Softpanorama
|
|
Home | Switchboard | Unix Administration | Red Hat | TCP/IP Networks | Neoliberalism | Toxic Managers |
| May the source be with you, but remember the KISS principle ;-) | |||||||
China is lashing out at South Korea and Washington for the deployment of a powerful missile defense system known as the Terminal High Altitude Area Defense system, or THAAD, deposited at the Osan Air Base in South Korea on Monday evening.
The deployment of THAAD follows several ballistic missile tests by North Korea in recent months, including the launch of four missiles on Monday , three of which landed in the sea off the coast of Japan. Though THAAD would help South Korea protect itself from a North Korean missile attack, China is vocally protesting the deployment of the system, claiming it upsets the "strategic equilibrium" in the region because its radar will allow the United States to detect and track missiles launched from China.
North Korean provocations aside, THAAD's arrival on the Korean Peninsula comes amid heightened tensions between the new U.S. administration and China, as well as uncertainty surrounding the U.S. military's commitment to its security relationships in the region and around the world. Within that context, THAAD's deployment packs a significant amount of symbolic firepower alongside its battery of interceptor missiles.
Already there has been a blacklash. Liu Yuan, a retired Chinese general who is generally outspoken on Chinese security matters, wrote for China's state-run Global Times that the Chinese military could conduct a "surgical hard-kill operation that would destroy the target, paralyzing it and making it unable to hit back."
Though such military actions are unlikely, China has already forced the closing of 23 stores owned by Lotte, one of South Korea's huge family-run conglomerates (Lotte agreed to turn over a parcel of land in South Korea on which the THAAD system would be placed). State media has also encouraged Chinese citizens to boycott South Korean products, a move that, if effective, could rob major South Korean companies, like Samsung and Hyundai, of a massive consumer market.
South Korea is reportedly considering filing a complaint with the World Trade Organization over China's economic retaliation. The commercial ramifications of THAAD could still escalate further.
What can THAAD do?
THAAD is a relatively new addition to the U.S. military's missile defense arsenal. Produced by Lockheed Martin (and priced at more than $1 billion per system), THAAD consists of a battery of truck-launched interceptor missiles and a powerful X-band radar that can detect, track and target inbound missile threats.
In other words, THAAD can see enemy ballistic missiles coming and can knock them out of the sky as they plunge toward their targets. Unlike some missile interceptors that navigate into the proximity of a missile and then explode to destroy or deflect the incoming threat, THAAD's missiles simply slam into their targets head-on, destroying them purely through kinetic force.
THADD's military value is spelled out in its name. It intercepts ballistic missiles during their "terminal" phase - that is, when they have passed their apogee and begun falling toward their targets. They can intercept these missiles at very high altitudes, up to roughly 90 miles above Earth's surface. Unlike other missile defense systems, like the Patriot PAC-3 that are designed mainly to defend a particular patch of ground, THAAD's powerful AN/TPY-2 radar can both monitor and defend large areas from short- and medium-range missiles.There are a number of things THAAD cannot do, however. Given that its missiles do not contain a warhead, its batteries are fairly useless as an offensive weapon, a characteristic that some consider a feature from a political standpoint. In a statement announcing THAAD's deployment to South Korea, U.S Pacific Command was careful to note that "the THAAD system is a strictly defensive capability and it poses no threat to other countries in the region."
Moreover, THAAD is not designed to destroy missiles while they are boosting skyward, nor can it shoot down something like an intercontinental-range ballistic missile, or ICBM. (Intermediate and intercontinental range missiles travel far too fast for systems like THAAD to target and intercept.) In a scenario in which North Korea or China were to launch missiles bound for targets in the United States, THAAD batteries in South Korea and Japan would not be able to target those weapons.
A historical perspective
China has long vowed retaliation if the United States should deploy THAAD to South Korea, citing security concerns that center more on the radar than the interceptor missiles. THAAD's radar is powerful enough to peer into Chinese airspace, military officials there argue, allowing the United States to monitor Chinese missile tests and provide early warning of any Chinese missile launch, upsetting the strategic balance of power.
Following the election of Donald Trump to the U.S. presidency in November, one Chinese official called the potential deployment of THAAD a " political weather vane " for the new U.S. administration and its relationship with China.
"This marks a real act of courage on the part of the South Korean government, working with its American allies, to do what these two countries together feel is a necessary and appropriate action in the face of Chinese bullying." -Tom Karako, senior fellow, Center for Strategic and Int'l Studies
In other words, beyond its technical capability THAAD's deployment symbolizes further solidification of the military ties between the United States and South Korea, ties Beijing has sought to loosen for decades.
"I think the photo op really helped seal the deal for some of the political and assurance significance," Tom Karako, a senior fellow at the Center for Strategic and International Studies, says of the video released showing the first pieces of the THAAD system rolling off the C-17 at Osan on Monday evening. "This marks a real act of courage on the part of the South Korean government, working with its American allies, to do what these two countries together feel is a necessary and appropriate action in the face of Chinese bullying."
If THAAD is a political weather vane, Beijing now knows which way the wind is blowing. Why is this happening now?
The United States and South Korea declared their intention to deploy THAAD to South Korea last year (and have discussed the possibility going back as far as 2013), but China's staunch opposition to the deployment and other geopolitical considerations kept the United States from doing so.
One reason the United States and South Korea are moving to deploy THAAD now, Lewis says, is likely due to the fact that at least one of the major political stumbling blocks has been removed. South Korean president Park Geun-hye is currently embroiled in political scandal and facing impeachment, creating a unique political opportunity for the South Korean government.
"It's very controversial, the THAAD system," Lewis says. "And whoever comes after Park will have the system in place without the responsibility of having agreed to it." What lies ahead Consequences - intended and not - from the deployment of THAAD will continue to manifest themselves over the coming weeks and months. In terms of positive fallout, U.S.-based makers of missile defense systems like Lockheed Martin and Raytheon are positioned to benefit from growing ballistic missile threats across Asia, the Middle East and Europe - threats underscored by THAAD's deployment to South Korea.
A recent note to investors by Cowen and Co. defense analyst Roman Schweizer cites both Lockheed Martin (maker of THAAD) and Raytheon (maker of various interceptor missiles, as well as components of THAAD's radar and tracking systems) as likely beneficiaries of an ongoing uptick in global defense expenditures, in large part due to their missile defense technology.
However, one potential negative consequence of THAAD's deployment stems from the sense of complacency that such systems can foster. THAAD can soften the effect of a missile salvo, but it's not a silver bullet for either North Korean or Chinese ballistic missile arsenals that are both growing in size and sophistication.
"They're missiles, and this is missile defense, and for a lot of people that checks all the boxes," Lewis says. "The unintended consequence
I can see is that you don't want the South Korean people to think this solves the North Korean missile problem, because it doesn't."
 |
 |
 |
Jun 13, 2020 | www.moonofalabama.org
450.org , Jun 12 2020 18:31 utc | 9Surprise, surprise. The Trump/Kim Jong-un love affair was about as long as one of Elizabeth Taylor's romances. Kim Jong-un wrote him beautiful letters and they fell in love, yet just as quickly they fell out of love. That's the way it is with Trump. He's a male version of Elizabeth Taylor. Melania was smart to renegotiate her prenup. It appears Kim Jong-un neglected to insist on a prenup.They Were A Match Made In Heaven But Heaven Can Wait I Guess
|
|
|
Jun 13, 2020 | www.moonofalabama.org
Jackrabbit , Jun 12 2020 19:04 utc | 13
North Korea is likely to time the announced tests in a way that creates maximum damage for Trump's reelection campaign.It matter little which flavor of the establishment a US President hails from.
All Presidents are portrayed as 'peacemakers'. Only peacemakers can claim to fight 'just' wars.
USA is effectively at war with Syria (via dubious legality of occupying Syrian oilfields), Venezuela (having seized Venezuelan State assets with the pretense that Juan Guaidó is the true head of State), and Yemen (via support for Saudi and UAE war on Yemen). And USA leads/forces its allies in a Cold War with Russia, China, Iran, and North Korea. Then there is the backstabbing of the Palestinians and the US-backed coup in Peru. Trump is merely spokesperson for all this belligerence. When he's gone, whether that occurs in 4 months or 4 years, TPTB/Deep State will turn the page and start again.
!!
Sakineh Bagoom , Jun 12 2020 19:06 utc | 14
The Korean Armistice Agreement was a ceasefire, but no peace treaty was ever signed. In effect the Korean war never ended.DannyC , Jun 12 2020 20:26 utc | 18DPRK will not give up her nukes, but that's not where its strength lies. Japan and South Korea are within range of regular ballistic missiles, where US personnel are just sitting duck. All this talk about nukes is hooey.
Aside from China, let's not forget Russia, which has a skin in this game. It has an 11 mile border, and 15 mile maritime border with DPRK. It will do it's utmost for North not become South.
Here's my 2 cents. North Korea should never denuclearize. The US is never going to remove itself from South Korea. The only reason it won't ever be attacked, is if the cost of attacking it is too great to justify. Timing this announcement to damage Trump isn't smart. Yes, Trump gets sabotaged by Pompeo, Bolton when he was around and many others, but at the end of the day the attack order is still his call and it's been obvious Trump doesn't want a war with them. He's mostly just bluffing with his threats towards others. If you get Biden in there, he won't be running the show. Youll have the Pentagon and the neoliberals in charge. They will be less tough talk on Twitter, but definitely more of a threat to start a major warvk , Jun 12 2020 20:59 utc | 22It's important to speculate that the relations between the USA and South Korea have their contradictions.uncle tungsten , Jun 12 2020 22:48 utc | 26The South Korean elite certainly would like a complete victory over the North under their terms (unconditional surrender to the South). That would allow the dream scenario for South Korea: ransacking their infrastructure (by the chaebols ) and absorbing their 25 million population as cheap workforce.
The South Korean military would also love this scenario, as an enlarged Korea, bordering both China (in a very favorable terrain for a terrestrial invasion in collaboration with the Americans) and Russia, with 75 million inhabitants, could rival Japan as the favorite vassal of the USA in the northwestern Pacific. This would embolden the nationalists at home, open space to crush the center-left (social-democrats) and add fuel to the melting pot of East Asia.
A unified Korea under capitalist hegemony would also enable the Korean military to charge the Americans for much more money, military equipment and other infrastructure in exchange for keeping their occupation. It would also absorb the North's nuclear weapon technology, know-how and infrastructure, so it would automatically be a nuclear power. It could even rise above Japan in geopolitical importance in the American eyes for this reason - it could essentially be an Israel in East Asia, directly threatening China in the name of the USA.
For that reason I think the USA doesn't want a unified and strengthened Korea - even one unified under the South's terms.
The American are already bleeding money and resources on Israel, NATO, Japan and the already existing South Korea. To have another emboldened vassal would bleed the American fiscus even more.
Besides, the Americans see themselves as the owners of South Korea, in the sense that South Korea owes their own existence to American occupation. If the North is to fall, I don't think the USA will allow the South Korean bourgeoisie to simply grab the North Korean resources and nuclear know-how. I don't think they will make the same mistake they did with Germany (by allowing the Western elite to absorb the East entirely, which opened the gates to the creation of the EU and then to the German conquest of Central Europe).
My bet is the North resources would mainly fall to American capital if it was to be conquered. Maybe the American won't even allow a unified Korea - at least not de facto .
Kim Jong Un is more than a match for the dope Trump and his class of '86 wargamers. With this particular agreement the USA confirmed in everyone's eyes that it remains incapable of making and keeping a deal between nations. It would have been cheap and easy for Trump to walk away with a deal to give himself security in his second term runup. He cheated, he lied, and he bragged and so now that very agreement is a lance that the North Korean people can torment and bleed Trump with for the next six months and more.Don Bacon , Jun 12 2020 23:27 utc | 28Let's be clear about how important and sane the original deal was: relax the oppressive sanctions, diminish nuclear threats, remove invasion threats in exchange for repatriated human remains, and NK to destroy its nuclear production facility. That ignorant Pompeo nixed the deal on his very next visit and proved to Kim on his first round with the USA that the president was a puppet and the USA incapable of being trusted.
It was easy, it was inexpensive, it was painless and the USA could not do it.
And so Trump handed a weapon to Kim to stab at him throughout his own re-election. No brains in Kushner or Ivanka's heads as they too have handed a golden opportunity to the North Korean fox. Fools all.
The North Koreans have only their liberty and nation to lose and they would not lose it back in the 1950's and they sure wont lose it now. All the more so to a scabrous pack of greedy Chaebol mafia from the south. Do not forget that the USA bombed the North Koreans continuously, almost every village was bombed in a free fire zone approach that was repeated in Vietnam a decade or so later. Koreans were slaughtered in their millions by this grubby little USA mendacity and it is remembered through the generations. Korea had only just repulsed the Japanese occupation. They remember - and they wont be suckered by some clown nation in the Pacific.DPRK is an ally of both China and Russia, US enemies which are currently besting the US by undermining its influence. .. from the Senate 2021 proposed budget summary:Richard Steven Hack , Jun 12 2020 23:38 utc | 30
Two years ago, the National Defense Strategy (NDS) outlined our nation's preeminent challenge: strategic competition with authoritarian adversaries that stand firmly against our shared American values of freedom, democracy, and peace -- namely, China and Russia.These adversaries seek to shift the global order in their favor, at our expense. In pursuit of this goal, these nations have increased military and economic aggression, worked to develop advanced technologies, expanded their influence around the world, and undermined our own influence. . . herePosted by: vk | Jun 12 2020 17:54 utc | 7 use its 25 million inhabitants as a brand-new cheap labor resources with which the chaebols could start a new cycle of capitalist accumulation is closing./div>Not to mention the estimated *6-10 trillion dollars* in natural resources that North Korea has.
