North Korea War Fever

I am interested to see that there is NO THREAD here on this entire forum about North Korea, but not surprised because this is a "Boy Crying Wolf" situation.

That's because the Lefttoons must stay in lockstep. They bash Bush for 'manufacturing' a war. But they have no problem with Obamy doing it.
How is Obama manufacturing a war with North Korea? We have had long standing mutual defense treaties with South Korea. Currently there are almost 30,000 US troops in South Korea, many within a short distance of the DMZ. If North Korean troops cross the boarder we will be in a war regardless of who's president.
 
Last edited:
EDITED FOR BREVITY/CLARITY

There really are only two ways to get [US govt] attention.
The best way is to hit our homeland...
The other way is to hit bases abroad...

I THINK that might still work.........


Does anyone think it wouldn't?

Nothing is going to get the US into another land war in Asia any time soon. The Bush League proved military leadership isn't up to a win against shitty little nations in Asia. It is a little bit amusing to believe these generals are ready to face human waves of well armed highly disciplined night fighters. Every military force on earth now knows for sure what the limits of US military forces are. That is the real kick in the face Bush League policy gave the United States - and Obama continued down that drain unabated.

Should NK attack, what would happen is some kind of rear guard action until 24/7 air power blew away as many of NK forces and SK civilians in the surrounds as it takes to get control of some kind of perimeter followed by either defensive reinforcements on the ground or more likely a holding action supported by air protection and tactical attacks in NK.

One can't be sure Obama has the brains or the cojones to vaporize the NK capital, so one doubts there would be more than tactical strikes within a larger strategy to destabilize NK into collapse. Think, Yuogslavia, only with China in the wings instead of civilized people like Russians.
 
Last edited:
EDITED FOR BREVITY/CLARITY

There really are only two ways to get [US govt] attention.
The best way is to hit our homeland...
The other way is to hit bases abroad...

I THINK that might still work.........


Does anyone think it wouldn't?

Nothing is going to get the US into another land war in Asia any time soon. The Bush League proved military leadership isn't up to a win against shitty little nations in Asia. It is a little bit amusing to believe these generals are ready to face human waves of well armed highly disciplined night fighters. Every military force on earth now knows for sure what the limits of US military forces are. That is the real kick in the face Bush League policy gave the United States - and Obama continued down that drain unabated.

Should NK attack, what would happen is some kind of rear guard action until 24/7 air power blew away as many of NK forces and SK civilians in the surrounds as it takes to get control of some kind of perimeter followed by either defensive reinforcements on the ground or more likely a holding action supported by air protection and tactical attacks in NK.

One can't be sure Obama has the brains or the cojones to vaporize the NK capital, so one doubts there would be more than tactical strikes within a larger strategy to destabilize NK into collapse. Think, Yuogslavia, only with China in the wings instead of civilized people like Russians.
There are 700,000 North Korean troops near the boarder, about 400,000 South Korean and 30,000 US troops. Both of these countries have been preparing for this war for 50 years so both sides are going to be ready. If North Korean troops come across the boarder in numbers, there will be heavy casualties on both sides and the US will be in the middle of it. Unless we go nuclear, I seriously doubt US bombing would weaken the resolve of the North Koreans. However, any long campaign by the North would fail because they would have to rely heavily on China and Russia and both these countries have been less and less supportive of North Korean military action.
 
EDITED FOR BREVITY/CLARITY

There really are only two ways to get [US govt] attention.
The best way is to hit our homeland...
The other way is to hit bases abroad...

I THINK that might still work.........


Does anyone think it wouldn't?

Nothing is going to get the US into another land war in Asia any time soon. The Bush League proved military leadership isn't up to a win against shitty little nations in Asia. It is a little bit amusing to believe these generals are ready to face human waves of well armed highly disciplined night fighters. Every military force on earth now knows for sure what the limits of US military forces are. That is the real kick in the face Bush League policy gave the United States - and Obama continued down that drain unabated.

