Iran, N Korea Naval Blockade Pending?

Discussion in 'Current Affairs, News and Analysis' started by Not_Whistlin_Dixie, Jun 27, 2004.

Welcome to the Army Rumour Service, ARRSE

The UK's largest and busiest UNofficial military website.

The heart of the site is the forum area, including:

  1. "THINK OF IT AS CUBA LIGHT."

    "'Foreign policy analyst John Loftus told Fox news that the 'diplomatic solution' could involve preventing trade out of Iran and North Korea, which intelligence sources say has been sending enriched uranium to Iran.

    "'We're going to use a little persuasion. In the last week, virtually every carrier group in the United States Navy has been ordered to put to sea and they're heading in two directions -- one for the Arabian peninsula and the other into the Pacific. Now, just by coincidence, the largest maritime exercise in military history, RIMPAC, Operation Pacific Rim, will take place off the coast of Hawaii in August. There will be ships from eight countries involved,' he said.

    "'In August, they wil have finished their exercise and they'll be within easy sailing distance of the Korean peninsula. So, we're not going to invade iran. We're not going to invade North Korea, but we may blockade them. Think of it as Cuba light, where our ships will stand far off from shore.'"

    "U.S. Seeks U.N. Response To Iran Nuke Plan"
    http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,123852,00.html

    I have read elsewhere that ten of twelve US carrier groups are participating.
     
  2. North Korea's too volatile and unpredictable to risk the direct provocation of a blockade at a time when the US is overstretched elsewhere. Remember, too, that it's election year in the States. Bush doesn't need more bodybags. If he triggers a shooting war with NK, he'll have those aplenty. The last Pentagon estimate of US casualties in a conflict with Pyongyang was 52,000 in the first 90 days. It would make Iraq look like a stroll in the park, even if the NKs didn't unload a bucket of instant sunshine or two over the peninsula.
     
  3. Aye, the NK's have tons of conventional arty assets and probably some NBC stuff as well. Most of their tubes are within range of Seoul, and could severely degrade both the south Korean forces and the septics
     
  4. Seoul, the South Korean capital, is less than 50 miles from the DMZ which marks the border. The NKs have up to 8000 arty tubes, plus MLRS, ranged along that border. The Pentagon's own figures say 70% of the 1m-plus NK army is deployed within 150 kms of the border, with assault and SF divisions already on their jump-off positions. Not a good bet to push them when it's not necessary. There are 10m civvies in and around Seoul who'd be hostages to fortune.
     
  5. Now would not be a good time to kick off in Asia.

    I just bought a Daewoo an i want my five year warranty! :lol:
     
  6. I'll e-mail Dubya(he can always get someone to read it to him)and Condie Rice. Your legitimate concern will no doubt cool their jets. Stand down,lads.8)
     
  7. The biggest problem with a war in Korea would be the Chinese - no way would those boys let a fight break out on their borders. They'd be into NK and eliminate the regime in pretty short order. And not even Dubya is daft enough to take the Chinese on - is he ?
     
  8. I wouldn't count on it. It might suit Beijing to have the US embroiled in a war in Korea as well as Iraq as long as it didn't go nuclear. It would certainly thin out any American carrier and sub cover for Taiwan.
     
  9. Errr, a lot of you seem to be assuming some degree of judgement on behalf of the Bush administration. Not a good bet :cry:
     
  10. Fair point, but maybe there's got to be a first time for eveything. :roll:
     
  11. If North Korea wanted to move enriched uranium, or some similar "high unit value" merchandise to Iran, would it necessarily have to depend on ships?

    What would stop them from flying it in?

    Does this "naval blockade" explanation make sense?
     
  12. Cutaway

    Cutaway LE Reviewer

    The movers wouldn't let them take any dangerous cargo on one of their ac !
     
  13. Gents heaven forbid another war but N. Korea wouldn't last a week as a serious offensive fighting force.
    The US navy would wipe the opposing airforce out in one day or whenever it apeared.
    Most of their tanks are WWII left overs T34 with 85 mil guns, a few MODERN T72s or chinese copy.
    Would someone with serious knowledge of their arty say how many 30Kms + pieces they have and rate of fire with the US navy hovering on high.
    Whats the footslogging time to Soul with a highly profesional S korean army in your way?
    Nucs! tales say the first chinese one just fizzeled and we all know King George would just love to sling a know working nuc in an election years, garunted four more years.
    john
     
  14. The NKs have a serious artillery/missile arm. They have 122mm, 130mm, 152mm towed and SP guns, and some 50-plus Frog and Scud missiles. A lot of their long-range weapons are dug into tunnels and emplacements in the mountains facing the south. And yes, they have two or three times as many tubes as the Royal Artillery's entire holding in range of Seoul.

    Their tanks may be old, but there are 3500 of them, backed by 2500 APCs. hey also have 180-plus MLRS variants, some of them 227mm. All are chemwar capable.

    Even the US navy's air wings would have trouble over the battlefield. The People"s Army fields 11,000 AAA pieces, many of them 23mm and 37mm ZSUs. They also have Javelin, Redeye, Stinger and Mistral AA missiles, plus thousands of SAM-7s.
     
  15. Excuse me if I try to dodge the bullet on this one then. I reallly do not fancy getting involved in this lot. It could give you a nasty rash :? :?