North Korea Has Trillions of Dollars in Mineral Wealth
From another article: "An estimate from 2012 by a South Korean research institute values the North's mineral wealth at $10 trillion, 20-odd times larger than that of the South."
It's always about the money (and power).
/div
|
|
|
Sep 23, 2019 | thenewkremlinstooge.wordpress.com
Northern Star September 16, 2019 at 2:37 pm
An overlooked battle :Northern Star September 16, 2019 at 2:55 pmhttps://www.youtube.com/embed/mAmJUyHloTk?version=3&rel=1&fs=1&autohide=2&showsearch=0&showinfo=1&iv_load_policy=1&wmode=transparent
Like Like
Wow Learn something new..at least to some!Patient Observer September 20, 2019 at 4:10 amhttps://www.youtube.com/embed/PlJOvUCrN30?version=3&rel=1&fs=1&autohide=2&showsearch=0&showinfo=1&iv_load_policy=1&wmode=transparent
Like Like
Interesting and new to me as well. I do recall reading several articles that the Mig 15 was a huge leap in military technology and the Mig 17 was the best subsonic fighter ever fielded.Moscow Exile September 20, 2019 at 4:26 amFancy a flight down MiG Alley , chaps?Patient Observer September 20, 2019 at 5:51 pmThe MiG Alley battles produced many fighter aces. The top aces were Russian. Nikolay Sutyagin claimed 21 kills, including nine F-86s, one F-84 and one Gloster Meteor in less than seven months. His first kill was the F-86A of Robert H. Laier on 19 June 1951 (listed by the Americans as missing in action), and his last was on 11 January 1952, when he shot down and killed Thiel M. Reeves, who was flying an F-86E (Reeves is also listed as MIA). Other famous Soviet aces include Yevgeni G. Pepelyayev, who was credited with 19 kills, and Lev Kirilovich Shchukin, who was credited with 17 kills, despite being shot down twice himself.
During the Korean War, NATO Allies wanted so badly to examine a MiG at close quarters that they offered a US$100,000 reward for any pilot who would defect and bring his MiG-15 with him. When a North Korean pilot, Lt. Ro Kun Suk, did defect in September of 1953, he was not aware of the reward, but was given it anyway.
Source: MiG-15
Like Like
I had heard that the Mig 17 was deliberately kept out of the war as it would have decimated the US Air Force forcing them to do something really stupid like drop a nuke. Could be an urban legend.
|
|
|
Apr 02, 2019 | www.moonofalabama.org
bjd , Mar 31, 2019 2:43:18 PM | link
El Pais: North Korean embassy assailants filmed the attack to prove their actions, say Spanish police
The 10 individuals who broke into the North Korean embassy in Madrid last month, assaulting staff members and taking audiovisual material with them, had micro-cameras that they used to provide evidence of their actions to whoever ordered and financed the operation , according to Spanish investigators.
...
The 35-year-old is a US resident with a Mexican passport who "owns several dubious companies and is in contact with various intelligence services. "Investigators are now exploring whether Hong Chang played a role "in other violent incidents against North Korean interests in other countries." Near the Madrid embassy, the police found an Italian driver's license belonging to Hong Chang but showing a fake name . The North Korean ambassador to Italy has been missing since January, and is presumed to have defected.
...
Investigation sources say the attack was perfectly planned down to every last detail, something that would require "significant infrastructure and financing, which the individuals involved lack."
...
Even though the assailants – mostly young South Koreans living in the US and trained in military action – took away the hard drives of the embassy's security cameras, the police was able to partially recover the footage before its automatic deletion. This is what allowed investigators to observe the intruders' "extremely violent and professional" behavior , and to identify them.-
The CIA cover group has gone silent. It may be that Adrian Hong gets another gig. Not again Libya from where he transferred Islamist to the Syrian war theater, but how about Venezuela?Free Joseon says it is going on a hiatus
Most notably, according to AFP, Hong was spotted in Tripoli, Libya, during the Libyan civil war in 2011. He helped Libyan war victims receive treatment at hospitals in Jordan.-
Mystery group tied to break-in at DPRK embassy in Madrid will suspend activitiesNotably, the source said that South Korea's embassy in Madrid also had some knowledge of the incident shortly before it took place and immediately after.-
Presumably to prevent that the case gets buried, North Korea finally acknowledges the raid:North Korea said Sunday it wants an investigation into a raid on its embassy in Spain last month, calling it a "grave terrorist attack" and an act of extortion that violates international law.b. you should do a piece on invasions of Embassies and Consulates, which app. is becoming en vogue, as are appropriations of territory (the similarities, the differences)
...
The North's official media quoted a Foreign Ministry spokesman as saying that an illegal intrusion into and occupation of a diplomatic mission and an act of extortion are a grave breach of the state sovereignty and a flagrant violation of international law, "and this kind of act should never be tolerated."He claimed an armed group tortured the staff and suggested they stole communications gear.
This briefing https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Kkfr7rzSle8 by Maria Zarakhova mentions a few I wasn't aware of. At around 09:30 min.
Appalling precedents are created before our eyes.
michaelj72 , Mar 31, 2019 2:49:22 PM | link
well, that was fast
https://www.nbcnews.com/news/north-korea/fbi-has-data-stolen-north-korea-embassy-anti-kim-regime-n988906
FBI has data stolen from North Korea embassy by anti-regime group
A group calling for the overthrow of Kim Jong Un has given the FBI data seized in a raid of North Korea's embassy in Spain, a law enforcement source says.
"....Receiving intelligence stolen from a foreign embassy in a NATO country puts the FBI in a delicate position, but there is no U.S. legal prohibition against the American government making use of the material, legal experts say....."
|
|
|
Mar 01, 2019 | www.moonofalabama.org
twhstmmwmafilwwwww , Feb 28, 2019 8:13:44 AM | link
This is just a hunch but I have a feeling it was undermined by Bolton and Pompeo from the start. They know the DPRK wasn't gonna give up its nuclear deterrent unilaterally, so the next best thing behind a the dream of a Libya situation is to once again have an aggressive relationship with the North to be able to continue to justify all sorts of "defense" maneuvering around China now that foreign policy has now officially pivoted away from terrorism and towards China(+Russia).Similar to AEGIS Ashore in Eastern Europe in order to "defend" Europe from "Iran".
Christian Chuba , Feb 28, 2019 8:22:32 AM | link
We've given up everything, they have given up nothingsteven t johnson , Feb 28, 2019 8:28:11 AM | linkEvery time I hear a Neocon say this on FOX / CNN I want to strangle the host for not asking any follow up question as in, 'like what?' What has the U.S. given up.
We talked to them giving them legitimacy, OMG, as if we have some kind of glorious halo that is worth a billions of $ or even more. This makes me want to puke when I heare this.
The N. Koreans have stopped ALL nuclear and ballistic missile testing. We the U.S. have put in place even more draconian sanctions under Trump than were in place before. We raised the ante. We have more room to give then the N. Koreans do.
Believing Trump is or ever was open to breaking with US imperialism is Trumpery. He wants to sweat the subordinates, wants them to spend more on the military, buy more US weapons, do more fighting. But to make things look good he will say anything, and renege.Ts'yew Taw-Loh , Feb 28, 2019 8:30:46 AM | linkSome people think Trump etc. are trying to detach the north from a Chinese alliance. There are two problems here. First, there's no sane reason to think the Chinese aren't engaged in economic warfare against the north. Not wanting to squeeze hard enough to cause a total collapse is not supporting the north. Second, if that's what Trump wanted, he'd actually try offering the north concessions.
The issue in the background is whether Trump will let the south out of the US orbit. It's an easy question to answer: He won't. Empires don't give up their territory until they're made to. The Soviet withdrawal from central Europe is not an exception, as the USSR was not an empire. (Yes, everyone who says "Soviet empire" and means it is a shithead.)
Formally, the Korean War was between Chosôn on the one side and The United nations and Hangok (Daehan)on the other. The UN security council is the ones to have instituted tthe sanction regime and thus in practice committed a crime against Humanity by inflictin starvation the people of the North. In practice it was a US & their allie's war against the entire population of Korea. Formally, peace must be signed by Chosôn and the UN and sanctions lifted by the latter. In Practice, the US must be made to abide with agreements.vk , Feb 28, 2019 8:48:36 AM | linkWhy does the USA keep economic sanctions on DPRK? This article helps to explain it: Despite himself Trump admits the superiority of China's socialist economy to capitalismDavid Wooten , Feb 28, 2019 8:58:41 AM | linkJong-un Kim has an advantage his predecessor didn't: he has China. He doesn't need to invent nothing: he already has the long-term solution next door.
My guess is the USA and South Korea know if the sanctions are lifted, North Korea will become a mini-powerhouse under China's sphere of influence. They have to create a situation equal to Libya's, where they can invade the North militarily and quickly occupy its territory, thus using its population as cheap labor force for the American multinationals and South Korean chaebols.
The US military/foreign policy establishment wants North Korea to disarm so that it can give them a Carthaginian peace. Until then, they are content to do their cushy jobs and rake in the money from South Korean businessmen.donkeytale , Feb 28, 2019 9:07:21 AM | linkMoon would probably like to unite the two Koreas and kick US out. But then, the US mil/fp would sanction him and all Korea.
This was yet another photo op on the road to nowhere with our reality show presidency. As Conway Twitty sang, "it's only make believe." The path to "normalisation" with NK winds through SK.Ant , Feb 28, 2019 9:09:01 AM | linkb , Feb 28, 2019 9:34:31 AM | linkAn excellent article from Tom Engelhardt on Consortium News, in which he attempts to explain how the USA had the world at its feet, and squandered the chance to do good and instead went on a series of further Imperial military adventures: https://consortiumnews.com/2019/02/21/the-neocons-have-their-caesar/
American diplomacy still consists of behaving like a bull in a china shop: do what we say or die.
Time to grow up, it's not the 1990's. You're just another country, and we're not so frightened any more.
This is quite possible ...snake , Feb 28, 2019 10:06:12 AM | linkKevin Gray @DrKevinGray Former SK unification minister Chong Se-hyun suggests that summit was derailed by last minute attendance of Bolton, who added demands for NK to also report chemical/biological weapons, in response to which NKs increased their demand for sanctions relief in Korean@8Jason , Feb 28, 2019 10:54:18 AM | linkWe've given up everything, they have given up nothing. Every time I hear a Neocon say this on FOX / CNN I want .. follow up question {answered} as in, 'like what?' What has the U.S.[ A given up. [please note that unless you are a member of the 527 persons that make up the USA, you the " WE does not include you. Americans get to elect by a vary strained highly polarized (Republican vs Democrat) process, 525 persons under Article I, but not the two persons who are the CEOs that govern the USA ?
Americans cannot elected the CEOs that make all of the decisions. The CEOs of the USA are elected by persons who many or may not be Americans, have a look PLEASE!
... ... ...
The N. Koreans have stopped ALL nuclear and ballistic missile testing. We the U.S. have put in place even more draconian sanctions under Trump than were in place before. We raised the ante. We have more room to give then the N. Koreans do.<= once again I remind you that the " WE d/n include you..
Posted by: Christian Chuba | Feb 28, 2019 8:22:32 AM | 5
So we give up nothing, not even a temporary ease in sanctions and they give up their nuclear weapons program in whole, what a deal.AriusArmenian , Feb 28, 2019 11:02:39 AM | linkIts obvious that even if Trump went there with the intention of making a realistic two sided deal the permanent war state would just scuttle it anyway by refusing to follow the plan or staging some new provocation like some war games or bomber fly over.
DPRK has to see that after Iran complied with the inspections regime and abandoned its civilian nuclear program the goal post was moved to not even being allowed to have ballistic missiles.
What I don't understand is how long before South Korea demands we respect its sovereignty in it's own military affairs and asks us to remove a sizable chunk of our war machine so a lasting peace can be made. Can South Korea not forge its own tit-for-tat peace plan with the North that makes sense to both sides and tell the US not to interfere, sabotage or ask it to leave? It seems the opportunity is ripe to exclude the empty suit Trump and his group of Neo-con madmen and forge ahead with opening up trade and mutual thawing of feeling in Koreas, but is there political will to do so in South Korea?
No surprise that the US is always 'all or nothing'. It thinks it is 'uber alles'.Jackrabbit , Feb 28, 2019 11:06:39 AM | linkfairleft @16karlof1 , Feb 28, 2019 12:17:31 PM | linkThe link @12 is another form of apology for Trump. Essentially, an insanity defense:
All of this not only gave Americans a visibly unhinged president -- think of him, in axis-of-evil terms, as a rogue state of one -- but an increasingly unhinged country. You can feel so much of this in Trump's confused and confusing attempts to both end American wars and ratchet them up . . .It's not Trump's fault - it's the neocons! They constructed a system that allowed for the election of this "loopy" President and are using him for their own ends.[So] ... think of this piece as an obituary of sorts ... not as an obituary for a single loopy president, a man who ... was elevated to a strange version of power by a troubled republic showing signs of wear and tear [but of a nation] . . . whatever Donald Trump does, the Caesarian die was cast early in this century as the neocons crossed their own Rubicon.
Sure, the neocons deserve much blame but the Deep State and their US President compatriots (Bush Sr., Clinton, Bush Jr., Obama, and Trump) are also guilty just as the driver of the getaway car is just as guilty as the bank robbers.
BM , Feb 28, 2019 12:24:57 PM | linkIMO, the key was laid bare by Trump: "Basically they wanted the sanctions lifted in their entirety, and we couldn't do that." [My Emphasis]
Wouldn't or couldn't? Using "couldn't" tells me that possibility was zero to begin with and Bolton's appearance had nothing to do with anything other than the fact that the impasse was pre-determined. Kim knew it would happen; I was 99% sure it would happen; and of course Trump knew. And that's where it will likely remain until 2021, although there's a slight possibility that the UNSC sanctions will be modified and lessened.