Should NK attack, what would happen is some kind of rear guard action until 24/7 air power blew away as many of NK forces and SK civilians in the surrounds as it takes to get control of some kind of perimeter followed by either defensive reinforcements on the ground or more likely a holding action supported by air protection and tactical attacks in NK.

One can't be sure Obama has the brains or the cojones to vaporize the NK capital, so one doubts there would be more than tactical strikes within a larger strategy to destabilize NK into collapse. Think, Yuogslavia, only with China in the wings instead of civilized people like Russians.
There are 700,000 North Korean troops near the boarder, about 400,000 South Korean and 30,000 US troops. Both of these countries have been preparing for this war for 50 years so both sides are going to be ready. If North Korean troops come across the boarder in numbers, there will be heavy casualties on both sides and the US will be in the middle of it. Unless we go nuclear, I seriously doubt US bombing would weaken the resolve of the North Koreans. However, any long campaign by the North would fail because they would have to rely heavily on China and Russia and both these countries have been less and less supportive of North Korean military action.

With the exception of your apparent belief US forces are "ready" your points align with mine. Getting ready for a wave attack is like getting ready to be shot: there is no amount of preparation that reduces the shock. First US military consideration is going to be saving as many US troops as possible with little to no regard for collateral damage, second consideration is going to be a Yugoslavia style air war to drive NK back.

The US public isn't going to stand for another land war and the military is rice crispy burnt out on deployments. The crop of generals that blew it in Iraq and Afghanistan are among the worst in history, about on par with Westmoreland or Abrams. Bag licking careerists lacking the memory of small unit combat and lacking both the vision and ability to manage politicians seen in great division/Army/theater commanders.

No shit for brains dictator that ever wanted to kick the US down a notch or two had a better time to do it than this guy. My guess is US regular leg infantry would never leave some perimater area in SK except as occupation troops in captured areas; that the only US forces to cross the border for combat would be airborne (173d for sure) some Ranger and Seal units, and maybe some GBs/Ranger pathfinders to run intel in forward areas.

Both China and Russia will aid NK but not like 1950. More like Canada trading with China/Vietnam and daring the US to take diplomatic action.

It isn't like all that isn't speculation, and to be clear I agree with almost all of your assessment. Just felt like adding more of my own.
 
Last edited:
Nothing is going to get the US into another land war in Asia any time soon. The Bush League proved military leadership isn't up to a win against shitty little nations in Asia. It is a little bit amusing to believe these generals are ready to face human waves of well armed highly disciplined night fighters. Every military force on earth now knows for sure what the limits of US military forces are. That is the real kick in the face Bush League policy gave the United States - and Obama continued down that drain unabated.

Should NK attack, what would happen is some kind of rear guard action until 24/7 air power blew away as many of NK forces and SK civilians in the surrounds as it takes to get control of some kind of perimeter followed by either defensive reinforcements on the ground or more likely a holding action supported by air protection and tactical attacks in NK.

One can't be sure Obama has the brains or the cojones to vaporize the NK capital, so one doubts there would be more than tactical strikes within a larger strategy to destabilize NK into collapse. Think, Yuogslavia, only with China in the wings instead of civilized people like Russians.
There are 700,000 North Korean troops near the boarder, about 400,000 South Korean and 30,000 US troops. Both of these countries have been preparing for this war for 50 years so both sides are going to be ready. If North Korean troops come across the boarder in numbers, there will be heavy casualties on both sides and the US will be in the middle of it. Unless we go nuclear, I seriously doubt US bombing would weaken the resolve of the North Koreans. However, any long campaign by the North would fail because they would have to rely heavily on China and Russia and both these countries have been less and less supportive of North Korean military action.

With the exception of your apparent belief US forces are "ready" your points align with mine. Getting ready for a wave attack is like getting ready to be shot: there is no amount of preparation that reduces the shock. First US military consideration is going to be saving as many US troops as possible with little to no regard for collateral damage, second consideration is going to be a Yugoslavia style air war to drive NK back.

