Facing a population decline, fewer potential service members and calls for social equality to be extended to national military service, Korea is inching closer to breaking the taboo on women on the front line.
Begging the question as to why South Koreans feel they need a large standing and reserved military force, when they haven’t been involved in a shooting war in over 60 years. This seems like an enormous (largely involuntary) commitment of human resources to facilitate what is effectively an 18-month hazing ritual.
The need to incorporate women into the program seems to be a direct result of declining birth and military readiness rates in the overall population.
According to the Defense Ministry, around 332,000 men were eligible to perform mandatory military service in 2019. That number fell to 257,000 men in 2022 and is forecast to shrink to just 120,000 men in 2043.
which may suggest plowing millions of additional (wo)man-hours into Readiness Kabuki (or, maybe Hanbok would be the more appropriate term?) is a mismanagement of the nation’s declining supply of youth labor.
Pretty sure the Korean war technically never ended, so SK and NK have been in a shooting war since the 50’s.
Occasional NK commando incursions support this.
It would be better if they could use their resources more reasonably, but the fact remains that NK will remain unreasonable and will continue to be a threat.
NK troops “accidentally” crossed the DMZ multiple times last year.
The US also has oceans for neighbors. Maybe if NK didn’t maintain one of the biggest standing armies in the world, SK wouldn’t need such a large military either.
The US also has oceans for neighbors. Maybe if NK didn’t maintain one of the biggest standing armies in the world, SK wouldn’t need such a large military either.
Maybe DPRK wouldn’t need such an army if they weren’t under constant threat from Amerika, who has the biggest army, 800+ bases around the world and has Occupied Korea’s army under Amerikan command.
Why would downsizing their military hurt employment and social stability? The only reason they need such a large and mobilized military is deterrence, same as the nuclear program.
The DPRK does not have a marketized economy, and employment is guaranteed. They could very easily redirect labor spent in the military towards developing the countryside and improving the lives of their people. Instead, they focus on deterrence so that the rest of society can function without fear of being subject to genocide again.
Can’t find any evidence of regularly killing livestock and farmers. Just shooting at NK soldiers that wander into SK.
Yep. Dude didn’t load live ammo, apparently.
Maybe they are. But considering their northern neighbors are actively hostile and routinely call for invasion while sending troops to probe the border, a strong standing border force seems like a prudent choice.
But considering their northern neighbors are actively hostile
Ah yes, I remember this like it was yesterday. 2019 SEAL Team Six operation in North Korea. The North Koreans attacked a Navy Special Forces infiltration squad with a shell fishing boat, firing three sailors worth of ammunition into their defenseless bullets.
What has the DPRK done that’s unreasonable with respect to the ROK? For decades, their proposal of “one country, two systems” and the US decolonizing the southern half of the peninsula has been the most clear-headed resolution of the Korean War.
For decades, reunification was far more popular than not. It wasn’t until recent years where both the north and south pivoted away from reunification. It isn’t that the people of the ROK aren’t interested, it’s predominantly the fact that the US has de-facto semi-colonized the southern half of Korea. The US legally gets dominant say in any discussion between the two.
That was the ROK plan. The DPRK plan was “one country, two systems,” essentially a federation with open travel and economic cooperation, but socialism in the north and capitalism in the south, acting as one country.
What do you mean by “drinking the kool aid?” A federated system with a unified nation is the first step towards lasting peace and a unified Korea. The Korean people are one people, divided. I really don’t think you’ve spoken with Koreans about this, the question of national unity on the peninsula is one of reclaiming sovereignty.
Begging the question as to why South Koreans feel they need a large standing and reserved military force, when they haven’t been involved in a shooting war in over 60 years. This seems like an enormous (largely involuntary) commitment of human resources to facilitate what is effectively an 18-month hazing ritual.
The need to incorporate women into the program seems to be a direct result of declining birth and military readiness rates in the overall population.
which may suggest plowing millions of additional (wo)man-hours into Readiness Kabuki (or, maybe Hanbok would be the more appropriate term?) is a mismanagement of the nation’s declining supply of youth labor.
