gulf War. But efforts to persuade the South Koreans to redeploy some of their troops away from the DMZ have failed.
During the opening hours of battle, North Korea would have a pronounced edge. After the initial thrust across the DMZ, its forces would head south, with thousands of infantry streaming through the smoking gaps in the South Korean lines ahead of T-62 and T-55 tanks and armored personnel carriers. Commandos and vehicles would move through secret tunnels to sabotage Allied positions from the rear. Over the next days and weeks, North Korea would try to encircle Seoul and gobble up much of the rest of the peninsula before U.S. reinforcements would arrive.
So who will prevail? The gloomiest scenario is also the most controversial. The 1991 assessment designed by retired U.S. Air Force Colonel Robert Gaskin predicts the all-important U.S. air campaign would never get off the ground. Instead, he forecasts that when squadrons of American and South Korean F-16s scramble at a dozen air bases, Scud missiles armed with nerve-gas warheads would slam into the tarmac, effectively shutting down operations. At bases like Osan, the huge U.S. air base 25 miles south of Seoul, North Korean commandos would suddenly appear and shoot up the base's preflight briefing room, killing pilots and disrupting the counterattack.
Continued....
--
February 5th, 2007  
Gator
 
 
Quote:
Gaskin's report sees the entire South Korean front crumbling in as few as three days. Never trained to retreat and regroup, the Southern troops would flee in disorganized panic. North Korean armored columns would then envelop Seoul and drive south toward Taejon, a key crossroad, gobbling up captured oil and gasoline supplies along the way and speeding toward Pusan. As the invaders tear through the countryside, Seoul's lightly armed reserve units would fall to North Korea's tanks and armored personnel carriers. Millions of panicked civilians clog the highways, blocking South Korean reinforcements trying to move north. In four weeks, Kim Il Sung's troops would capture Pusan, erasing the mistake their predecessors made 44 years earlier, when Northern forces failed to reach the port before U.S. reinforcements arrived to drive them back across the 38th Parallel.
By Gaskin's lights, President Clinton is left with three bad choices: mount a Normandy-style invasion from the shores of a reluctant Japan; use atomic weapons on Pyongyang, at the cost of countless civilian lives and the peninsula; or simply throw in the towel. Last week Gaskin defended his three- year-old prognostication: "I don't think it's changed much, except at the margins."
"His conclusions are ludicrous," a Pentagon official retorts. This official, who reflects current top-level thinking, is confident that North Korea cannot win. "Our scenarios are profoundly conservative because of the way we vastly overrate the North Korean troops."
The U.S. firmly believes that a lopsided air advantage would more than make up for any mistakes or deficiencies on the ground, an attitude bolstered by the dramatic success of Western air forces in the Gulf War. There is little question that modern U.S. fighters, rapidly brought up to 500, can quickly clear the skies of North Korea's large but obsolescent squadrons of MiG-21 and MiG-17 fighters. B-52s would carpet-bomb Pyongyang's advancing troops 12 hours after they crossed the DMZ. While there are only 72 U.S. F-16s in the South now, warplanes from Japan, Alaska and nearby carriers would arrive within hours of an attack, including the cream of the U.S. arsenal: radar-eluding F- 117A Stealth fighters and F-15E strike jets. The U.S. would also rely on sophisticated radar to pinpoint the enemy's artillery tubes and take them out with artillery salvos.
Air strikes on Pyongyang might prove trickier. North Korean facilities are heavily defended by antiaircraft guns and long-range SA-5 missiles, with many of those deeply dug into the ground. The most urgent job for aerial forces would be to blunt the North's offensive with antiarmor smart bombs and cluster bombs. Southern airfields have strengthened their defenses, and the arrival of Patriot missiles should help fend off lethal Scuds.
The U.S. has a far better idea of the capabilities of its allies in the South than its enemies to the North. But Washington is in the dark about how % well the North might attack. Virtually all the military analysts studying the battlefront acknowledge that hard information about the quality of Pyongyang's forces is scanty. "Compared to North Korea, the former Soviet Union was a duck-soup intelligence target," notes a Pentagon's analyst. "Here, we just don't know much."
No one is sure if the Northern army has a strategic reserve of petroleum and diesel oil that exempts troops from the severe fuel shortage crippling the rest of the country. Nationwide food shortages and lack of spare parts may cut into the military's muscle. Nor does anyone know whether the North has the means to coordinate a major attack. Its communication systems are primitive, yet the military routinely conducts command-and-control training for large- scale operations.
"The difficulty of the situation is the proximity of the DMZ to Seoul," says retired General Robert RisCassi, who commanded the U.S. forces in South Korea until a year ago. "I truly believe that we would win -- and win handily -- but the cost in terms of civilian lives adds another dimension." Bill Taylor, a retired Army colonel now at the Center for Strategic and International Studies, puts it more starkly: "Seoul will be destroyed almost totally in less than a week. That's the rub, and I think everybody knows that."
In the end, acknowledges Eliot Cohen, a war-fighting expert who is frequently consulted by Pentagon officials, "until the shooting starts, nobody really knows what's going to happen." Much depends on the will and determination of the North Koreans. And that is the piece of the puzzle neither Washington nor Pyongyang can calculate with certainty.
http://www.time.com/time/magazine/ar...980909,00.html

From the time of that report there have been less US Combat Troops and Equipment in Korea because of other more pressing missions.
February 5th, 2007  
A Can of Man
 
