johnnylump

Out the back of a CH-47, over Baghdad, February 2004. The black smudge in the sky is an Apache that was kind enough to escort us. USS O'Bannon, Spruance-class destroyer, off the coast of Nice, France, February 2005 Iraqi special operations forces, training west of Baghdad, February 2005 Iraqi T-55 & crew, north of Baghdad, February 2005 Stryker team, Mosul, Feburary 2005 Cheers, JL

I think you have to look at the motivations of Kim Jong Il. He leads a clique of maybe 10,000 people who live like we westerners -- cars, cell phones, DVDs, etc. Their chief goal, I would suggest, is to maintain that power and quality of life. His behavior does not suggest he is out to conquer territory or even spread his particular brand of communism, but to stay in charge. But to stay in power and maintain their lifestyle, Kim Jong Il and the other families need money, and some assurances they won't be invaded. They proliferate missile technology for hard currency. They make nuclear weapons to deter the United States from doing what it did to Saddam. Kim Jong Il also craves attention, hence their public threats of nuclear war. It's not out of vanity: More attention means more opportunities for international concessions ... that is, free stuff, whether it's a power plant, or food, or technology ... in exchange for "halting" their nuclear program. Another term for that is blackmail. Might the North Koreans be crazy enough to force the issue, by conducting a nuclear test? Maybe, if they figured they could win even more international concessions. I'd argue something along those lines would present the most likely scenario for conflict: In an act of brinkmanship, the North Koreans conduct a test and say they are ready to provide nuclear weapons to any third party who will buy them. In response, the U.S. considers launching airstrikes aimed at NK's nuclear infrastructure, kind of like what Israel did to Iraq in 1981. Would they? Would we? Honestly, I don't know what would push TBA over the edge to strike NK WMD facilities, because Pyongyang's response is so unpredictable. It's such an incredible risk. But the alternative _ perhaps a nuclear-armed Iran, as an example _ may be an even worse risk. So then U.S. planners must ask what is the threshhold for Kim Jong Il to order his artillery along the DMZ to open fire on Seoul? At that point the conflict would certainly escalate. Air and naval power would be brought in to take out the artillery; I imagine troops would probably cross the DMZ from SK, not to occupy cities, at least initially, but to take key passes and other points in an effort to stop the bombardment. And then you've got a ground war. The question remains for TBA and the rest of the world, at what point does North Korea's nuclear weapons development justify risking the destruction of a first-world city?

This is a Defense Intelligence Agency document released under the Freedom of Information Act. Pretty good readout on NK's military. It's also 5.5 MB in pdf form. US military handbook on North Korea

I imagine Russia would see which way the winds were blowing, geopolitically speaking. I don't see them siding with NK under any circumstances _ North Korea is truly an international pariah, with China having the slimmest of influence. You might see Russian arms companies mucking around, but Federation troops? It's not in Russia's interests. If it was an internationally unpopular war _ that is, if the EU sat out _ I imagine they would sit out Korean War II, as well. If everybody threw in, a la Gulf War I, they might go along. I think much of the same goes for China, tho I don't see Chinese troops driving on Pyongyang. And China cannot, technically, match the U.S. military in a head-to-head fight (but check back in 2030 or so), and their relations with Pyongyang are not worth losing bazillions in trade dollars with the United States and any allies who would fight alongisde us. It's just not profitable national strategy. China would probably sit out any open fighting and score points by portraying itself as an international leader as it tried to negotiate a peace agreement. Whether it would quietly pass intelligence to either side is an open question; it would probably serve as a conduit for secret communications. Still ... a near-term US v China scenario is fun to wargame (which is far more likely in a Taiwan contigency rather than a Korean one) . I see the US going after China's ability to project power -- it's navy and air force -- and initially leaving the army and infrastructure alone. I do wonder if we'd leave their 20 ICBMs alone ... I wouldn't want to force a panic launch in a purely conventional war. ... I do find it difficult to imagine Japanese troops on the Korean peninsula under any circumstances, except for perhaps reconstruction. While Japan does have commerical interests there, Korea recalls Japan as occupiers. In addition, Japan's Self-Defense Force, while technically capable, is not able to function offensively -- their officers do not study offensive maneuver as most militaries do. You would be most likely see naval support; Japan would instead concentrate on protecting its homeland and oil tanker routes, I think. One final part of the dynamic is what a unified Korea would mean for the rest of that part of the world, particularly if they unified peacefully, or with minimum damage to the south's infrastructure. Suddenly, you have a nuclear-armed economic powerhouse with a massive trained army and the strength to have an independent foreign policy. Japan and China would certainly take note. Guess I'm up to four pesos now.

