Despite rising tensions, or maybe because of it, the United States has continued its yearly training in South Korea where the combined 65,000 American and South Korean troops are practicing anti-terrorism drills. Given the current climate, North Korean officials said this is pouring gasoline on the fire and furthered the fear of possible military action.
To illustrate what war would possibly look like, Glenn Beck interviewed a military analyst who echoed conventional wisdom in that Seoul could be leveled with a million casualties within the first hour alone if accounting for North Korean artillery near the DMZ, the population of Seoul, and the likely course of a conflict. But that kind of military analysis fails to take into account key US military assets and doctrine that make a preemptive first strike much more powerful.
For example, repurposed Ohio class subs can penetrate North Korean waters and fire their entire missile arsenal without detection in less than six minutes. If they choose to fire their entire complement, that would make about 300 missiles from just the two subs in the area. They would target anti-air facilities, which in turn would open up North Korean positions to American air assets. Long range bombers and sorties from the carrier in the region would hit command and control as well as artillery positions. Instead of a million casualties in the first hour, the North Koreans would be subjected to a blistering air campaign that could knock out most of their firepower.
This analysis is based on the reported paper strength of the North Koreans. American air assets have been engaged in constant operations in the War on Terror around the world since 2001. They are well trained (the best in the world) and proven in combat conditions. History is replete with examples of militaries that sound powerful on paper but vanish like the morning dew at the first sign of combat.
Remember Saddam calling for the mother of all battles? There is a chance that when calm and focused military exercises are replaced by battlefield chaos, the under-trained North Korean forces would have trouble firing their missiles and artillery to any significant degree.
But eliminating “most” of the artillery and nuclear weapons does not mean eliminating all of them. And the discipline and effectiveness of North Koreans under fire is a matter of speculation. There are so many artillery pieces in hardened positions, nuclear weapons in North Korea, and a large civilization population in Seoul that it still makes a preemptive military strike rather dangerous for the US to pursue.
So I agree with the basic premise of the analysts that North Korea poses significant problems for a military strike and significant potential for civilian casualties, but those positions increasingly seem to offer an overly pessimistic assessment that distorts the relative abilities of American and North Korean forces.
The joint training exercises might be fuel on the fire, but they are vital in training for every contingency, and for having the forces in the region that can conduct a preemptive strike and offer statesmen a viable military option in their negotiations with North Korea.
