Re: Fwd: North Korea - Miscalculation

[Mike Davino <mdavino@yahoo.com>]

I think if you look at the layout of the valley Camp
Casey is in, it is a valley that runs from west to
east and the mountains to the north of Casey would
provide no protection from long range artillery fires
from the west.  The nK's could engage Casey firing on
a west-to-east axis from firing points at least 5 K's
west of the DMZ and still be well within the range of
the Koksan gun.  Other camps like Camp Greaves, Camp
Giant, and Camp Edwards West are within easy range of
the nK artillery and Camp Pelham (now renamed Gary
Owen) is also within easy artilery range of artillery
emplaced west and north of the Han River Estuary
Neutral Zone.  Also unlike in the mid-eighties when  a
large numbers of troops were still scattered about the
camps in 15-20 man quonset huts, they are now
vulnerably housed in 100 and 200 man barracks.  

I don't want to imply that we would not win a war with
north Korea, I believe we certainly would, but we
would have to accept large numbers of US casualties.

Mike

--- James Robert Dennis III <jrdennis@earthlink.net>
wrote:
> The North Koreans do not have the skill that they
> once had with Kim Il 
> Sung.  Kim Jong Il has not shown the political
> pragmatism that his father 
> had.  
> 
> I would worry about the North Koreans getting
> pressed against the wall.  
> I remember a war game played at Ft. Leavenworth
> (Warfighter) where the 
> OPFOR was allowed to use NK Tactics and Doctrine,
> the results were not 
> pretty from a ROK/US point of view.  They stopped
> that wargame in 1 hour 
> and restarted 6 hours later with a lot of
> restrictions against the OPFOR. 
> 
> While the North Korean Air Force is composed mostly
> of obsolete aircraft, 
> they still have enough punch in a first strike to
> make our eyes water, 
> especially if they hit the helicopter airfields and
> the MLRS battalions.  
> MiG 15's with 5 inch rockets would be more than
> suitable for this, 
> especially if they are still in the Camps.
> 
> There are too many people that think everyone will
> sit still and get 
> bombed for 30 or so days, ala Iraq did.  To think
> this is as stupid as 
> someone who actually lets it happen.
> 
> Now as far as 2d Infantry Division goes, it sure
> sounds macho and one can 
> really thump one's chest when you state that you are
> within Artillery 
> Range.   Well it just isn't true.  Most of the
> Hardened Artillery Sites 
> aren't in the area where they can hit 2d ID (Camp
> Casey).  If the NKs 
> were to bring up the D-74s (122mm guns) the 130mm or
> even the Kokson 
> guns, the mountains to the north west of Camp Casey
> would provide a 
> shield.  (long range fires require low
> trajectories).  Additionally the 
> place where people show where the "guns could be"
> isn't suitable for 
> artillery (very steep slopes) and the direction of
> the mountains make the 
> orientation of HARTS (where you could fire out of
> them) not suitable. 
> 
> At Camp Howze, in the Western Corridor back when 2d
> ID had a brigade out 
> there, it was out of Artillery Range as was Camp
> Garry Owen.  The 
> Battalion across the Imjin (1-9 Infantry back then
> and the Artilley 
> Battalion at Camp Pelham were with in range of the
> Artillery but the 
> 120mm mortars of the DMZ police and the front line
> units were too far 
> back to hit them.  Now if the NKs moved them just
> prior to hostilities 
> that would have been a different story.  Now of
> course the JSA HQ (Kitty 
> Hawk) was within 120mm Mortar range.  
> 
> Going after Western Seoul would be interesting again
> because of the 
> directon of the mountains.  I don't think we would
> see Koksan guns used.  
> The Rocket Artillery can certainly hit Seoul.  Seoul
> gets closer to the 
> DMZ everyday, in 20 years Seoul may be within Mortar
> Range (less than 6 
> kms).   
> 
> Was I worried about NK artillery in '83-84, yes. 
> Towards the end of the 
> Korean fighting, the Chinese were able to fire
> approximately 100,000 
> rounds per day against us and the number of rounds
> per day was 
> increasing.  A 100,000 round day would be a light
> day in a current war 
> (until the NK had to advance their guns).  
> 
> The problem is can the NK's deliver a knock out
> punch before we can send 
> in reinforcements?  They don't have to take Seoul,
> all they have to do is 
> recover the 38th Parallel and hold it until they can
> get talks started 
> again.  The current ROK government would fall and we
> could see a military 
> coup to keep a "reunification" under less than
> favorable conditions from 
> taking place.  Additionally the ROK Army would have
> had the stuffing 
> stomped out of it and it would take years to recover
> from that.  ROK 
> Reserve Divisions don't have the heavy artillery and
> tanks that a Regular 
> Division has.  
> 
> 
> 
> 
> >An interesting article, but the north Koreans have
> >little to worry about.  The US is certainly not
> going
> >to employ the strategy and tactics used in
> Afghanistan
> >against the DPRK.  The US was able to employ its
> >awesome precision airpower against the Taliban
> because
> >the Taliban and Al Queda had no way of striking
> back
> >against the US forces except perhaps, terrorism.  
> >
> >That is not the case in north Korea.  The nK's have
> a
> >highly developed air defense system that would pose
> a
> >real threat to our aircrews.  More disturbing is
> their
> >artillery.  Most of the US 2nd Infantry Division is
> >within artillery range of the NKPA, some of the
> camps
> >are even within mortar range.  All they have to do
> to
> >retaliate against US airstrikes is fire their
> 122mm,
> >130mm and 152mm artillery at the camps with their
> >large barracks full of US troops and they will
> cause
> >hundreds, perhaps thousands of casualties.  Even
> worse
> >is the case of the main US HQ in Seoul which is
> within
> >range of the 170mm Koksan gun and 240mm rockets. 
> In
> >addition to military facilities it has daycare
> >centers, an elementary school, a high school,
> family
> >quarters, etc.  I doubt that the nK's will be
> >concerned about collateral damage if they aim thier
> >rockets at the battle simulation center troop
> barracks
> >and hit the elementary school across the street
> >instead.   
> >
> >For years the US troops north of Seoul have served
> as
> >a tripwire against a nK attack, but now ironically
> >they now tie our hands by being so far forward. 
> Any
> >option that includes Afghanistan-like precision
> >airstrikes would have to be weighed against the
> risk
> >to US troops posed by nK artillery.  Not to mention
> >the risk to our allies allies who have probably got
> >about 12 divisions within artillery range of the
> nK's
> >as well as a significant portion of their civilian
> >population.
> >
> >Mike Davino
> >
> >
> >


__________________________________________________
Do You Yahoo!?
Send your FREE holiday greetings online!
http://greetings.yahoo.com