Escobar's recap of recent events seems rather bland, although between the lines I think he's saying that solving Kashmir is more important than solving Afghanistan, an important point overlooked too long.
So, Koreans are left to their own devices and will continue their unification drive, while the quadrangular relations between China, Russia, and the two Koreas will grow tighter; all of which serve to increase pressure on Abe and Japan to drop the Empire's line.
It would be easy to be put off by the failure of the summit under the Americans' blatent treachery, but it is probably better that way.james , Feb 28, 2019 12:31:38 PM | linkConsider what would happen if the US and NK were to have a "fantastically successful" summit with agreements signed - what are the chances that the US would subsequently honour their commitments? NILL. What would be the effect on NK if NK does not honour it's commitments? Devastating at best.
Because of the US' well-established behaviour patterns, it is hard to imagine how NK could benefit from signing an agreement with the US - any concrete agreement - the US will ignore it's commitments, while forcing NK to abide by its commitments.
Therefore a situation in which the US clearly shows itself to be the treacherous partner while the NK side is beyond reproach is the perfect outcome for NK, allowing her to establish a good reputation in world public opinion and - hopefully - together with SK find their own way to achieve peaceful reunification without the US.
Peaceful reunification with US blessing was never on the cards and never will be.
Fortunately Kim Jong-Un has thus far been truly masterful in playing his cards, getting the geostrategic benefits at each throw, while the US only succeed in clearly establishing their treachery and progressively undermining their geostrategic hand.
With support from China and Russia, may the two Koreas eventually successfully achieve their own peaceful reunification without the US!
thanks b... aside from liking what @26 psychohistorian said, i wonder who really benefits from these sanctions the usa is so quick to use as a tool against others impose or maintain? the usa appears to be built on this system of financial sanctions and can't function without it.. is it that the thought of north and south korea working together means the usa gets cut out of the action? is that a big part of it?? at some point it is going to happen anyway... same deal russia and the rest of europe and same deal iran and the rest of the world... it seems to me the usa is squandering all the promise they might have had at one time by catering to whoever profits from these financial sanction routines..Red Ryder , Feb 28, 2019 12:35:04 PM | linkso yeah.. it is back to rome didn't fall in a day, and the usa's time is coming soon enough..
A large impediment to North Korea achieving a lifting of sanctions is the long list of UNSC resolutions establishing global unanimity for a sanctions regime.arby , Feb 28, 2019 12:52:37 PM | linkThe US has managed to corral China and Russia to join these sanctions.
However, a case can be made that since no nuke testing has transpired, no missile tests have continued, and the threat to neighbors and the region is now flat-lined, North Korea should be acting, not with the US alone, but with all the UNSC and other nations, in a way that demonstrates it is walking from nuclear development and ICBM achievement.
We shall see if Russia and China can press this argument in order to pursue economic development as a reward for international inspection and IAEA control of the NK nuclear program.
What the US wants is to get Moon out of the picture and retain fanatical South Korean leadership that would be against North Korea development. Trump may see the potential in North Korea, but the MIC and Deep State absolutely do not want to have to leave South Korea as a base.
To the posters who think Russia should intervene everywhere... Just reading on Orlov's blog and he pointed to an article he wrote about Russia and Putin in 2014 from a Valdai meeting---Putin--the pair , Feb 28, 2019 1:21:18 PM | link"5. Russia has no intention of going fishing in the murky waters created by America's ever-expanding "empire of chaos," and has no interest in building a new empire of her own (this is unnecessary; Russia's challenges lie in developing her already vast territory).
Neither is Russia willing to act as a savior of the world, as she had in the past."
as you and many others have noted, the US argument seems to be "give up your nukes so we can Libya you into oblivion". if venezuela had nukes would they be putting up with the incessant stupidity of the "blob"? they'd still have sanctions but i doubt the dumb twats running the surrounding countries would be as eager to aid and abet US hijinks.b , Feb 28, 2019 1:23:41 PM | linki know it's based in "realism" or "realpolitik" or whatever euphemism for "do what we say or be murdered" people prefer, but south korea not telling the west to kiss the tastiest part of its ass and siding with the dprk and china to settle things is just absurd. other than financial punishment, what are they afraid of? no more disgusting tainted beef? no more deliveries of WWIII-level military gear without permission? a drop in sex tourism among pasty white anglos?
at least this does away with all pretense of trump being a "peace president" in the slightest. that was always a fantasy of the MAGA/"we liek him cuz hes xtian lol" crowd to begin with but now even the suggestion of such is laughable.
The North Korean Foreign Minister gave a press conference in Hanoi. I updated the piece above at its end with the reports of what he said.worldblee , Feb 28, 2019 1:28:41 PM | linkThe bi-partisan War Party wins again, the world loses.the pair , Feb 28, 2019 1:29:15 PM | link@#36james , Feb 28, 2019 1:52:15 PM | linki despise trudeau and all, but this oddly timed "scandal" is based on nothing but one woman's testimony (as believable as she is) and the screeching of the scumbag conservatives along with their bootlickers in the media. global and CTV have always been conservative party infomercials but lately it's just ridiculous.
saying "a canadian politician did a corrupt thing" is like saying "we caught water being wet". odd how canada has a reputation as being "smarter" than the US yet its citizens have already forgotten the ten years of dripping, oily sleaze under harper and his coterie of fat doughy apes (the fattest and oiliest of which - jason kenney - has been oozing from the telly screen on a constant basis on said channels).
with his repulsive bootlicking on the huawei affair and venezuela, it's easy to want justin out yesterday . but any conservative taking his place will be harper 2.0 and therefore trump's maple mini-me.
apologies for off topicness.
ot - @36 karlof1... next election is oct 2019... it probably doesn't matter as i doubt very much he gets elected in october.. it is kinda true what the pair is saying @40 too... we will get getting our version of trump, as we are one cycle behind the usa... some conservative jackass will be running canada towards the end of the year to make matters even worse.. canucks are not all that bright, lol..S , Feb 28, 2019 2:04:06 PM | linkSouth Koreans, where are you? You should be camping 24/7 in front of the U.S. embassy, demanding the immediate removal of sanctions. The unification will never happen if you don't take a more active stance.one off poster , Feb 28, 2019 4:04:14 PM | linkThe international community wants it, North Koreans want it, it all comes down to you. Kick the American troops out, break up your chaebols, and start the unification process. Any sanctions the U.S might impose on you will be more than offset by cheap Russian pipeline gas, a rail link to Europe, and an economic boom due to integration with the North. What are you waiting for? You may never have another chance like this.
@38 b:PavewayIV , Feb 28, 2019 4:06:44 PM | link
Thank you very much for the update, b. I am pleased that the DPRK called the press conference. It is a pity the video has been viewed only 1179 times.Here is video footage of the DPRK news conference.
The 1st part is the prepared statement read out by foreign minister Ri Yong Ho with english translation following. The 2nd part of the interview consists of Q&A (sound quality v bad). It mainly reiterates the 1st part, but from 10:25 on, she says that (an) American Inspector(s) visited a factory called "Yun Soo" within the Yong Byon. She wanted to emphasise that that factory was put on the table for closure as well by DPRK.
Given that the sanctions the DPRK was seeking to be lifted were not US imposed sanctions, but UN sanctions, can the UN Sec Gen intervene (kind of like what happened in Yemen)?
It does make one wonder why POTUS said that DPRK was seeking the removal of ALL sanctions. Was he expecting something like this? It is so easy to refute that the fact it was said at all is intriguing.
Otto B@33 - I suppose I can't argue with your logic - especially if this was part of an 'Art of the Deal' seminar. I will simply point out that your premise completely ignores what US citizens think is in THEIR best interests.karlof1 , Feb 28, 2019 4:12:47 PM | linkPulling out all of our forces from South Korea permanently and ending sanctions on North Korea would be more than enough for them to denuclearize (and probably unify with the South). THAT is in US citizens' best interests, period. Chickenhawks within the US government are the only ones demanding an eternal occupation of South Korea and an eternal standoff with North Korea. They sell this as a necessary price to pay for 'security', except we're damn tired of hearing about our psychopathic leaders' manufactured enemy and we don't need protection from it.
Same goes for Iran, despite their nuclear capabilities, or lack thereof. 'Protecting US interests' is not 'protecting the US'. No amount of marketing or propaganda is going to make Iran a credible threat to the US or its citizens EVER. We don't need protection from a manufactured enemy. Three million people (give or take a million) were slaughtered in Southeast Asia to protect us against the last manufactured enemy: those homicidal CHICOMs. I don't recall seeing any fresh, bloody human heads mounted on pikes in downtown Hanoi during the talks this weekend. How is that possible?
I don't need a better Iranian 'deal'. I need my psychopathic leaders to stop antagonizing the hell out of Iran and stop punishing the Iranian people. Israel's psychopathic obsession with destroying Iran or somehow containing its regional influence has NOTHING to do with the security of US citizens - despite the incessant narrative. Are you honestly expecting the little people in the US to believe the DC chickenhawks or the MSM again?
RT editorial savages BigLie Media for the usual reasons--but--in choosing to highlight Susan Rice's NY Times op/ed in an attempt to discredit her, she actually suggests the very sort of incremental moves agreed to in the initial summit's Declaration:Yeah, Right , Feb 28, 2019 4:35:58 PM | link"To move the needle, the United States and North Korea will need to agree on a series of incremental, reciprocal steps that would build mutual confidence as part of a road map to full denuclearization."
Oops!! All in all, the editorialist misrepresents Rice, which is what he accuses BigLie Media of doing--OUCH!
Rice's conclusion will surprise a few here:
"In Hanoi, Mr. Trump has an opportunity to achieve incremental progress toward denuclearization. Unfortunately, history suggests that Mr. Trump will be content with another colorful photo opportunity and more diplomatic shadow boxing that perpetuates the illusion of success, while running down the clock on a nearly intractable challenge."
And it seems Trump lied about the impasse that led to Kim walking out, proving that Kim's initial assessment of Trump as dotard was 100% correct.
@27 Jose Garcia: "My question. What will South Korea do now?"Rob , Feb 28, 2019 5:03:57 PM | linkWell, they only have two choices:
Option 1: Continue to be the USA's loyal lapdog, in which case several million of them are doomed to die in the (increasingly inevitable) replay of the 1950-2 war.
Option 2: Hold secret talks with North Korea that lead to the surprise signing of a peace treaty that contains a clause that says "Both Koreas agree that no foreign forces shall be stationed on the Korean Peninsular". Then brace themselves to be sanctioned within an inch of their lives.
They'll go hungry under Option 2, and it will be inevitable that they flip into the "Chinese orbit". But they'll still be alive, which is not nothin'.
They'll make a stab at Option 2, because under Option 1 they'll all end up dead.
@fairleft (16)TDeL , Feb 28, 2019 5:17:43 PM | linkWhen did Bolton's coups and intimidations ever work? He is, in essence, a megalomanic mustache.
@6uncle tungsten , Feb 28, 2019 5:36:43 PM | linkActually there is one sane reason to think the Chinese aren't engaged in economic warfare against the north: a Shengyang rail link to Seoul via Pyongyang. This could be constructed in less than 3 years and will take some pressure off congestion in the Bohai Sea-Yellow Sea shipping lanes. And provide efficient transport of materials, goods & people in new & expanded markets. I'm sure there are others.
Thank you b for the timely update on the latest theatrical entertainment, Nobel Peace Prize episode
fastfreddy # 44Chas , Feb 28, 2019 5:50:42 PM | linkAgreed ff but regarding the Trump timeline from afar he has deliberately and methodically filled the white house staff with more and more extreme people. Slowly boiling the frog comes to mind. We are supposed to be acclimatized to this huckster being surrounded by hawks whereas he and his entire family are predators more deadly than hawks.
S #42
Thank you, you nailed it. Perhaps the assembled mass of South Koreans in front of the US embassy could wear a vest symbolising healing or unity. Perhaps they could assemble around a UN flag demanding that it back off from being a USA puppet. I don't recall having seen a UN flag burned yet but it would be an appropriate symbol from South Korea, or Haiti, or Libya, or......
Thank you again b and all the comrade writers, it has been a great read.
What I can't understand is why NK would give up its nuclear capability without requiring the empire to do the same. It isn't equitable for NK to give up its nukes for the mere promise of the empire to not place nuclear weapons on the Korean peninsula. The empire could still strike Nk from outside the peninsula. What's good for one country is good for the other.karlof1 , Feb 28, 2019 5:59:53 PM | linkYeah, Right @50--Red Ryder , Feb 28, 2019 7:49:53 PM | linkFor your Option #2 to fly, the existing treaty with Outlaw US Empire must be negated along with the entire arrangement with UN that's existed since 1950. Given Imperial intransigence combined with ever escalating political will within RoK, such a happening may occur before 2020 begins.
The most recent article on reunification I was able to find in English is 3 months old and provides grounds for optimism given the concept's positive direction. IMO, Moon and Kim need to continue down the path they've made for each other,, while the diplomatic action moves into the UNSC which is where most of the sanctions were born and the only venue where they can be rescinded.
@35, S,Jen , Feb 28, 2019 8:29:00 PM | linkI always check my comments in preview, often many times. The URL seemed to be fine. It works. However, I'll be more cognizant in the future with any long URLs.
Thanks.
S @ 42:psychohistorian , Feb 28, 2019 9:29:16 PM | linkFor South Korea to do as you suggest, Japan must do exactly the same. The South Koreans are more afraid of what Japan would do if they (SK, that is) were to throw out the Americans, downsize their own military and start a reunification or a "one-state-two-systems" process, and Japan does not follow suit with demilitarisation.
