If the Koreas go to war together, what would the British response be?

#1
The news tells us that it is getting more and more likley that the Koreans are about to have a skirmish, but is mute on what our response will be.

What if anything, would we do in the event that there is war?

If we went in what would our roles be?
 
#3
Ruffle copy of Daily Telegraph, take a sip of tea and tell the yanks to get stuffed, it's none of our business or theirs for that matter
 

chrisg46

LE
Book Reviewer
#5
And suck teeth, muttering, thats gonna be nasty...
 
#9
Sod all, I suspect. Hardly a bad thing as it's December, it'll be ****ing freezing in Korea right now.

Edit: bright and sunny and -13ºC in Seoul right now.
 
#10
Serious answer - probably very little beyond diplomatic support, and maybe some various ELINT, ISTAR platforms if the US ask for them, and if there is a vessel in the region, possibly a maritime presence too.

The US / ROK have been rehearsing for the potential conflict for 60 years, and I gather their plans are well advanced on how to work together in wartime. Any coalition presence would get in the way of these plans, and would be put somewhere where it could do the least amount of damage in my view. Think Iraq and the various MCFI nations, which were for the most part a staff officer at a desk in Baghdad or Basra, but who had their flags flown alongside all other partners...
 
#11
As a matter of legal/historical interest, since the Korean War is officially still ongoing (just subject to a ceasefire) are the original combatants - including China and the United Nations - still regarded as such? I.e. if the 1953 ceasefire breaks down, is the 1953 United Nations (including UK) obliged to stand by its original resolutions - including its mandated use of military force?
 
#12
Aren't we still tied to the defence South korea through some kind of UN Resolution?



Anyway, there is little we can do. And even if we did have the capabilities, why would we want to?
 
#13
Send tekirdag to work on the DPRK missile projects, that'll learn 'em...
 
#14
Meh - There's so much firepower concentrated in such a small area that the High-intensity stuff would be done and dusted by the time you could say "British Armoured Formation, by boat, from Marchwood to Seoul". Besides which, even a full armoured Division would be a very small drop in the ocean in comparison to the conventional forces that are currently facing off against each other there. For example, rumourcon has it that there are hundreds (thousands?) of NK artillery pieces within range of Seoul. There is a strand of staff officer thinking that likes to highlight an NK high-intensity conflict as something we'd get involved in, and as an excuse to perpetuate maneouvrist thinking as the be-all and end-all but it's pie in the sky.

What we are getting much better at (for some reason I can't fathom) is the COIN/STAB side of things. Assuming this were to happen post-Herrick, we'd probably get involved in some form of stab op, perhaps in the North? If it were to happen while Herrick is running at current intensity, we'd not be able to do that - stab ops are enduring and we don't have the troops. Because the Army is too small.

Of course, there's always the worst case scenario, in which the US respond to NK aggression so hard and fast that the Chinese have to step in... or would that be history repeating?
 
#15
Once again though, why would we want to get involved? Wouldn't we be better served sitting back and watching? What would yet another costly war on the other side on the earth give us?
 
#16
because that lunatic is threatening the south with nuclear weapons the fall out of which would affect us all? be better to assainate him and his son and be done with it
 
#17
NK's nukes are pretty small (Supposedly) so I highly doubt the fallout would effect us. Besdies, NK aren't as crazy as they appear. They aren't just going to start firing off nukes left right and centre (Unless they are invaded of course)



Any North-South war is something we would be much better served by sitting back and letting the US and SK get on with it. This has been our problem the last few decades- getting involved in wars that don't directly concern or benefit us.
 

Mr Happy

LE
Moderator
#18
I doubt we'd have a chance to do a thing.

NK opens up with arty, a tiny fraction of which can hit central Seoul. Commando raids across the DMZ. Joint ROK/USN air strikes take out their C&C. Job done. If they did roll South I dare say the ROK would chew them up as the fought a retreat. Around Seoul it would all get very bloody and then the USN would arrive on mass and do a Desert Storm on them and then roll North to the Chinese border.

Any participation by BritFor would surely be limited to what the RN could get over there in time (some ASW assets maybe) and of course some of THEM to evacuate the Embassy or what not.

Post ground war I suppose we might help the ROK/yanks but I'm pretty sure DC would wait for the press to start shouting about starvation on the streets before he risked a repeat of Telic. E.g. the slightest hint of terrorism and we'd not be going.
 
#19
You might be underestimating China's involvement in this? I'm sure they will back the north in manpower and hardware support. South Korea regularly practice abandonment of their capital, so I expect that will be a major target and will be likely to fall.
 

Mr Happy

LE
Moderator
#20
You might be underestimating China's involvement in this? I'm sure they will back the north in manpower and hardware support. South Korea regularly practice abandonment of their capital, so I expect that will be a major target and will be likely to fall.
The 1950's called. They want your view of the world back...

Chances of China raising one inkling of an eyebrow over the replacement of the DPRK with a unified ROK is very low. Firstly, it gives them another country to sell to, secondly, the alternative, going toe-to-toe with the USofA would wipe out the value of the US Dollar. And China has more of those than the US has! It would be nothing short of a national disaster to kick off against the US whereas the alternative, the replacement of a loony on their border with a stable peninsula is probably quite attractive.

Of course, I thought GW2 was a good idea so don't trust my opinion...
 

Similar threads

Latest Threads

Top