The US public isn't going to stand for another land war and the military is rice crispy burnt out on deployments. The crop of generals that blew it in Iraq and Afghanistan are among the worst in history, about on par with Westmoreland or Abrams. Bag licking careerists lacking the memory of small unit combat and lacking both the vision and ability to manage politicians seen in great division/Army/theater commanders.

No shit for brains dictator that ever wanted to kick the US down a notch or two had a better time to do it than this guy. My guess is US regular leg infantry would never leave some perimater area in SK except as occupation troops in captured areas; that the only US forces to cross the border for combat would be airborne (173d for sure) some Ranger and Seal units, and maybe some GBs/Ranger pathfinders to run intel in forward areas.

Both China and Russia will aid NK but not like 1950. More like Canada trading with China/Vietnam and daring the US to take diplomatic action.

It isn't like all that isn't speculation, and to be clear I agree with almost all of your assessment. Just felt like adding more of my own.
I think China's aid would amount to practically nothing.

Do you Realize that North Korea represents less than 1% of China's world trade while it's 62% of North Korea's trade? North Korea doesn't even make the top 10 in China's list of top trading partners. China does more business with South Korea than it does with North Korea.

China has far more to lose backing North Korea than it has to gain. Any war North Korea waged without Chinese support would not last long.
 
There are 700,000 North Korean troops near the boarder, about 400,000 South Korean and 30,000 US troops. Both of these countries have been preparing for this war for 50 years so both sides are going to be ready. If North Korean troops come across the boarder in numbers, there will be heavy casualties on both sides and the US will be in the middle of it. Unless we go nuclear, I seriously doubt US bombing would weaken the resolve of the North Koreans. However, any long campaign by the North would fail because they would have to rely heavily on China and Russia and both these countries have been less and less supportive of North Korean military action.
With the exception of your apparent belief US forces are "ready" your points align with mine. Getting ready for a wave attack is like getting ready to be shot: there is no amount of preparation that reduces the shock. First US military consideration is going to be saving as many US troops as possible with little to no regard for collateral damage, second consideration is going to be a Yugoslavia style air war to drive NK back.
The US public isn't going to stand for another land war and the military is rice crispy burnt out on deployments. The crop of generals that blew it in Iraq and Afghanistan are among the worst in history, about on par with Westmoreland or Abrams. Bag licking careerists lacking the memory of small unit combat and lacking both the vision and ability to manage politicians seen in great division/Army/theater commanders.
No shit for brains dictator that ever wanted to kick the US down a notch or two had a better time to do it than this guy. My guess is US regular leg infantry would never leave some perimater area in SK except as occupation troops in captured areas; that the only US forces to cross the border for combat would be airborne (173d for sure) some Ranger and Seal units, and maybe some GBs/Ranger pathfinders to run intel in forward areas.

Both China and Russia will aid NK but not like 1950. More like Canada trading with China/Vietnam and daring the US to take diplomatic action.

It isn't like all that isn't speculation, and to be clear I agree with almost all of your assessment. Just felt like adding more of my own.
I think China's aid would amount to practically nothing.
Do you Realize that North Korea represents less than 1% of China's world trade while it's 62% of North Korea's trade? North Korea doesn't even make the top 10 in China's list of top trading partners. China does more business with South Korea than it does with North Korea.
China has far more to lose backing North Korea than it has to gain. Any war North Korea waged without Chinese support would not last long.
I agree. I think it's time for the Chinese to stop playing footsies with that fellow, and pull the plug on supporting that regime. The Chinese have the clout to go in and tell that regime that they are fired and are being replaced with more sensible and moderate leadership, who will commence peace talks with South Korea with the aim of achieving reunification of the Korean Peninsula.
 
So now our military is sending in F-22 Stealth fighter planes..... for the "military exercise."

Ha, they're for defense in case we need them. The Pope and the Russians have now started speaking out about this situation: I'm beginning to think it could be serious, too.