Incidentally the current Japanese PM Shinzo Abe's grandfather Nobusuke Kishi served as Munitions Minister under PM Hideki Tojo in the early 1940s. Under his watch, thousands of Chinese and Koreans were employed as slave labour in factories and mines. Kishi also ran the puppet state Manchukuo during the 1930s as his personal technocratic industrial slave state.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nobusuke_Kishi
https://www.theglobeandmail.com/opinion/east-asia-cant-escape-the-sins-of-the-father/article15987729/Much later Kishi also got a turn as Japanese PM but his legacy as PM may have been to design a political system in which the Liberal Democratic Party (a conservative party in Japan) was always the main political party in government from 1955 to 1993.
https://www.japantimes.co.jp/community/2011/09/27/general/no-nos-for-noda-japans-top-10-most-useless-pms/#.XHiKklwzaUkNeedless to say, Abe hero-worships Kishi.
I want to add some more thought to those I shared with Jen. What about the Philippines? I think that at this time in history all of the outposts of empire are at risk.Kiza , Feb 28, 2019 9:31:48 PM | linkI think that Trump represents a pivot from containment of China/Russia to one of "Quick, pull what pieces of empire we can defend/control together."
I think that the West is delusional to think they can defeat any alternative that doesn't have profit as its God. That said, that monotheistic myth of "better than others" runs deep as evidenced by some of the opinions expressed in this venue
Are we going to see the dominoes of empire fall? I damn well hope so!
Is it not funny how the boss Bolton shows up at negotiations and El Presidente falls into (his unrealistic) line? El Presidente de la republica bananera is just a low level employee of his own staff BullbyTon and Pompous Maximus.Yeah, Right , Feb 28, 2019 9:36:01 PM | linkNobody asked this here yet, but how did we get to US negotiating against NK on behalf of UN Security Council ?
Who did China and Russia on the Security Council serve, did they get anything for their service to the republica bananera?
One can recognise how ruthless US is, but one also has to recognise how worthless China and Russia are. US ignores UN Resolutions it does not like and uses UN Resolutions it initiated as a head-club for achieving its goals whilst China and Russia go along. This is exactly why the things are as they are - the Selfish Human Condition.
Oh, we are all so happy when someone does not do like the majority of the worthless humanity does (Russia out of own interest in Syria). Otherwise, back to being the usual shitbags.
@60 Karlof1 As ever, it is instructive to read the text of a treaty.Sad Canuck , Feb 28, 2019 9:45:27 PM | linkIn this particular case the treaty between South Korea and the USA contains within it the answers to your concerns.
1) either party can end the treaty with 12 month notice.
2) the stationing of US troops is by mutual agreement I.e. if South Korea "No longer agrees" to US troops stationed on its soil then those troops have to leave.Uncle Sam would have no grounds to refuse, as the treaty itself says that both signatories have to agree. And, no, the treaty doesn't have to be "renegotiated" to produce that outcome: the South Koreans need only say "we don't agree any more".
That's what the treaty says, so that's what the treaty means.
@31 Red RyderJen , Feb 28, 2019 10:54:54 PM | linkNothing will change until S Korea decides to be an independent country instead of a low vassal. Watching a foreign country negotiate peace in your own civil war without being at the table must be deeply humiliating to at least some S Koreans surely?
As for the sanctions, if the Koreas re-united as ROK and the DPRK disappeared as an entity, I assume the UN sanctions on extinct entity would be void.
Psychohistorian @ 67:Uncle $cam , Feb 28, 2019 11:12:52 PM | linkIt's significant that the current PM of Japan is a grandson of a politician with a very dark past, and moreover idolises his grandfather and believes the policies he followed were right.
"Formed in childhood, roots of Abe's conservatism go deep"
https://www.japantimes.co.jp/news/2012/12/26/national/formed-in-childhood-roots-of-abes-conservatism-go-deep/#.XHirsVwzaUkYou and I live in the year 2019 but the issue is whether Shinzo Abe does.
For that reason South Korea is unlikely to demilitarise and get rid of its US bases unless Japan commits to doing the same.
The two countries also continue to dispute the ownership of a set of islands called the Liancourt islands in the Sea of Japan, midway between the two nations.
https://twitter.com/DrKevinGray/status/1101089899430793221?link_id=3&can_id=6b614a325626aa55ec3e7563bb5103b1&source=email-why-did-hanoi-summit-really-fail-interviews-available&email_referrer=email_502522&email_subject=why-did-hanoi-summit-really-fail-interviews-availablePft , Feb 28, 2019 11:14:31 PM | linkFormer SK unification minister Chong Se-hyun suggests that summit was derailed by last minute attendance of Bolton, who added demands for NK to also report chemical/biological weapons, in response to which NKs increased their demand for sanctions relief
South Korea is a puppet government of the US. Its constitution was written by the US and its early leaders were those who worked with the Japanese during the occupation. Anyone against the government and continued occupation by foreign forces was labelled Commmunist and shot. Up until the late 80's South Korea was under martial lawkarlof1 , Mar 1, 2019 12:12:52 AM | linkWhile much of the population is aware of this being humiliated by foreign powers has been a way of life for over a century. Reunification is a pipe dream unless the North is under the Empires control and the US will not pull out even then because its conveniently located at Russia and Chinas borders
I can imagine Trump talking to Kim and asking him how he would like to live like him and the global elite. It worked with Gorbachev and Deng. Just need to adopt the neoliberal religion and loot the resources of your own people (bottom 95%) for eventual handover to the Empire (privatization or sending cash back to buy Treasuries and other investments).
My guess is Kim and NK elite live pretty well already, but who knows. In any event he knows he cant trust them.
Yeah, Right @70--PavewayIV , Mar 1, 2019 1:53:34 AM | linkGuess I need to find a way to create more time to do stuff as I know I'm skimming way too much.
Schmoe@55 -V , Mar 1, 2019 3:55:42 AM | link[sigh...] Yes, you're right. I suppose I got kind of got carried away there. But I can't believe the polls '50% approval rating' for the Syrian retaliatory strike, at least in my little world.
Most people I encounter through the day, especially college kids and millennial debt slaves, don't care about Syria or Israel and never will. Zero expectations of their government and can't understand why some old people are concerned about distant wars.
They feel absolutely no responsibility for the actions of the US government any more than they feel responsible for the actions of their next door neighbors. Society is slowly devolving itself in toad freak show!
Deschutes | Mar 1, 2019 2:55:06 AM | 81uncle tungsten , Mar 1, 2019 4:16:58 AM | linkI posted this over at TAE. It might resonate with some few. Any one who has held on to their sanity, surely sees the fantastical reality created by twisted people and their twisted ideals. If that accurate vision is the context from which the U.S. is framed; then its true health is obvious.
A sick society ruled by equally sick fascisti
Record numbers of U.S. citizens are leaving for distant places they view as an improvement. If in fact they find respite; it will likely not last, until and unless the U.S. is brought to ground.
Chas # 58Kiza , Mar 1, 2019 5:19:42 AM | linkMay I suggest there is a small matter of war reparations owed by the USA that needs immediate resolution well prior to any yak yak about denuclear strategies. Ms Susan Rice's piece also blithely ignores that question. And so do all the yankees as they are fully liable for an unwarranted assault on Korea - both north and south - and reparations are immediately owed to the north.
Pay up yankees.
Will someone tell that to John Bolt-on. I would love see his mustache quiver.
One of these days I am going to write a piece on what the World would look like one month after the Second US Civil War starts.Steve , Mar 1, 2019 6:03:28 AM | linkAny nation which still trust any promise coming from the USA and its European, Australian and Canadian poddles deserves to be colonized and destroyed.Yeah, Right , Mar 1, 2019 6:49:19 AM | link@77 Karlof1 "Guess I need to find a way to create more time to do stuff as I know I'm skimming way too much."BM , Mar 1, 2019 7:13:57 AM | linkIt's not difficult to dig out the source text, and most international treaties relating to Int'l Humanitarian Law are not exactly dense reads.
The Kellogg-Briand Pact is a mere three articles long, with the first two being single sentences. The Mutual Defense Treaty between the USA and South Korea consists of only six articles.
The NATO Charter is but fourteen articles long. The Hague Regulations are a comparatively hefty fifty-six articles, but even the UN Charter - an outlier if ever there was one - contains only 111 Articles.
The Geneva Conventions are much longer but, boy, do the Swiss like to talk.
But none are like slogging through some Hemingway or Melville. Simple prose, as unambiguous as possible while still satisfying all the negotiators.
In fact you can find all the treaties in one place: http://avalon.law.yale.edu/default.asp
A one-stop-shop for all things relating to treaties, highly recommended.
I've just read two articles that in one fell swoop can explain a large part of Trump's behaviour, together with policies to eliminate nuclear arms control, first strike policies, apocalyptic policies towards Iran and North Korea, policies towards Israel, policies aimed at blowing up the Middle East, willingness and eagerness to precipitate destruction and chaos on a global scale, precipitate policies towards Russia and China, support for Islamic jihadism, anti-environmentalism, and climate denial:BM , Mar 1, 2019 7:28:23 AM | link
- The Right May Finally Get Its War on Iran
- Trump's foreign policy looks a lot like Rapture Christians' plan to welcome the apocalypse
The key are the so-called "Rapture Christians" nuts - of whom there are 12 in Trump's cabinet [out of how many?]. I've never looked into this obscure sect of insane nutcases before, but people urgently need to understand this phenomenon - they are an obscure sect, but they hold the keys to political power in the US, and have determined the key political events of the last several decades!
These nutters are a million times more dangerous than Islamic jihadists - they have no fear of all-out nuclear war, global destruction, climate change, environmental devastation or all the things that wise people with foresight advise against - on the contrary they are eager to bring all these things on as soon as possible, because they associate these things with the return of Jesus, and ascent to heaven for all the sect's believers.
A key fact in understanding this phenomenon is that they deny evolution, and a scientific basis for reality in its entirety, and therefore are completely closed to rational argument.
Quote from the second article: 'In an April 2 Bible study, Drollinger focused on the "huge and dire error" of "radical environmentalism". He argues that humans are incapable of destroying the earth on their own, because it is up to God to "continually renew the face of the earth until He forms a new heaven and a new earth in the end times."'
They support Trump because they believe he is the "tool of God".
For that reason South Korea is unlikely to demilitarise and get rid of its US bases unless Japan commits to doing the same.Mig-21-Block 70-2022 , Mar 1, 2019 7:34:39 AM | link
Posted by: Jen | Feb 28, 2019 10:54:54 PM | 74That seems like a strange argument to me. The US is not in Korea to protect Korea from Japan, nor are they in Japan either to protect Japan from Korea nor to protect Korea from Japan. In both cases the true target is China.
If the two Korea's unite it will necessarily be under the military protection of Russia and China - there is no other possibility, because they need protection from the US. Both Koreas are obviously much safer under Russian and Chinese protection than under US "protection" - the latter being no more than mafia style "protection".
In this case Japan would clearly oppose such an arrangement - in allignment with the US - therefore the last thing [imperialist] Japan would want would be the pull-out of the US (what ordinary Japanese people might want is another matter - unfortunately they have no say).
N.K. should just ask Russia to buy 1000 warehoused MIGs 21 refurbished for year 2023 and thats it!b real , Mar 1, 2019 7:47:45 AM | link
Kim should go for a No deal with the US.
Mig 21s just shot down brand new f-16s over in India.
Whole world world including Chinese airmen are laughing.
Well maybe except the starving Greeks threw 1 bill. eu out of the window for a new deal with Trumps Lokheed for f-16 modernizations.manufactured controversy to get the top of the news cycle and take focus off the cohen testimony so it dies quicklyrattlemullet , Mar 1, 2019 8:05:02 AM | linkThe trio of Trump, Pompeo and Bolton, quite frankly spells failure. The leader has zero capacity to learn and understand the motivation behind North Korea and their very exacting understanding of the English language. Every single word written has a clear and precise meaning tied into complete sentences. The fact that is written on paper and executed by both parties memorizes the document. Trump literally has not read the first agreement as executed. To place any faith in this trio of clowns to negotiate with the North Koreas is laughable. The basic fact is that North Koreans will never trust the US as we literally tried to bomb all their cities out of existence during the Korean intervention. Trump's trio does not understand the lasting impact that those actions burned into North Korean souls. Trump is completely out his league on the world stage he has made a fool of the US.arby , Mar 1, 2019 8:22:57 AM | linkb real @ 90--Scotch Bingeington , Mar 1, 2019 9:42:07 AM | linkThat was my thoughts as well. The real reason Trump handlers sent him to Viet Nam was to not be around for a damning testimony.
Tom Luongo claims that Bolton's spoke in Trump's wheel was to add chemical & biological weapons to US demands ( Link ). There, just like that. Pretty clever actually. Bolton may be the king of scumbags, but he sure is resourceful. The picture they have in the article of Bolton watching over Trump is scary and probably very telling.BM , Mar 1, 2019 10:20:07 AM | link"Trudeau was detonated today by his former Attorney General, Jody Wilson-Raybould, Canada's first Aboriginal A-G. She just testified in Parliament, in meticulous detail, how Trudeau and his staff tried to get her to drop criminal charges against a corrupt company that he liked."frances , Mar 1, 2019 12:19:47 PM | link
Posted by: karlof1 | Feb 28, 2019 1:15:41 PM | 36I've just finished reading the article on the testimony in the National Post, linked in Karlof1's link:
Read the full text of Jody Wilson-Raybould's statement to the House of Commons justice committee
(That's the title of the article; actually it is not the full text it is important extracts, but generous extracts).Wow! Everybody should read this! This lady is someone who deserves a lot of respect! This text is fascinating in how it details the arm-twisting that goes on in power - nothing that would surprise us that it happens, but here it is described in black and white by a former government witness - including even such titbits as:
"if Jody is nervous, we would of course line up all kinds of people to write OpEds saying that what she is doing is proper."Hey, James, you have some good Ministers over there in Canada, despite the more famous ones. Erm, well, one. Erm, well, had.