The feeling among wiser military minds than mine is that the US and South Korea could lick North Korea, but at such a vast cost that such a war is not worth fighting unless forced to. The NK army is huge, but way behind in technology; DIA open sources list T-34s in their inventory. No evidence they can detect stealth aircraft. And, apparently, they are behind in health; there was a recent claim from the Pentagon that the NK military lowered its height minimum to below five feet because everybody is so malnourished. Still, there are indeed something like 10,000 artillery pieces in range of Seoul, plus, it is thought, one or two or perhaps even six nuclear weapons, though the NK's capability to deliver them is unclear. Yes, they have an untested missile that can reach the West Coast, but are their nukes small enough to fit on the missile? It's not known. And a missile isn't the only way to get a nuke to an American city. So I think there's some sense that war isn't in anybody's interests, including the North Koreans. Yet they still proliferate missiles and may consider proliferating nuclear technology. And any negotation is of uncertain value -- the North Koreans have not held to their promises made during the Clinton administration -- as evidenced when they restarted plutonium reprocessing. It's a problem without a near-term solution. So you do what you can, keep them talking, monitor them closely, and try to get China _ the only country with any leverage with Kim's regime _ to see that a belligerent North Korea is not in its best interests, so they can apply what pressure they are able, and hope, somehow, the ruling clique in Pyongyang sees another way. My dos pesos. Fire away ...

Those are U.S. Air Force markings. The one on the top left, with the wings, is the Air Force's Air Combat Command, which is the greater command that oversees Holloman AFB and most of the fighter and bomber wings based in the United States. http://www.usafpatches.com/gallery/cmdsacc.shtml The second one, on the right, should be the patch of the 49th Fighter Wing, which is the wing based at Holloman the Germans train under. (Incendentally, that's the wing the F117 stealth fighters are also a part of). http://www.usafpatches.com/gallery/wgs0049.shtml Cheers JL

If its dropped or launched from space, dosn't that qualify as a space weapon then? I don't think it is considered a "space weapon" subject to the Outer Space Treaty because it's launched from the surface, just like a ballistic missile. Article IV of the Outer Space Treaty prohibits space-based weapons of mass destruction: <<States Parties to the Treaty undertake not to place in orbit around the Earth any objects carrying nuclear weapons or any other kinds of weapons of mass destruction, install such weapons on celestial bodies, or station such weapons in outer space in any other manner. The Moon and other celestial bodies shall be used by all States Parties to the Treaty exclusively for peaceful purposes. The establishment of military bases, installations and fortifications, the testing of any type of weapons and the conduct of military maneuvers on celestial bodies shall be forbidden. The use of military personnel for scientific research or for any other peaceful purposes shall not be prohibited. The use of any equipment or facility necessary for peaceful exploration of the Moon and other celestial bodies shall also not be prohibited. >> ... I think the old ABM treaty, (from which the US has withdrawn) prohibited space-based ABM defenses. But AFAIK there are no other restrictions on space-based weaponry. Here's a pretty good, if somewhat academic, take from a Washington think tank: http://www.cdi.org/missile-defense/spaceweapons.cfm

You set Hellfish straight Tex. (Dallas native here) 'Cause the truth is that the only country that ever got truly whupped by Mexico was France. That's what Cinco de Mayo celebrates. On topic -- and live from the front -- I now live in Northern Virginia in DC suburbs and have yet to see a cicada.

Little behind the times quoting this ... but I must say, the writer of this article has a great byline.

Cheers ... hell, maybe I'll update the site someday. Been a long winter ... and it takes a while when you do your HTML coding in Windows Write.

Did someone say Soviet ORBAT? Motorized Infantry http://www.adtdl.army.mil/cgi-bin/atdl.dll/fm/100-63/Ch3.htm#p5 Mech Infantry and Armor http://www.adtdl.army.mil/cgi-bin/atdl.dll/fm/100-63/Ch4.htm#top

BTR-60 by Norsu (I believe) ftp://www.gamezone.cz/ofpd/unofaddons2/NOR_btr60.rar

Suggest you do some research on the Marine Corps Warfighting Laboratory, Project Metropolis, at Quanico, Va. They ran every battalion of the 1st MEF through an urban-warfare course at an old army base in California, I believe. In addition to fighting in Mog, I'd also look to Russian invasions of Grozny for large-scale urban combat. Cheers jl

Phaeden actually made a markers addon with some symbols like you showed above Link

After the "Escape from Kalisz" mini-module that came with the game, there was "Free City of Krakow", then "Pirates of the Vistula," then one set in Warsaw, then one where you ride a train to Germany to catch the last ship back to the United States, then one where you run around trying to liberate south Texas from Russians (and Cubans, I think) who occupied San Antonio. Wasn't there one about an uprising in Pennsylvania, too, and another about finding a working attack submarine? My books are long gone. But weird what your memory retains after 12-13 years, eh?