Suggestion for your viewing pleasure: This is THE time to watch the new 2012 Red Dawn if you meant to catch it. I just did (Amazon has it streaming video and it comes out April 2 on Netflix) and it's uncanny how close the movie is to right here and now. The same pols, the exact same European crisis, the same Kim Jong Un, it's all exactly like it's happening right now.

Hopefully the North Koreans won't actually parachute into Austin, Texas, however, and we have to depend on the high school football team the Wolverines to take back the country.
 
With the exception of your apparent belief US forces are "ready" your points align with mine. Getting ready for a wave attack is like getting ready to be shot: there is no amount of preparation that reduces the shock. First US military consideration is going to be saving as many US troops as possible with little to no regard for collateral damage, second consideration is going to be a Yugoslavia style air war to drive NK back.
The US public isn't going to stand for another land war and the military is rice crispy burnt out on deployments. The crop of generals that blew it in Iraq and Afghanistan are among the worst in history, about on par with Westmoreland or Abrams. Bag licking careerists lacking the memory of small unit combat and lacking both the vision and ability to manage politicians seen in great division/Army/theater commanders.
No shit for brains dictator that ever wanted to kick the US down a notch or two had a better time to do it than this guy. My guess is US regular leg infantry would never leave some perimater area in SK except as occupation troops in captured areas; that the only US forces to cross the border for combat would be airborne (173d for sure) some Ranger and Seal units, and maybe some GBs/Ranger pathfinders to run intel in forward areas.

Both China and Russia will aid NK but not like 1950. More like Canada trading with China/Vietnam and daring the US to take diplomatic action.

It isn't like all that isn't speculation, and to be clear I agree with almost all of your assessment. Just felt like adding more of my own.
I think China's aid would amount to practically nothing.
Do you Realize that North Korea represents less than 1% of China's world trade while it's 62% of North Korea's trade? North Korea doesn't even make the top 10 in China's list of top trading partners. China does more business with South Korea than it does with North Korea.
China has far more to lose backing North Korea than it has to gain. Any war North Korea waged without Chinese support would not last long.
I agree. I think it's time for the Chinese to stop playing footsies with that fellow, and pull the plug on supporting that regime. The Chinese have the clout to go in and tell that regime that they are fired and are being replaced with more sensible and moderate leadership, who will commence peace talks with South Korea with the aim of achieving reunification of the Korean Peninsula.
I think Beijing has a problem in dealing with North Korea. China and North Korea have been allies since the 1950's. Both countries embraced communism and stood as allies against the west. However, the two countries have taken divergent paths. China has embraced capitalism while still clinging to communism while North Korea is as communist today as it ever was. There is still support for North Korea in the Chinese government but that support is dwindling year by year as China becomes closer allied with the west.
 
With the exception of your apparent belief US forces are "ready" your points align with mine. Getting ready for a wave attack is like getting ready to be shot: there is no amount of preparation that reduces the shock. First US military consideration is going to be saving as many US troops as possible with little to no regard for collateral damage, second consideration is going to be a Yugoslavia style air war to drive NK back.

The US public isn't going to stand for another land war.....


No? Not another social-work war like the Iraq and Afghanistan wars, maybe -- but we have some tolerance for quick and dirty wins. Desert Storm, Yugoslavia, like that. I think it would have to be all air: I don't see us being able to do a land war, and besides ---

I know the treaty says we have to, but after all these decades, is war for South Korea REALLY in American interests?

Frankly, I can't see why it would be. Our trip-wire troops, there to guarantee that the USA will go to war, is a relic of the Cold War, and it's very WWII old-think. There are a number of commitments that are not at all obviously in our national interest anymore: Israel is one and the Korean penninsula is another, I'd say. I could be wrong, but I can't see either as crucial in 2013. If 20,000 troops get wiped out immediately, won't the American people mainly be mad at our government???



No shit for brains dictator that ever wanted to kick the US down a notch or two had a better time to do it than this guy.