I am interested in some of the things she is declining to speak about (due to confidentiality of counsel issues), and am wondering if that might include the Huawei CFO issues, for which she was in a pertinent position. Any connections to the dates 11th February, and 19th February? (Actually I was travelling at that time so was out of the loop). Then there is the meeting with the PM on 17th September, requested 2 weeks earlier, which seems to have been intended primarily about something other than the SNC affair. The Huawei CFO was arrested in early December, I think, so that should be something else.
reply to Mig-21-Block 70-2022 89frances , Mar 1, 2019 12:25:54 PM | link"...Mig 21s just shot down brand new f-16s over in India.Whole world world including Chinese airmen are laughing.Well maybe except the starving Greeks threw 1 bill. eu out of the window for a new deal with Trumps Lokheed for f-16 modernizations."
Maybe laughing but maybe not, this fellow seems to feel they are evenly matched depending on their respective upgrades and concludes by saying it comes down to pilot expertise. BTW he considers Pak as having superior pilots.
reply to Scotch Bingeington 93karlof1 , Mar 1, 2019 2:14:11 PM | link
"....The picture they have in the article of Bolton watching over Trump is scary and probably very telling."Yes, I am inclined to think Bolton was foisted upon him. I do think he chose Pompeo though.
Another very telling photo is that of Trump at Bush Sr.'s funeral, in the row behind him was Chaney, the look on Chaney's face as he stared at Trump's back was very interesting to me, he looked almost afraid.
President Moon's confidence remains strong despite summit outcome. He tweeted this [machine translation] earlier today:james , Mar 1, 2019 3:49:21 PM | link"Independence of spirit and national integration based on the 'faith based system'considerably.
Please gather all the power of the people.
Peace on the Korean peninsula will drive new economic growth across the North and South, encompassing Northeast Asia, ASEAN and Eurasia."Today marks then 100th anniversary of the Declaration of Korean Independence, and Moon makes clear in his speech that there was and is only one Korea and one Korean people:
"One hundred years ago today, there was no South and North Korea.
"From Seoul and Pyeongyang to Jinnampo, Anju, Seoncheon, Uiju and Wonsan, loud chants of [the masses] erupted on the same day, and these calls for independence spread like a wildfire to every corner of the country.
"For two months from March 1, [mass] protests took place in 211 out of the total 220 cities and counties across the country regardless of the region – whether they belonged to what is now a part of South or North Korea."
Gotta love Moon's optimism in his closing remarks:
"The history of the past 100 years proves that we can achieve changes and innovation if we do not lose hope no matter how difficult our present reality is.
"Over the next 100 years, the growth of the people will directly lead to the growth of the nation. When unity is achieved from within by moving beyond ideological confrontations, and when peace and prosperity are accomplished from outside, genuine independence will be completed."
I'd be very interested in discovering what Kim did today. Hopefully, he, too, gave an address similar to Moon's.
@94 BM - maybe Jody Wilson-Raybould can run for the prime ministers job if she can get on the top of the heap of the liberal party.. chances of this are slim!
|
|
|
Mar 15, 2019 | www.moonofalabama.org
March 15, 2019 CIA Blames Its Proxy For Its Raid On North Korea's Embassy In Spain james , Mar 15, 2019 7:15:08 PM | link
The CIA is the main suspect in the military style raid on the North Korean embassy in Madrid. It now launched a somewhat hapless effort to deflect from it. The original Spanish report said :
At least two of the 10 assailants who broke into the embassy and interrogated diplomatic staff have been identified and have connections to the US intelligence agency. The CIA has denied any involvement but government sources say their response was "unconvincing."That the CIA is the main suspect in the assault was reported on Wednesday in the Spanish mainstream paper El Pais . The paper made the extra effort to publish an abbreviated English language version . It was widely picked up by other international outlets . Some of the assailants were Asian and spoke Korean language. They were probably from the South Korean National Intelligence Service (NIS), a subsidiary of the CIA know for its extremely hawkish politics. It often rigged elections in South Korea in support of hawkish conservatives candidates.
Attacking a foreign embassy in a third country is far out of bounce of international law and diplomatic decency. After the El Pais report something had to be done to direct the attention away from the CIA and to find some other culprit.
A story was thought up and pushed to the favorite CIA outlet, the Washington Post . It wasn't the CIA which did it, writes the Post's national security reporter, it was a CIA controlled 'regime change' organization.
A shadowy group trying to overthrow Kim Jong Un raided a North Korean embassy in broad daylight
In broad daylight, masked assailants infiltrated North Korea's embassy in Madrid, restrained the staff with rope, stole computers and mobile phones, and fled the scene in two luxury vehicles.The group behind the late February operation is known as Cheollima Civil Defense , a secretive dissident organization committed to overthrowing the Kim dynasty, people familiar with the planning and execution of the mission told The Washington Post.
...
People familiar with the incident say the group did not act in coordination with any governments. U.S. intelligence agencies would have been especially reluctant to do so given the sensitive timing and brazen nature of the mission. But the raid represents the most ambitious operation to date for an obscure organization that seeks to undermine the North Korean regime and encourage mass defections, they say.The CIA agents, led by torture queen Gina Haspel, are snowflakes who would never break the law or cause some international outrage. It must have been some independent group:
"This group is the first known resistance movement against North Korea, which makes its activities very newsworthy," said Sung-Yoon Lee, a North Korea expert at Tufts University.The identity of the assailants is a particularly sensitive topic given the delicate nature of Trump and Kim's relationship.
...
Any hint of U.S. involvement in an assault on a diplomatic compound could have derailed the talks , a prospect the CIA would likely be mindful of.Derailing the talks was and is exactly what Trump's National Security Advisor John Bolton wanted to do. We know that because the Post reported it on February 20, two days before the raid on the embassy and seven days before the Trump-Kim summit in Hanoi:
Last month, in a lengthy speech at Stanford University, [Trump's special envoy Stephen E.] Biegun set out his vision for North Korea to dismantle its plutonium and uranium enrichment facilities in exchange for "corresponding measures" by the United States.Hawks such as Bolton have fiercely opposed this "step-by-step" process in favor of maintaining maximum pressure through economic sanctions that would, in theory , force a better deal by eroding North Korea's resolve.
Tasking the CIA to raid a North Korean embassy to spoil the talks is exactly a thing John Bolton would do. The Post's shameful attempt to make believe otherwise is laughable :
"Infiltrating a North Korean embassy days before the nuclear summit would throw that all into jeopardy," said Sue Mi Terry, a former Korea analyst at the CIA . "This is not something the CIA would undertake."The agency declined to comment.
We can of course fully believe the 'former' CIA analyst's assertion that the CIA never do such a thing. Aside from Bolton's urge to sabotage the negotiations it would have had no motive. Except, of course, it would have many:
Experts say the computers and phones seized in the raid amount to a treasure trove of information that foreign intelligence agencies are likely to seek out from the group.In 2017 Spain asked the North Korean ambassador Kim Hyok Chol to leave. He is now the leader of the negotiations with the United States. To know everything about him is important. He may even be susceptible to blackmail:
The assailants also possess a video recording they took during the raid, which they could release anytime, said one person who like others spoke on the condition of anonymity to discuss a sensitive and illegal operation.The Spanish language version of the El Pais report had a side box that might explain the possible content of a video (machine translated):
One of the darkest aspects of the assault on the North Korean Embassy in Madrid is the interrogation to which the head of the command, who called himself The Entrepreneur, subjected the charge of business, leading the diplomatic delegation since the ambassador was expelled. The head of the commando separated the diplomat from the rest of the hostages and locked himself alone with him. It is not known what he intended, but the current head of the Pyongyang delegation in Madrid probably knows a lot about Kim Hyok Chol, head of the North Korean delegation in the nuclear negotiations before the US, with whom he coincided when the latter was ambassador in Madrid, between 2014 and 2017.Mentioning a video recording taken during the raid is supposed to sow 'fear and doubt' in the North Korean negotiator.
The new Washington Post /CIA story goes on to describe the 'regime change' organization that is supposed to divert from the direct CIA involvement in the raid:
The Cheollima group, which also goes by the name Free Joseon, came to prominence in 2017 after it successfully evacuated the nephew of Kim Jong Un from Macau when potential threats to his life surfaced. The nephew was the son of Kim Jong Nam, the North Korean leader's exiled half brother who was assassinated in a nerve-gas attack in a Malaysian airport in 2017....
For safety reasons, the leader of the group does not disclose his name, and his identity is known only to a small group of people.
Cheollima is the name of a mythical horse in Chinese and Korean folklore. The Joseon dynasty ruled Korea from 1392 to 1897. It went down when Japan tried to gain control of the country which it achieved a few years later.
Kim Jong Nam was killed on February 13, 2017. In a redacted video his son Kim Han-sol thanks the people who picked him up. (They might want to use him as a future replacement for Kim Jong-un.) The video was recorded on February 15 2017 ("my father was killed two days ago"). It was published on March 7 2017 on a Cheollima channel on Youtube created on March 4 2017. The Cheollima website domain the group uses was anonymously registered in March 2017. It was updated on November 29 2918 shortly after the South Korean NIS received new orders from its headquarter in Washington DC.
Cheollima/Free Joseon also seeks defectors from North Korea. On February 28 2019 (not "in March" as the Post claims), the very same day the Trump-Kim summit in Hanoi failed , Cheollima published a manifest that clearly aims at 'regime change' in North Korea:
WE DECLARE ON THIS DAY the establishment of Free Joseon, a provisional government preparing the foundations for a future nation built upon respect for principles of human rights and humanitarianism, holding sacred a manifest dignity for every woman, man, and child.We declare this entity the sole legitimate representative of the Korean people of the north.
The U.S. driven 'regime change' attempt in Venezuela also has a figure that claims to be the "sole legitimate representative" while having zero power in that country.
The English version of the manifest reads like it was written by someone who is a native English speaker or at least studied English literature:
Joseon must and shall be free. Arise! Arise, ye who refuse to be slaves!We reject the chains of our historic unrequited grief, declare henceforth a new era in our history, and prepare the way for a New Joseon. We therefore proclaim the birth of our revolution and our intentions towards building a more just and equal society, as truest expressions of the shared affections of our people.
A report on the manifest launch in the British Sun remarks :
The Cheollima Civil Defense (CCD) organisation has declared itself as a shadow government which is working to overthrow the regime.
...
Not a lot is known about the CCD but some people believe it is linked to South Korea's spy agency.The White Helmets, the MI-6 organization for 'regime change' in Syria, has the website domain "www.syriacivildefense.org". Cheollima's website domain is "www.cheollimacivildefense.org". The logos of the two organization are also somewhat similar.
Is there a corporate design/marketing company specialized in spy service cutouts for 'regime change'?
The 'former' CIA analyst in the Post piece 'predicts' that there will be more 'embassy raid' operations:
"In its messaging, the group said they have formed a provisional government to replace the regime in Pyongyang," said Terry, who is a scholar at the Center for Strategic and International Studies in Washington. "They have now shown the seriousness of their intent and some capabilities to carry out operations. We will see in the coming months the extent of their capabilities."While the CIA makes a hapless attempt to cover its traces in Madrid, North Korea continues to follow its game plan for the next round of negotiations. It prepares the public for a U.S. failure :
North Korean leader Kim Jong Un will soon decide whether to continue diplomatic talks and maintain his moratorium on missile launches and nuclear tests, a senior North Korean official said Friday, adding that the U.S. threw away a golden opportunity at the recent summit between their leaders.
...
She said Pyongyang now has no intention of compromising or continuing talks unless the United States takes measures that are commensurate to the changes it has taken -- such as the 15-month moratorium on launches and tests -- and changes its "political calculation."The North Korean statement blames Bolton and Secretary of State Pompeo for the failure of the negotiations while it empathizes a special relation between Kim and Trump.
The signaled satellite launch by North Korea will proceed. It will push the Trump administration back to the starting point of its efforts to 'denuclearize' North Korea.
The difference now is that North Korea has earned good will in China and Russia. It showed its willingness to negotiate and stuck to its commitments made in the Joint Declaration in Singapore while the U.S. obviously refused to fulfill its parts. China and Russia already gave North Korea some unofficial 'sanction relief'. They are unlike to again support the failed 'maximum pressure' approach the Trump administrations once set out with.
The hapless CIA nonsense will not change those facts.
Posted by b on March 15, 2019 at 06:50 PM | Permalink
Comments thanks for this b.. fascinating.. reality is stranger then fiction.. trust the wapo prints mostly fiction to run to the cias rescue..
yeah, i just can't imagine the cia doing anything bad... that would really be unlike them!! the logo designers are going to have to be more creative, but until such time as they are, we can count on such branding that appears to come out of the same graphic design outfit.. i wonder how the poodle spain proceeds from here??
Zachary Smith , Mar 15, 2019 7:24:22 PM | link
Sally Snyder , Mar 15, 2019 7:26:01 PM | linkTasking the CIA to raid a North Korean embassy to spoil the talks is exactly a thing John Bolton would do.So it was probably Bolton after all. If he had no authority to issue orders within the CIA, things would have been lots fuzzier with that "proxy". Especially if somebody was waving around shopping bags full of large bills. The other day at the xymphora site the blogger wrote this:More Bolton hyper-aggression on multiple fronts. Bolton out of control is the best example of the complete deterioration of Trump. Remember it was Sheldon who forced Trump to appoint him, and the equally incompetent Abrams. One of the problems with the Deep State animosity towards Trump is that the 'adults' who would normally move in to fix this have relatively little influence over Trump, who is now flailing away under the influence of shekels and the most obvious blackmail I've ever seen.Influence! But only today did I read a comment which caused me to add 2 + 2 to get 4.It has to be Mossad-Epstein nasty pedophilia videos.