Pretty sure the Korean war technically never ended, so SK and NK have been in a shooting war since the 50’s.
Occasional NK commando incursions support this.
It would be better if they could use their resources more reasonably, but the fact remains that NK will remain unreasonable and will continue to be a threat.
Omg, really? How many people died in the war this year?
Occasional, as in, last recorded incident in 1983?
I have no idea why you need 300k new recruits ever year to deal with them.
The US military recruits 60k soldiers annually - fully voluntarily - and manages a global network of bases with them.
When they sign a peace treaty, the war will end.
NK troops “accidentally” crossed the DMZ multiple times last year.
The US also has oceans for neighbors. Maybe if NK didn’t maintain one of the biggest standing armies in the world, SK wouldn’t need such a large military either.
Maybe DPRK wouldn’t need such an army if they weren’t under constant threat from Amerika, who has the biggest army, 800+ bases around the world and has Occupied Korea’s army under Amerikan command.
Maybe they wouldn’t.
I doubt it, though. I think NK would have issues with unemployment and social instability if they didn’t maintain so many troops.
I’ll be honest, the only times I think about NK is when they need more food aid and start threatening to nuke someone.
Why would downsizing their military hurt employment and social stability? The only reason they need such a large and mobilized military is deterrence, same as the nuclear program.
A bunch of soldiers suddenly becoming not soldiers leads to higher unemployment.
The DPRK does not have a marketized economy, and employment is guaranteed. They could very easily redirect labor spent in the military towards developing the countryside and improving the lives of their people. Instead, they focus on deterrence so that the rest of society can function without fear of being subject to genocide again.
Doesn’t the southern side of the DMZ have autocannons on the border that regularly kill dozens of North Korea livestock and a few farmers every year?
And didn’t a South Korean commander just lose his job this month over sloppy border discipline?
Seems like they’re just squandering domestic resources in the same way the US has bungled the Mexico and Canada border situations.
Can’t find any evidence of regularly killing livestock and farmers. Just shooting at NK soldiers that wander into SK.
Yep. Dude didn’t load live ammo, apparently.
Maybe they are. But considering their northern neighbors are actively hostile and routinely call for invasion while sending troops to probe the border, a strong standing border force seems like a prudent choice.
Ah yes, I remember this like it was yesterday. 2019 SEAL Team Six operation in North Korea. The North Koreans attacked a Navy Special Forces infiltration squad with a shell fishing boat, firing three sailors worth of ammunition into their defenseless bullets.
Damn, I didn’t know seal team six was a part of the South Korean military. That’s pretty crazy.
Or irrelevant.
Jesus dude. That’s painfully ignorant
What has the DPRK done that’s unreasonable with respect to the ROK? For decades, their proposal of “one country, two systems” and the US decolonizing the southern half of the peninsula has been the most clear-headed resolution of the Korean War.
Because SK clearly isn’t interested in being part of their country. Which is very understandable. Making the one country proposal unreasonable.
For decades, reunification was far more popular than not. It wasn’t until recent years where both the north and south pivoted away from reunification. It isn’t that the people of the ROK aren’t interested, it’s predominantly the fact that the US has de-facto semi-colonized the southern half of Korea. The US legally gets dominant say in any discussion between the two.
Yeah when your reunification plan is “we’re all one people and we need to unify under my rule” that rarely goes well.
That was the ROK plan. The DPRK plan was “one country, two systems,” essentially a federation with open travel and economic cooperation, but socialism in the north and capitalism in the south, acting as one country.
That sounds like drinking the kool aid. Who rules the one country?
If each country rules independently, there’s no need to change the status quo.
What do you mean by “drinking the kool aid?” A federated system with a unified nation is the first step towards lasting peace and a unified Korea. The Korean people are one people, divided. I really don’t think you’ve spoken with Koreans about this, the question of national unity on the peninsula is one of reclaiming sovereignty.