Good point........if Kim means ever to do it, this is the time. The next president he gets might be a Reagan. Or have a Rumsfeld, a pit-bull defense secretary. Obama is weak and no war president, I don't think, and we are war-weary with a broken Army and a bad deficit. I don't think he can make a good case for another Korean War, and that's a problem too.
 
Fox News breaking about 4 PM today 4/1:


URGENT: US Navy moves USS Fitzgerald, a ballistic missile defense destroyer, closer to the Korean peninsula in what appears to be attempt to head off military conflict in the region, as White House says threats from North Korea follow 'pattern' but must be taken seriously.

China Mobilizing Troops, Jets Near North Korean Border, US Officials Say


Our government appears to be concerned that NK might indeed mean what they keep saying over and over. The Korean situation is grossly unstable and has been for years: it cannot keep on like this forever, after all, so impoverished and pouring all national resources into weapons development in the hopes of being taken seriously -- time passes and things change. Perhaps this is the time when things change.

I suppose what Kim wants, besides respect and freedom of action, is simply what Hitler wanted: he wants all the territory with Korean-speaking people on it, as Hitler wanted the Greater Deutschland, the German diaspora of the time. Kim wants South Korea.

CAN he take it? March south his million-man army, shelling and bombing all opposition, and simply take the country and unite it under him? It is not actually perfectly clear to me how we could stop him. Certainly not with the few troops we have there, whose function is to die and make the rest of us mad. Anybody have an idea what a battle plan might be?
 
What will stop him is another shock and awe campaign where the entire infrastucture for war is wiped out in a matter of a day or two.
 
The news today 3/28 is leading on most sites with the USA sending Stealth bombers to South Korea against the threats North Korea is constantly making.

I am interested to see that there is NO THREAD here on this entire forum about North Korea, but not surprised because this is a "Boy Crying Wolf" situation. The crazy NK style of "diplomacy," if you can call it that, is repeated threats and aggression and generally crazy talk, while nuking up as fast as possible. Iran, obviously, has also adopted this style, so I guess on some level, it works.

So NK constantly threatens war against us, but nothing has happened for decades except their small aggressions, like shooting down planes and sinking ships and firing on island populations. They kill people, but they don't actually charge over the border with their Million Man Army. And nobody here is interested, because we assume that will go on and on forever.

But what if it didn't? My belief is that people mean what they say: that's why they say it. Just because a madman talks aggressively about guns and knives for months but doesn't do anything doesn't mean he'll NEVER attack shoppers in Walmart or Target, or run around shooting up his trailer park.

We ignored bin Laden's aggression talk, and then he started acting and took out two embassies and a Navy ship, and we STILL ignored him, because Americans care nothing about whatever goes on in other countries. But with bin Laden, this was a mistake: tearing his hair with frustration that he could not get our attention even with the embassies and the attack on the U.S.S. Cole, he figured out that the only way to get our attention is to aggress against us here at home, and he bombed New York. And that worked.

I think that could be going on with North Korea. Or maybe not! Maybe it's just more of the same crazy talk. But I notice our military IS responding with caution and a beef-up of fighting capacity, wisely, IMO. Anyone else care about the possibility of war with North Korea, or are you all sure nothing can possibly happen?

To me this is like the Cold War on a miniature scale. I think the ramped up threats by the young 3rd generation dictator has a lot to do with trying to consolidate power. This isn't the first time they said the Armistice is invalid or null & void. They've declared that several times in the past. I think Dictator Jr. is trying to show the Korean Communist party that he is just as tough as his daddy and grandpa. True they are trying to develop nuclear weapons, but neither China or the U.S. wants the Koreas to go back to war, especially since N.K. would most likely be the aggressor and it would be hard for China to back them. I think at some point they will be unified like East and West Germany, but it will take a bunch more of the old guard military in North Korea dying off before that can happen. Just keep this in mind: North Korea may be able to intially create a lot of damage in South Korea, especially in Seoul, but they don't have the resources or capability to engage in a war that lasts more than a couple weeks. They can't even keep their people fed, so I don't know how they can keep an army of that size going for very long.
 