Maybe Trump will fire Bolton and Abrams. That's not the outcome I expect if the apartheid Jewish state holds videos demonstrating behavior both sinful and criminal.
Here is an article that looks at what one former U.S. president had to say about trusting his own intelligence network:Yonatan , Mar 15, 2019 7:28:04 PM | linkhttps://viableopposition.blogspot.com/2019/02/americas-intelligence-community-can.html
Given the current world geopolitical situation and the American intelligence network's close involvement in the Russian meddling narrative, it's looking this former president's assessment was prescient.
"Is there a corporate design/marketing company specialized in spy service cutouts for 'regime change'?" (presumably rhetorical)steve , Mar 15, 2019 7:31:50 PM | linkhttps://alexandrabader.files.wordpress.com/2017/01/otporinterna.jpg
It was not me defence does not work in real life. In the master of reality distortion field it is accepted effective SOP. My SITRAP tells me that this operating system is due to crash.John , Mar 15, 2019 7:35:53 PM | linkSome more context on "Cheollima," in Korean mythology the Cheollima arrives to sanctify the founder of a new dynasty, thus quite literally a reference to "regime change." Also, Joseon is both a reference to the last dynasty and a reference to the official name of North Korea, which prefers "Joseon" to South Korea's "Han." Both terms are frequently used in Juche ideology, meaning they've worked out a communications strategy for this outfit that fits with the ruling ideology of the Communist Party.robjira , Mar 15, 2019 8:11:15 PM | link"We will see in the coming months the extent of their capabilities."DontBelieveEitherPropaganda , Mar 15, 2019 8:17:49 PM | link
Followed by...
"While the CIA makes a hapless attempt to cover its traces in Madrid..."
My god, are these fkrs even trying to be subtle anymore, or are they (as the Saker has asserted) just that stupid? They sure as sheise aren't doing very well at the "cover its traces" part...
I'd also like to add that despite all the cracks about "little rocket man," "fat boy," pie, and cakes, etc., Kim Jong Un is proving to be just about as sharp as Kim Il Sung (I hear Kim's sister, Kim Yo Jong is also very bright).
Excellent report; many thanks once again, b.@B: Thanks for connecting the dots. Thats the great strength of MoA IMHO, that you put all details together, revealing the whole picture. Those details, that even supposed first class journalists dont (want to) remember. Thus enabling a look on the deeper truths.dltravers , Mar 15, 2019 8:20:57 PM | link@John: Thanks for the background info!
Trump IS being blackmailed. Not by Russia, but by Sheldon Adelson and Co. With the neocons in the admin being the price DJT and we all now pay.
That this can not end well, no matter if with Trump or Clinton or whoever, should be clear by now. The USA and us their vassals are on a path on which there are no happy endings i fear. Only crash and burn, and the near hope to rebuild something liveable out of the ruins. Dystopia.Do not forget the Democrats hand in this. They want Trump to fail. They held the Cohen hearings while Trump was negotiating with Kim in Vietnam. Clearly that was intended to show that Trump is weak and not in control. Joined together with the embassy raid it shows the NK leadership that any promises made are not likely to be kept by the next administration.Piotr Berman , Mar 15, 2019 8:30:00 PM | linkTrump needs to change tack by backing off slightly on his demands and getting the UN more involved bypassing his national security establishment.
I cannot recall there ever being a regime change organization directed at North Korea.All of this is obvious, the war party is using its resources to push North Korea away from the table. In my opinion the South is way to smart to swallow that BS. The South does have its war hawks as well but it appears that the desire for reunification is quite strong.
The Tick 201 The Little Wooden Boy, part 2, dialog around 5:50 of the You Tube video:David , Mar 15, 2019 8:42:15 PM | linkWonder Woman: "So it is true! The Swiss mean to take over the City!"
Anonymous person with gray mustache, a leader of a masked group, all armed in huge and very special Swiss Army Knives: "No, no, no, no! Silly American woman, we are certainly Swiss, but our actions IN NO WAY represent the policies of the Swiss government. Actually, we are more like, err, criminals."
Wonder Woman: "Yea, this is what they all say."
Another possibility not mentioned is the possibility of a false flag operation carried out by the NOKO's themselves (or some other entity).Jackrabbit , Mar 15, 2019 8:46:07 PM | link1) AFAIK Bolton can't order the CIA to do anything.Jen , Mar 15, 2019 9:12:00 PM | link2) If Bolton has any 'pull' it's because he is a neocon and advances their agenda (but he can't order CIA to do anything).
3) Gina Haspel is Brennan's gal at CIA. Trump appointed her as well as others connected to his (supposed) enemies like:
- VP Pence, long-time friend of John McCain;4) In foreign policy, Trump plays the good cop to the Deep State's bad cop.Bolton, who Trump had praised long before the election;
William Barr, who is close to Robert Mueller;
5) We've seen apologists give numerous excuses for Trump:
- he's a foreign policy neophyte, getting played by the neocons!The same sort of excuses were made for Obama, USA's previous faux populist President.- he's playing 11-dimensional chess!
- Bolton!
When people tire of the excuses, maybe they will start to see how a) faux populism is a political model that serves the establishment and b) revisit the 2016 Presidential election and connect the memory-holed dots:
- the Deep State wanted a nationalist President to counter the challenge from Russia-China ( Kissinger alluded to MAGA in his WSJ Op-Ed in August 2014) ;- Trump was the ONLY populist running on the Republican side (out of 19 candidates!) ;
- Trump was close to the Clintons for years (even their daughters are close) ;
- Felix Sater worked for Trump for over a decade while an informant for Robert Mueller's FBI (Sater's family had Russian mob connections) ;
- Virtually all of the dubious Russian oligarch ties attributed to Trump are Jewish and are likely (if not known to be) more connected to Israel than Russia;
- Sanders was a sheepdog (this 25-year friend of Hillary's was not a real candidate) ;
- Hillary deliberately alienated key voter groups (Sanders progressives, BLM blacks, 'delorable' whites) ;
- CIA/MI6 'meddled' in the election and arranged to trap Wikileaks and Flynn and agents of Russia/Turkey.
6) USA/Trump/neocons were never interested in Korean peace. The first Summit was a PR event to further the Trump psyop..
Welcome to the rabbit hole.Jackrabbit @ 12 beat me in saying that John Bolton has no authority over the CIA to tell them to do anything but he's head of the NSA and that organisation could have been tasked with organising the raid using mercenaries.Jackrabbit , Mar 15, 2019 9:40:15 PM | linkJenJackrabbit , Mar 15, 2019 9:45:44 PM | linkJohn Bolton is National Security Advisor (NSA), and as the name implies, it is an ADVISORY position (with no formal command authority):
The National Security Advisor participates in meetings of the National Security Council (NSC) and ... is supported by NSC staff who produce research and briefings ...The influence and role of the National Security Advisor varies from administration to administration and depends not only on the qualities of the person appointed to the position, but also on the style and management philosophy of the incumbent President....
National Security Agency (NSA) is headed by Gen. Paul M. Nakasone:
... (NSA) is a national-level intelligence agency of the United States Department of Defense, under the authority of the Director of National Intelligence [DNI] . The NSA is responsible for global monitoring, collection, and processing of information and data for foreign and domestic intelligence and counterintelligence purposes ...Jenbevin , Mar 15, 2019 9:53:49 PM | linkI'm glad you reiterated the point (that Bolton has no such authority). It's an important one.
I rarely beat you at making important points, and even rarer do I make them as well as you do!
No Bolton can't order the CIA to do anything. But he can indicate to the Korean Intelligence Service (Formerly known as the Korean CIA) that an attack on the Embassy would be a good thing to do.Sasha , Mar 15, 2019 9:59:37 PM | link
There are rogue players here, one is the ultra right Korean deep state. Another is Japan. Both are committed to keeping US troops in Korea and to continuing to treat the North as an enemy.
Then there is the influence, in both Korea and Japan, of the Pentagon or elements within it equally committed to maintaining the status quo: permanent war with the North, permanent control over South Korea's forces, butting up to China's border, and the continued hostility between Japan and China.
One thing we do know is that the South Korean government will not have approved of this raid.@Posted by: Jackrabbit | Mar 15, 2019 8:46:07 PM | 12Jackrabbit , Mar 15, 2019 10:20:47 PM | linkAgree in that Trump is not innocent at all, as clearly states Miles Copeland in an article linked by P. Armstrong in his last Russian SitRep ....
Ordinarily, when you get an order from headquarters you never obey it the first time because you're not sure they mean it. It might be some guy telling you to do something to get himself off the hook, being on record as having ordered it. So you always wait until the second time. But if there's a White House code word, you'd better take it seriously. The message from the White House said he was to assassinate Lumumba(...)(...)my complaint has been that the CIA isn't overthrowing enough anti-American governments or assassinating enough anti-American leaders, but I guess I'm getting old. What's keeping the agency inactive is Congress and disinformed public opinion(...
Especially interesting the part dedicated to poisonoing, Skripal case comes to mind, taking into account the coordianted effort in expelling diplomats and the US expelling more than anybody, even than UK...
Trump approves all this outrage, it has his seal all the way...
bevin:karlof1 , Mar 15, 2019 10:26:10 PM | linkBut he can indicate to the Korean Intelligence Service ...Any NSA that stepped out of bounds like that with out authorization would be sacked.The point stands: Trump is not being undermined or blind-sided by Bolton, Trump approves of what Bolton does and has done.
In fact, Trump has admired Bolton for a long time. Two and a half years before appointing Bolton as NSA, Trump mentioned Bolton as someone that is his "go to" person for military/foreign affairs :
CHUCK TODD:Who do you talk to for military advice right now? ... is there a go-to for you?
DONALD TRUMP:
Yeah, probably there are two or three. I mean, I like Bolton. I think he's, you know, a tough cookie, knows what he's talking about . Jacobs is a good guy--
CHUCK TODD:
Do you mean Ambassador John Bolton--
DONALD TRUMP:
Yes. I think he's terrific --
CHUCK TODD:
You mean Colonel Jack Jacobs?
DONALD TRUMP:
Colonel Jack Jacobs is a good guy. And I see him on occasion.
With this quite obvious violation of International Law on top of the seemingly infinite previous violations, Pompeo and Bolton have tag teamed to tell the ICJ they'll sanction anyone that comes after any Outlaw US Empire individual, the threat itself likely being against the UN Charter and thus unlawful. I really don't have much further comment on this incident other than to reiterate that the United States of America should no longer be called that as it now proven beyond all doubt to be the Outlaw US Empire--internationally, the USA's Federal government's an Outlaw and must be treated as such. It's time to flip GW Bush's ultimatum on its head and tell every nation on the planet that if you're with the Outlaw US Empire then you're also an Outlaw, part of its Evil designs and abettor of its crimes. The UK & Zionistan have already proven themselves to be the top accomplices, with France and Canada their juniors. It's long past time to form an international posse, and no nation can claim ignorance.mourning dove , Mar 15, 2019 10:38:43 PM | linkdamn b, you just tear it up, thank you so much!!
|
|
|
Mar 14, 2019 | www.theamericanconservative.com
The BBC reports on a very strange story from Spain about last month's attack on the North Korean embassy:
Spanish investigators are probing an alleged attack on the North Korean embassy in Madrid.
On 22 February, a group of 10 assailants reportedly broke into the building, tying up, beating and interrogating eight people inside.
The incident took place just days before a key summit between US President Donald Trump and North Korean leader Kim Jong-un.
And now there are reports US intelligence services were involved.
The alleged involvement of men with ties to the CIA was first reported in the Spanish daily El Pais . According to El Pais ' sources, the men that attacked the embassy may have been looking for information on North Korean diplomat Kim Hyok-chol, who had served as North Korea's ambassador to Spain until he was expelled in 2017. Kim has also been one of the leading officials involved in the negotiations with the U.S. over the last year.
Whatever the reason for it, invading another state's embassy and assaulting the personnel there obviously constitute gross violations of the conventions governing protections for diplomatic facilities. Judging from these reports, the attack was extraordinarily brazen and risky. It is doubtful that any information obtained from the devices that the assailants stole could have been worth the risk of attacking an embassy and beating up embassy staffers, but someone must have thought it was. If anyone connected with the U.S. government was involved, both Spain and North Korea will be understandably outraged. The intelligence committees in Congress should look into this matter to determine what role, if any, the U.S. government had in this incident.
Sid Finster March 14, 2019 at 12:41 pm
Note that El Pais is the Spanish equivalent of "solidly MSM", not the National Enquirer or Antisemitic Conspiracy Theorist Weekly Roundup.
|
|
|
Sep 27, 2018 | www.theamericanconservative.com
Let Americans Visit North Korea Now Kim has expressed his desire for contact with Americans. The Trump administration should give it to him.
North Korea is changing. That doesn't mean Kim Jong-un is mimicking Mikhail Gorbachev or even Deng Xiaoping, at least not yet. But it does increasingly appear that Kim intends to chart a more moderate course for his nation -- that is, make it less threatening, though not more democratic.
The U.S. should help Kim pull his country back from seven decades of confrontation. Kim's apparent reasonableness may turn out to be fake, but it is in Washington's interest to create positive incentives for the North. If President Donald Trump can do it right -- imagine a White House signing ceremony for a peace treaty with Kim, China's Xi Jinping, and South Korea's Moon Jae-in -- a Nobel Peace Prize might just be within reach.