 
Moving the capital wouldn't do squat because Seoul would be Seoul. Those people and those buildings aren't going to move simply because someone decides to move the government.
Seoul has been the capital for about 600 years. Though it's name has changed, it's location has not.
North Korea's most feared weapon is not the nuke or anything but their massive chemical weapons arsenal. This is a threat that very few people seem to ever talk about but THIS is the main threat.
Seoul will be levelled within minutes of the war. There's no way around this unfortunately. Millions of people will die within an hour of opening hostilities.
Strategic nuclear strike against the US? Oh please. They can't even load their nuke on a missile that can fly to Seoul.
Also the state of their equipment is terrible. Their low quantities of fuel means that many of their tankers will enter battle without ever having really used their tanks before. And plenty of them will find out that their tanks don't even run. Those who do reach the battlefield will find their T-55s and 64s obliterated because quite frankly those tanks really really suck.
The South Korean military is supposed to be very well funded but even WE have serious problems here and there. Just imagine what the North Korean guys will have to go through.
Another serious threat is their special forces. They will wear South Korean uniforms, infiltrate by nap of the earth flying AN-2 Colt transport planes or by sea. They will cause a lot of confusion behind the lines.
Also it's funny whenever you read about this stuff... it makes you think that South Korea doesn't field a military. I guess I've been kidding about having a job for the past 2 years.

Oh right, forget that South Korea has tanks too. Yes, we just made it out of paper, how did you know?
February 5th, 2007  
senojekips
 
 
Redneck, I bow before your local knowledge, but I did not suggest that they move Seoul, they were asked to decentralise, to spread their civil and military assets all around the country so that a strike on Seoul would be far less effective. This of course would also mean that many of the population would have to move to stay with their jobs. So instead of having one high priority target the North would have to divide their resources to cover perhaps hundreds of smaller targets. I'm sure that I'm trying to teach my granny to suck eggs here, but it is for the benefit of others that I am going into such detail on such a simple concept.

I have no doubt that their military command is already decentralised, but what about industry etc?

Whatever the outcome it will have a high human cost.
February 5th, 2007  
Gator
 
 
Wouldn't the plan be to use part of the South Korean Military to start an evac south from Seoul, and to assist with the many WIA in Seoul, while planing the defense of Seoul?

The problem is Seoul cannot be moved, and the North Koreans bank on that.

As for the Nuke Threat to South Korea from the North, the North can still load a Nuke on an Aircraft, or on a vehicle for that matter, and years back the US Military came up with the crazy idea of fielding a Nuclear Bazooka, why I will never know, as it was not a very good idea.... and Nuclear Artillery has been around for quite some time.
February 5th, 2007  
A Can of Man
 
 
The chances of a North Korean aircraft making it through the fighter and SAM screen of South Korea is about as high as me banging Britney Spears and Christina Aguilera at the same time in a Playboy mansion party. If the US and South Korea have the upper hand in only one thing, it's air power.

As for the industry, it's hardly in Seoul. There's some in Incheon, then there's most of the heavy stuff near Yosu and Pohang. Those are on the southern parts of South Korea, real far from Seoul. Also the best ports are in Busan, which is about as far away as you can get from Seoul. So it's not like one major raid on Seoul will knock everything and everyone out. Seoul's big, but it's mostly services. In terms of military impact, flattening Seoul will do very little if we assume that the government and military command manage to escape in time but the problem is the civilian casualties.
February 5th, 2007  
Gator
 
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by the_13th_redneck
The chances of a North Korean aircraft making it through the fighter and SAM screen of South Korea is about as high as me banging Britney Spears and Christina Aguilera at the same time in a Playboy mansion party. If the US and South Korea have the upper hand in only one thing, it's air power.
I would have never thought it possible for a Terrorist Group to commandeer 4 US Civilian Aircraft all at once and slam 3 of them into buildings before 9-11-01.
My guess would be for the North to load a IND into a helicopter with either South Korean or US Military markings and bank on confusion during the first round of fighting.

Quote:
Originally Posted by the_13th_redneck
As for the industry, it's hardly in Seoul. There's some in Incheon, then there's most of the heavy stuff near Yosu and Pohang. Those are on the southern parts of South Korea, real far from Seoul. Also the best ports are in Busan, which is about as far away as you can get from Seoul. So it's not like one major raid on Seoul will knock everything and everyone out. Seoul's big, but it's mostly services. In terms of military impact, flattening Seoul will do very little if we assume that the government and military command manage to escape in time but the problem is the civilian casualties.
All the North would have to do in my opinion is take Seoul, with many Civilian South Koreans trapped inside, and we (along with the South Korean Military) would have a hard time getting them out, and, it would take the use of Tac Nukes off the table as I do not believe we would Nuke Seoul to get at the North Koreans. They know they cannot beat us on the open range.

I just do not know how much they would have left to defend the North, or even if they care to. Perhaps they would have already written much of the North off once they hit the South.
The thing that scares me the most as far as North Korea is they have very little to lose.
February 5th, 2007  
A Can of Man
 
 
The only way they'd have a shot at using the nuke is if it was their first shot. i.e. a low flying AN-2, a fighter jet pretending to defect ... perhaps a MiG-19 with a nuke disguised as an external fuel tank.
Actually the fight's not over if they take Seoul. They'd still have to deal with most of the Army to the northeast and the 1st Marine Division at Pohang will be more or less untouched at this point. So they might take Seoul (but remember they'd have to launch a successful offensive through a MASSIVE city with a river running through it east to west and you know just how hard that can be). They might be able to take it but they're going to bleed real hard and that might be a good thing
 


Similar Topics
The Battle of Horseshoe Bend 1814
Battle for Baghdad: US and Iraq plan street by street offensive
India and Pakistan
What was said on the 3rd presidential debate.