Last edited:
Just keep this in mind: North Korea may be able to intially create a lot of damage in South Korea, especially in Seoul, but they don't have the resources or capability to engage in a war that lasts more than a couple weeks. They can't even keep their people fed, so I don't know how they can keep an army of that size going for very long.

There is talk in the news that NK doesn't have fuel enough for more than 3 weeks, and after that the soldiers have to walk. Of course, if they've conquered SK in the meantime, I guess they could fill up their tanks there.
 
The news today 3/28 is leading on most sites with the USA sending Stealth bombers to South Korea against the threats North Korea is constantly making.

I am interested to see that there is NO THREAD here on this entire forum about North Korea, but not surprised because this is a "Boy Crying Wolf" situation. The crazy NK style of "diplomacy," if you can call it that, is repeated threats and aggression and generally crazy talk, while nuking up as fast as possible. Iran, obviously, has also adopted this style, so I guess on some level, it works.

So NK constantly threatens war against us, but nothing has happened for decades except their small aggressions, like shooting down planes and sinking ships and firing on island populations. They kill people, but they don't actually charge over the border with their Million Man Army. And nobody here is interested, because we assume that will go on and on forever.

But what if it didn't? My belief is that people mean what they say: that's why they say it. Just because a madman talks aggressively about guns and knives for months but doesn't do anything doesn't mean he'll NEVER attack shoppers in Walmart or Target, or run around shooting up his trailer park.

We ignored bin Laden's aggression talk, and then he started acting and took out two embassies and a Navy ship, and we STILL ignored him, because Americans care nothing about whatever goes on in other countries. But with bin Laden, this was a mistake: tearing his hair with frustration that he could not get our attention even with the embassies and the attack on the U.S.S. Cole, he figured out that the only way to get our attention is to aggress against us here at home, and he bombed New York. And that worked.

I think that could be going on with North Korea. Or maybe not! Maybe it's just more of the same crazy talk. But I notice our military IS responding with caution and a beef-up of fighting capacity, wisely, IMO. Anyone else care about the possibility of war with North Korea, or are you all sure nothing can possibly happen?

To me this is like the Cold War on a miniature scale. I think the ramped up threats by the young 3rd generation dictator has a lot to do with trying to consolidate power. This isn't the first time they said the Armistice is invalid or null & void. They've declared that several times in the past. I think Dictator Jr. is trying to show the Korean Communist party that he is just as tough as his daddy and grandpa. True they are trying to develop nuclear weapons, but neither China or the U.S. wants the Koreas to go back to war, especially since N.K. would most likely be the aggressor and it would be hard for China to back them. I think at some point they will be unified like East and West Germany, but it will take a bunch more of the old guard military in North Korea dying off before that can happen. Just keep this in mind: North Korea may be able to intially create a lot of damage in South Korea, especially in Seoul, but they don't have the resources or capability to engage in a war that lasts more than a couple weeks. They can't even keep their people fed, so I don't know how they can keep an army of that size going for very long.
I think you hit the nail on the head. Kim Jong-un like all leaders in North Korea have to prove their mettle to consolidate power and what better way than to threaten the greatest power on earth. We see that as a ridiculous threat, but that's not the case in North Korea.
 
Last edited:
Fox News breaking about 4 PM today 4/1:


URGENT: US Navy moves USS Fitzgerald, a ballistic missile defense destroyer, closer to the Korean peninsula in what appears to be attempt to head off military conflict in the region, as White House says threats from North Korea follow 'pattern' but must be taken seriously.

China Mobilizing Troops, Jets Near North Korean Border, US Officials Say


Our government appears to be concerned that NK might indeed mean what they keep saying over and over. The Korean situation is grossly unstable and has been for years: it cannot keep on like this forever, after all, so impoverished and pouring all national resources into weapons development in the hopes of being taken seriously -- time passes and things change. Perhaps this is the time when things change.