Of course, good policy is critical. The supreme leader is a ruthless survivor who appears to have eliminated all serious domestic rivals. He is unlikely to turn over his nuclear weapons up front, sacrificing his leverage in the hope that Washington, where the president's national security advisor has counseled war, will join him in a Kumbaya songfest. And even if he does make other worthwhile concessions that reduce the risk of conflict in Northeast Asia, he may want to keep a few of his nukes.
But more diplomacy is necessary. Kim has expressed his desire for contact with Americans. The Trump administration should give it to him, starting with a repeal of the ban on travel to the Democratic People's Republic of Korea.
Even before the Kim-Trump summit, the supreme leader was quoted by South Koreans as saying: "If we meet often and build trust with the United States, and if an end to the war and nonaggression are promised, why would we live in difficulty with nuclear weapons?" Moreover, the short summit communique was structured to reflect this perspective: the two governments would first "establish new U.S.-DPRK relations" reflecting a mutual desire "for peace and prosperity." Next they would "build a lasting and stable peace regime." Then they would work towards denuclearization, however defined.
Which makes sense. Assume that Kim is serious about improved ties with the U.S. and improving his standing worldwide. Further assume that he is open to the idea of at least curbing or even eliminating his nuclear ambitions. Then he has to trust that Washington won't follow its policy in Afghanistan, Iraq, Libya, and Syria, and pursue regime change. The case of Libya is particularly chastening. At the time of its civil war, the DPRK blamed the old fool Moammar Gaddafi for giving up his missiles and nukes, which allowed him to be driven from power the moment the U.S. and Europe had an opportunity.
If anything could generate both shared interest and trust, it would be creating a relationship characterized not just by official meetings, but even more human contacts. If Americans and other foreigners are visiting the North, investing in and trading with North Korean entities, staging cultural and sporting events, and more, U.S. bombers are less likely to pay a hostile visit to Pyongyang. The starting point for such an approach should be to eliminate the dual travel ban imposed on the DPRK.
Right now, North Koreans cannot come to America and Americans cannot go to North Korea. The latter matters most, having ended a tourist trade involving around 1,000 U.S. visitors annually, and hindering everyone else from aid workers to journalists seeking to go to the North. Exemptions for visiting the North are available, but representatives of NGOs with whom I've spoken indicate that the approval process remains both bureaucratic and uncertain.
Patience and a Powerful Military are the Keys to Success with North Korea Accepting a Nuclear North Korea to Contain ChinaThe other half of the ban is almost entirely symbolic, intended mainly to demonstrate that the Muslim "travel ban" is, well, not a Muslim travel ban. Other than DPRK officials, the only North Koreans likely to hop on a plane to America are defectors. And they should be welcomed.
Secretary of State Mike Pompeo extended the prohibition another year on September 1, for no obvious reason other than the fact he could do so. It was an extraordinarily foolish step, given Kim's evident desire to improve trust. If the president believes that the supreme leader is prepared to disarm, he should listen to Kim's conditions and encourage expanded private ties.
Moreover, every American who visits the North helps pry open another door or window into the Hermit Kingdom. Indeed, that nickname no longer really applies to the DPRK. The country is more open, elites are enjoying greater prosperity, market incentives are present throughout the economy, threats of war have disappeared from the regime's lexicon, Kim has dramatically stepped out onto the international stage, and America no longer is the domestic demon du jour.
The excuse for last year's prohibition was the horrific plight of Virginia college student Otto Warmbier, who was in a comatose state when he was returned from North Korean custody -- he was taken off life support and died shortly after -- and conveniently forgotten this year when Trump shifted strategies. Warmbier did not deserve whatever happened to him, but the best evidence, attested to by his doctors and the coroner who examined his body, was that he was not beaten. In fact, it was in the North's interest to keep him alive. (There is still no official explanation for his brain damage, however.)
But Pyongyang does not just kidnap Americans. The 17 detained over the last couple decades all "did something," as the head of a U.S. NGO told me while I was visiting the North last year. That is, every one of them fell afoul of DPRK rules, several by evangelizing. Of course, what they did should not be crimes, but in that the North is not alone. Show up in, say, Pakistan and tell people what you think of the prophet Mohammed: the result might be deadly.
Anyway, given the North's strong push for respectability, no repeat is likely. Even more important than visitors are aid workers, journalists, businessmen and women, and others who can demonstrate the benefits of international contact. With Kim apparently interested in a more respectable foreign role, the Trump administration should enlist other Americans to set forth a vision of a well-connected and well-rewarded DPRK. Maybe Kim is not serious, but the U.S. should proceed on the assumption that he is. The cost of doing so is small while the benefits of success would be great.
And Washington should not stop there. Political relations should be made formal. It is time for diplomatic recognition. This step should be treated as communication rather than reward. Imagine the Cold War, including the Cuban Missile Crisis, without any reliable channels between the two governments. Or what if the U.S. and the People's Republic of China had been in contact as allied forces neared the Yalu in late 1950? Washington and Beijing might have found a modus vivendi to avoid war.
Washington could start small, with an offer of consular relations. The administration could insist that ensuing discussions be wide-ranging, including not only denuclearization but human rights. Such ties would also provide a channel for dealing with errant American tourists. In this way providing Pyongyang with something it values would enable the U.S. to push forward on topics uncomfortable for the Kim regime. Positive movement would justify fully normal ties. There is very little downside to treating the North like most other nations.
Establishing these kinds of relationships would lead naturally to the next step in the U.S.-DPRK summit statement: creating a peace regime. Most obvious would be a peace treaty to end what remains a formal state of war. One criticism is that such a pact would benefit the North, yet all parties should desire an end to hostilities. If Pyongyang is not serious, that will be obvious in its behavior. The fact that Washington and Moscow are formally at peace has not stopped the U.S. from conducting a quasi-containment/Cold War strategy against Russia.
The second complaint is that the South might respond to a peace treaty by evicting U.S. troops and ending the alliance. Yet Washington's defense commitment and troop deployment are means to an end, not ends themselves. The Republic of Korea enjoys overwhelming advantages compared to the DPRK and is capable of defending itself. America should take the lead in shifting defense responsibility to South Koreans. A peace treaty would help formalize such a step.
No one knows how the president's North Korean gambit will turn out. But he deserves credit for upending conventional wisdom and making peace at least seem possible. Much needs to be done. However, a good start would be for the administration to encourage contacts between peoples as well as governments. There is no guarantee of success. But having moved this far, the president should push the bilateral relationship to the next level.
Doug Bandow is a senior fellow at the Cato Institute. A former special assistant to President Ronald Reagan, he is author of Foreign Follies: America's New Global Empire.
|
|
|
Sep 07, 2018 | sputniknews.com
karlof1 | Sep 6, 2018 5:05:28 PM | 46
A RoK delegation returning from yesterday's meeting with DPRK officials and accompanying news reports say Kim is willing to sign a Declaration of Peace with Moon prior to the Outlaw US Empire removing its troops, while also taking note of other related developments:
"Chung Eui-yong, Moon's national security adviser, told reporters Thursday that Kim said he would be willing to sign the end-of-war declaration that Seoul and Pyongyang have been pursuing since the spring without concomitantly demanding the withdrawal of the 28,500 US troops stationed in South Korea or an end to the alliance between the US and South Korea."
Kim said the following and more:
"[W]e should value all these successes which the north and the south made hand in hand and keep advancing without deviation the north-south ties that have definitely entered the new orbit of peace, the orbit of reconciliation and cooperation."
Here's the DPRK's Rodong Sinmun 's statement on the event.
The next Moon/Kim Summit will be in Pyongyang September 18-20. Imagine the pressure on the Outlaw US Empire should Kim and Moon sign such a Declaration! I bet Trump would sign it just to pressure the warmongering Senate to vote for a Peace Treaty. Imagine the global uproar if they declined to ratify!
|
|
|
Jul 09, 2018 | www.globalresearch.ca
The accusation of "Unilateral Gangster Mindset" is not directed against President Trump. It refers specifically to U.S. Secretary of State Mike Ponpeo. The Statement confirms: "We still cherish our good faith in President Trump."
|
|
|
Jul 09, 2018 | turcopolier.typepad.com
I am not a never Trumper or even anti-Trump but IMO he is headed for a fall in North Korea. He and Pompeo seem to be overly convinced of the effect of the magnetism of their personalities. Trump's self image ill equips him to deal with the sheer stubbornness of the inhabitants of a political theocracy and Pompeo suffers people poorly whom he thinks inferior to him in intellect. He hides that well behind a surface masked in affability.
Have the Chinese sabotaged the deal? They probably have done that, seeking to maintain control of this dependency while teaching Trump a lesson. Two birds with one stone is always good.
Trump is accustomed to making deals that are executed in trenches when the initial attempt to hustle the "partner" into giving it all up fails. IMO he will fall back to that method of operation. What will be the effect on Mikey? It will be nothing good. Trump does not tolerate failure in his zillim "flunkies." They are all just tools to him, to be discarded if they do not meet his expectations.
He will be particularly incensed because the Europeans may be encouraged in their resistance. pl
http://www.atimes.com/pompeos-prospects-outlook-from-a-40-year-pyongyang-watcher/
Zillim? Don't get the reference but the tone is clear enough...Pat Lang Mod -> EEngineer , 5 hours agoI think the Singapore summit and everything leading up to it was mostly just good political theater. The game is still wide open and nothing of substance has happened yet. Turning up the heat just made reducing it back to normal seem like cooling off.
"Zillim?" Saudi term for the hirelings who stand around respectfully until the prince takes note of them.Jack , 6 hours agoSirim cotton -> Jack , 3 hours ago"Have the Chinese sabotaged the deal? They probably have done that,...."
In my lay opinion you are spot on. This is precisely what is happening I believe since North Korea is a Chinese pawn in the trade contest between Xi and Trump. The question is how much further the trade dispute escalates and where the North Korea deal card gets played.
I don't know if you are correct or not, but a very interesting and thought provoking take on the situation in terms of trade, thanks.
|
|
|
Jul 09, 2018 | www.g2mil.com
It was nice to see Trump's sudden return to sanity by holding talks with North Korea. I never understood why he accepted psychopaths like Bolton into his office. One could be cynical (or realistic) and realize that Zionists don't give a damn about Korea, Iran is their target. Trump can secure peacenik creds and free up forces to focus on Iran. Others note that South Korea's president walked crossed the DMZ to hug North Korea's leader, and probably told Trump that he can do this with or without him. The neocons realized they need to give peace a chance or get dropped from the game.
It's a puzzle, but so far it's good news, especially since it showed that never-Trumpers prefer world war rather than congratulating Trump for peace. We didn't give up anything. I've taken part in these war games. South Korean land and airspace is so crowded that war games there are unrealistic and stupid. Our military is better off practicing elsewhere. The Deep State is in shock and counterattacked. Trump's peace effort was widely denounced by their corporate media, and fake news has just appeared from "anonymous intelligence sources" that North Korea is suddenly increasing production of nuclear material.
Hopefully, Trump will push ahead and learn that he can pull thousands of non-combat GIs out of South Korea to save a couple billion dollars a year and actually improve our combat readiness in Korea! Don't fall for lies that keeping troops in Korea saves the USA money because of contributions from South Korea. It costs a lot more money to maintain equipment and soldiers on the other side of the world, and to pay GIs thousands of dollars a month to live off base. South Korea does not pay any of these costs. Its contributions are paying land rent and base construction payments to South Koreans and bogus contributions like forgiving import fees, income taxes, and on-base sales taxes for American GIs. G2mil published these detailed proposals to cut military fat in Korea over the past few years:
Pull Aircraft and Airmen Out of Osan - now in a kill zone
Close Chinhae Tomorrow - it commands nothing
Cut Army Fat in Korea - 8th Army and Daegu
Withdraw from DMZ Bases - as ordered
|
|
|
Jun 19, 2018 | www.unz.com
David William Pear January 17, 2018 2,800 Words 115 Comments Reply
Fearing that peace might break out with the two Koreas talking to each other, Washington instructed South Korean President Moon Jae-in to keep the message about anything but peace . It is not just Trump. A former top official for the Obama administration warned Moon that South Korea was not going to get anywhere with the North Koreans unless they have the "US behind them". Humiliating, that is like saying that Moon's "button" is not as big as Kim's. The metaphor is exactly how the Washington elite see South Korea: as Washington's obedient eunuch. The official went on to say, "If South Koreans are viewed as running off the leash, it will exacerbate tension within the alliance". Running off the leash! Now more humiliation, is South Korea a US poodle? Instead President Moon Jae-in is showing that he has teeth, and that South Koreans want their country back from US humiliating domination.
During the talks it was agreed for North Korea to participate in the Winter Olympics in February. The two countries will even march together under a common flag, and future talks between the two are planned to reduce tension. Trump continues to bluster, while the two Koreas have " engaged in the most substantive direct talks in years". Neocons such as John Bolton are outraged that North Korea has proven once again that it is willing to come to the negotiation table. Bolton says it is a dirty trick and that North Korea is "taking advantage of a weak South Korean government", adding more insulting humiliation. To Washington, South Korea talking peace is weak, running off the leash and going it alone without its US master. The North using the peace option is seen as a provocation and propaganda that Washington will not tolerate. In retaliation the US sent more nukes to Guam, and put the state of Hawaii on a full alert that a " ballistic missile was inbound ". The nukes outbound to Guam are real; the ones inbound to Hawaii were fake, just like the ability of the billion dollar THAADS to shoot them down. Too conveniently the Hawaii false alarm comes just as the US and its vassals are readying for what the US plots to be a show of solidarity and unity on killer sanctions against North Korea. The US wants its chorus to perform the tragedy of telling North Korea to obey or watch 500,000 of their children die. As Madeleine Albright said about Iraq's 500,000 dead children from US sanctions, " the price is worth it ". The US does not think the price of diplomacy is worth it though.