I suppose what Kim wants, besides respect and freedom of action, is simply what Hitler wanted: he wants all the territory with Korean-speaking people on it, as Hitler wanted the Greater Deutschland, the German diaspora of the time. Kim wants South Korea.

CAN he take it? March south his million-man army, shelling and bombing all opposition, and simply take the country and unite it under him? It is not actually perfectly clear to me how we could stop him. Certainly not with the few troops we have there, whose function is to die and make the rest of us mad. Anybody have an idea what a battle plan might be?
Although North Korea boasts a million troops, South Korea isn't exactly unarmed.

The army consists of the Army Headquarters, the Aviation Command, and the Special Warfare Command, with 7 corps, 39 divisions, some 520,000 troops and estimated as many as 5,850 tanks and armored vehicles, 11,337 artillery systems, 7,032 missile defense systems and 13,000 infantry support systems.

There are some 170 commissioned ships (total displacement of approx. 153,000 tons)[9] in the ROK Navy, including approximately 10 submarines, 80 patrol craft and 20 auxiliaries as of October 2007. The naval aviation forces consist of about 10 fixed-wing and 50 rotary-wing aircraft.

The ROK Air Force (ROKAF) is a modern air force, which fields some 600+ combat aircraft of American design. In contrast, the North Korean Army has roughly 1,600–1,700 aircraft, but mostly obsolete types of Soviet and Chinese origin.


Unlike 1950, NK would find very stiff resistance from South Koreans if they crossed that 2.5 mile DMZ.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Republic_of_Korea_Armed_Forces#Army
 
Last edited:
I agree that the young Kim is merely performing for a domestic audience. He's just 30 and has done little to earn his current post. The only way to get the respect of the masses in North Korea is threatening the country's greatest enemy. He was educated in Switzerland and isn't stupid enough to go to war with the US. If that does happen, he'll be deposed and the time of the Kims will be over.
 
Why hasn't mr.porker ordered his army to attack? Does war now mean something different?

Apparently being in a state of war no longer means anyone actually shooting or fighting. At least on the NK side. I would think Kim would be embarrassed to make so many threats he never carries out. I don't see how this makes him look like a big leader to his people.
 
Why hasn't mr.porker ordered his army to attack? Does war now mean something different?

Apparently being in a state of war no longer means anyone actually shooting or fighting. At least on the NK side. I would think Kim would be embarrassed to make so many threats he never carries out. I don't see how this makes him look like a big leader to his people.

Technically there's been State of War since 1950. A cease fire was called, but a peace treaty was never signed. He's just reiterating the obvious to look like he's doing something. I doubt it's anymore than that, because he knows SK could probably take care of him all by themselves and the Chinese wouldn't permit him to screw up their economic growth by starting a war that could draw them in.
 
CNN today 4/2:

Kerry: We won't accept nuclear North Korea

Secretary of State John Kerry's comments follow reports that North Korea plans to restart a nuclear reactor that it shut down more than five years ago.


I don't know quite what to make of this. Apparently we are pretending that North Korea does not yet have a nuclear bomb? I thought they already did and the question was simply whether they could build one small enough to put on an ICBM to hit Los Angeles?

The other implication is that it LOOKS like Kerry is saying we'll stop them becoming a nuclear state. Does that mean he is hinting we'll bomb that nuclear reactor they want to start up to make plutonium? Kerry's statement was connected to that NK announcement.

China has for days been said to be moving troops and jets to their border with NK. Is that for military aid, or to keep North Koreans from streaming into China if war breaks out?

It is true that Obama also said the U.S. would not allow NK or Iran to become a nuclear state. (I simply didn't believe that.) Now Kerry is saying the same, quite flatly, no wiggle room. That implies that we would do something to stop them, because we sure haven't been able to stop either power nuking up with negotiations and "sanctions."
 

New Topics

Forum List

Back
Top