The US continues to block efforts at diplomacy, and express its contempt for South Korea's elected President Moon Jae-in. He was elected on a peace platform by the South Korean people. Moon's predecessor Park Geun-hye sang from the US hymnbook until she got caught with her hand in the cookie jar. In 2017 the South Korean people went to the street and demanded the granddaughter of former dictator Park Chung Hee be impeached, and now she is in prison. Peace is not anything that Washington's plutocrats want to hear, although the South Korean people like the sound of it, and elected Moon their president by a wide margin. The self-interests in Washington preferred the corrupt warmonger Park. She carried the US's tune with perfect pitch, even ( allegedly ) conspired to assassinate the North's Kim Jong-Un. The message of the humiliation from US apparatchiks is that if Moon does not change his tune the US will try to undermine South Korea's democracy with a regime change project might be in his future. The US habitually meddles in other's elections, and wants to keep tensions high on the Korean peninsula, keep the South Koreans in line, make North Korea a boogeyman, frighten the American people, station 30,000 US troops in South Korea with wartime operational control, buy more multi-billion dollar THAADS from Lockheed Martin, and divide the Korean people. Even at the risks of a nuclear war, which the US proposes making easier .
The establishment nearly went to war with North Korea in 1994 until Bill Clinton negotiated peace. The neocons in Washington and the mainstream media keep saying that North Korea refused to come to the negotiating table. Clinton's decision to use diplomacy instead of threats proved the warmongers wrong again. It was the US all along that refused to talk, preferring belligerence and threats just as it does now. Once Clinton showed a willingness to bargain, then a nuclear deal was struck. The deal was called the Agreed Framework . What North Korea wanted then for it to suspend its nuclear program was for the US to halt the massive military exercises on North Korea's border, a non-aggression guarantee, compensation for abandoning its needed electric producing nuclear reactors, and relations with the US. Now the situation with North Korea is back to where it was in 1994. George W. Bush reversed the path of peace when he came into the White House. In 2001 he tore up the Agreed Framework, put North Korea on the Axis of Evil list in 2002, invaded Iraq in 2003, and hanged Saddam Hussein in 2006. Very predictably North Korea resumed its nuclear program for self-defense against a paranoid and unpredictable USA that sees enemies to attack under every bed.
Bush scrapped the Agreed Framework, and told then South Korean President Kim Dae-jung that future talks with North Korea were dead. Kim Dae-jung had come to visit Bush shortly after winning the Nobel Peace Prize for his Sunshine Policies of peace with North Korea. Instead of welcoming President Kim and his peace efforts, Bush humiliated him by shockingly calling North Korea's leader Kim Jong-il a dwarf. North Korea predictably withdrew from the Non-Proliferation Treaty in 2003 and resumed work on its nuclear program. A month later Bush called out North Korea to pay particular attention to Libya as an example of how a country is welcomed into the international community when it unilaterally gives up its nuclear defense program. North Korea paid attention and it was listening when Muammar Gaddafi said in a 2008 speech that " one of these days America may hang us like they did Saddam ". In 2011 Gaddafi met a brutal death at the hands of US proxies; he was anally raped with a bayonet and left to rot on public display in a meat locker. Before Gaddafi's corpse was even cold a hysterically glowing Hillary Clinton cackled " we came, we saw, he died", hahaha ". Now fast forward to 2018 and the US is threatening war against North Korea again.
The US has been abusing Korea since 1871 when it first invaded it with an expeditionary force of Marines to forcibly open trade. Korea just wanted to be left alone, but the US forced Korea to sign an exclusive trade treaty in 1882 at the point of a gun. In exchange for that unequal trade agreement the US promised Korea protection. In 1910 the US proved that its promise was worthless. Instead of protection, President Theodore Roosevelt stabbed Korea in the back by conspiring with Japan. Roosevelt had enthusiastically supported Japan in the Russo-Japanese War. Japan pre-emptively attacked the Russian fleet at Port Arthur in a sneak attack. Teddy congratulated Japan for their brilliance in 1941 his nephew Franklin would call a Japanese sneak attack "a day of infamy". After Japan and Russia ground down to a bloody stalemate, Japan secretly appealed to Teddy to open negotiations. Roosevelt acted as a (dis)honest broker in negotiating the Treaty of Portsmouth, for which he won the Nobel Peace Prize. Japan won the spoils of the war. Roosevelt had a secret deal that Japan could have Korea and the US would take the Philippines. In 1945 the US deceived Korea again. Instead of liberating Korea from the Japanese occupation, the US occupied Korea for 3 more years until 1948 and then blocked its independence. The US was largely responsible for the division of Korea and backing dictatorships in South Korea until 1993. Americans do not know the US treachery, but Koreans do. Why would they trust the USA now?
In order to understand North Korea, one must start with the "anticolonial and anti-imperial state growing out of a half-century of Japanese colonial rule and a half-century of continuous confrontation with a hegemonic United States", as Bruce Cumings writes in his book North Korea: Another Country . In order to understand South Korea one should take a similar approach. The Japanese colonization of Korea in 1910 was greeted with cheers from the USA. Teddy Roosevelt encouraged Japan to have its own Japanese Monroe Doctrine for Northeast Asia. The Japanese were harsh rulers, and Koreans remember colonial times as a national humiliation. Under the Japanese the Korean economy grew rapidly, but Koreans will rightly argue that little of it helped the average Korean. Like the Korean "comfort women" sex slaves during World War Two, Koreans were forced to obey their Japanese masters. Some Koreans complied reluctantly, some willingly and some enthusiastically. Many, but not all of the enthusiastic collaborators came from the landed aristocratic class of Koreans known as the yangban . Other collaborators were traitors that saw advancing their economic and social status by collaborating. After the division of Korea in 1945 many of the yangban class and collaborators fled to the South where they felt safe with the US occupation army, and for good reasons. The North was redistributing the yangban's vast landholdings. Many of the yangban and collaborators were safer in the US occupied south. Some went on to achieve leadership in business and government in South Korea. For instance, the future South Korean dictator Park Chung-hee (from 1963 until his assassination in 1979) had collaborated with the Japanese as a lieutenant in the Japanese army in Manchuria fighting against the Korean resistance fighters.
Korea has a long history of thousands of years. It united as one people in the 7 th century and remained so until after World War Two. The US had started planning for the occupation of Korea six months after Pearl Harbor, according to Bruce Cumings. The day after Japan surrendered a future Secretary of State Dean Rusk drew a line at the 38 th Parallel where the US proposed that Korea be divided, and the Russian allies agreed. Thousands of Koreans protested in the streets. They were told that a trusteeship was temporary until elections. Instead the US feared that the people would elect a communist government, and so they rigged a fraudulent election for a separate government in the South. The United Nations rubber stamped it. As in the South, the North then held separate elections for the Supreme People's Assembly which then elected Kim Il Sung, a famous anti-Japanese guerilla resistance leader since 1932. The US and South Korean propaganda portray that North Korea was a puppet and satellite project of the Soviet Union. This is probably the US projecting its own imperial intentions. Cummings says that no evidence exists that the Soviets had any long-term designs on Korea. They withdrew all of their military from North Korea in 1948.
North Korea has experience with US brutality. During the Korean War the US bombed Korea for 3 years, wiped out 20% of its population and destroyed every city, village and vital structure. President Truman threatened to bomb them with the atomic bomb, and General Douglas MacArthur planned to use 30 nuclear bombs which were shipped to a US base in Okinawa. Truman fired MacArthur not because MacArthur wanted to use nukes, but because Truman wanted someone more loyal he could trust with them. Truman preauthorized MacArthur's replacement General Matthew Ridgeway to use the nuclear bombs at his discretion. The US public is oblivious to US recklessness with nuclear bombs and is passive about what is done in their name. The Korean War (1950 to 1953) is called the Forgotten War because the US public has amnesia. Whatever propaganda they do remember is a flawed version of history put out by the US government. Oblivious, passive and amnesia are why all US wars of aggression are quickly forgotten as the US moves on to the next one.
After the US military occupation of South Korea from 1945 to 1948, South Korea was ruled by US backed repressive dictators until the first democratic election in 1993. The first despot that the US installed was Syngman Rhee in 1948. Rhee was a practically unknown in Korea because he had lived in the USA from 1912 until 1945, when he was flown back to Korea by the US military. The US pumped billions of dollars into South Korea to make it a showplace of US-style capitalism during the Cold War, but South Korea did not develop under either democracy or a free market, according to Ha-Joon Chang, the author of Bad Samaritans: The Myth of Free Trade and the Secret History of Capitalism .
For many decades North Korea outpaced South Korea in economic development and in their standard of living until the 1970's. With the 1991 demise of its most important trading partner the Soviet Union, North Korea fell on very hard economic times. Then it suffered two floods and a drought in the 1990′s that resulted in famines. On top of that the US has imposed killer economic sanctions. So now US propaganda constantly reinforces the belief that North Korea is an economic failure that cannot even feed its own people. While the US touts that South Korea is an economic miracle of democracy, capitalism and free markets. Little is ever mentioned about the economic collapse of South Korea in 1997, which the US had to rescue with a financial bailout package that reached $90 Billion. The package included IMF loans that came with humiliating conditionalities of austerity. The minister of finance Lim Chang Yuel went on TV, humiliated and begging for the South Korean people's forgiveness.
Despite all the propaganda otherwise, North Korea is not only willing to sit down at the table with the US, but it has long been proposing negotiations to a deaf USA ear. What North Korea says it wants today are the same things that were negotiated with Clinton in the Agreed Framework: security, compensation, and economic relations with the US. There is nothing unreasonable that North Korea is asking for, and that is probably why the US refuses to negotiate. It does not want peace for its own insane naked imperialism reasons. Instead the US wants continued hostilities; otherwise if it wanted peace it would welcome diplomacy.
It is the US that is unpredictable. One day Secretary of State Rex Tillerson says that the US is willing to hold unconditional talks with North Korea. Then he says the US won't . Trump says that he will destroy North Korea with fire and fury, and then he says he would " absolutely talk to North Korea's Kim on the phone". It is the US that is paranoid and finding enemies everywhere: Cuba, Afghanistan, Syria, Venezuela, Iran, and Russia to name just a few. The US enemies list has nothing to do with democracy, freedom and human rights. If it did the US would not be friends, allies, and benefactors to brutal kingdoms, monarchies, dictators, fascists and human rights abusers such as Saudi Arabia, Egypt, Israel, Honduras, Haiti, and Ukraine, for example. US foreign policy is based on hegemony, empire, power, corporate interests, corruption and self-interests of the high and mighty, not democracy and human rights.
Who is paranoid? Compare how much of a threat the US is compared to North Korea. Since World War Two North Korea has not invaded anybody. The Korean War (1950 to 1953) was a civil war and authoritative historians such as I. F. Stone, Bruce Cumings, and David Halberstam agree that the South was responsible for instigating it too. Korea itself has not invaded anybody since the 16 th century. The US has attacked at least 32 countries just since WW2. North Korea has a defense budget of only $7.5 billion , compared to the US $1 Trillion. North Korea has developed nuclear weapons because the US has been threatening it with nuclear destruction since 1950, introduced nuclear weapons into South Korea in 1957 in violation of the armistice agreement and the Nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty. The US keeps practicing regime change decapitation invasions and nuclear attacks against North Korea. North Korea has an estimated arsenal of 20 nuke bombs that are not a threat to the US's 15,000 nuclear arsenal. Instead the US is an asymmetrical and existential threat to North Korea and every other non-compliant small country. North Korea has nuclear weapons because it does not want to humiliate itself by being a US poodle. When are the American people going to wise up to the US propaganda and false cries that the evil wolf is at the door again?
References:
"North Korea: Another Country", by Bruce Cumings.
"The China Mirage: The Hidden History of American Disaster in Asia," by James Bradley.
"Korean Mind: Understanding Contemporary Korean Culture", by Boye Lafayette De Mente
(Republished from The Greanville Post by permission of author or representative)
Singh , January 19, 2018 at 12:33 am GMT
USA also culturally & spiritually enslaved many South Koreans।।KA , January 19, 2018 at 3:49 am GMTand the war that America forgot come back as peace and American can't handle it . Do they still ask themselves that question "Why do they hate us" ?Nexus321 , January 19, 2018 at 5:03 am GMT@KARenoman , January 19, 2018 at 11:51 am GMTUnited Sh-thole of America. The people in Washington are degenerates. They want to murder millions of Koreans and tens of thousands of their own people.
Since World War Two North Korea has not invaded anybody. Not much more needs to be said.sid18 , January 19, 2018 at 4:08 pm GMTSouth Korea, Japan, Taiwan and Singapore always have been usa poodlesreiner Tor , January 19, 2018 at 7:30 pm GMTThis article is too easy on the Norks, who are no angels themselves. It's quite unlikely that the South started the war, when the South didn't have adequate weaponry or effective armed forces, unlike the North. North Korea has done some horrible things in the past, most recently the (likely) sinking of a South Korean vessel.nsa , January 20, 2018 at 6:13 am GMTBut overall, yes, in the current situation the US could easily avoid war, but doesn't want to.
Absolutely zero chance of JUSA attacking Korea for the obvious reason that there is nothing in it for the jooies. Why would the clever conniving jooies waste their satrap's military assets on Korea when they could be used to further the main jooie goal of destroying the ME and Iran? Think about it ..sarz , January 20, 2018 at 6:30 am GMTCould be that the Trump administration is playing a game of hyper-aggression that always goes 'wrong', uniting everyone against the empire and bringing America down in the least bad of hard landings from its imperial role. Trump's kind words vis-a-vis Kim might have served as an assurance that Kim could trust his channel. That purpose having been served, Trump was back in hyper-aggressive mode with his "I'd" versus "I" explanation.Biff , January 20, 2018 at 7:05 am GMTTrump's statements regarding Jerusalem, Iran and Pakistan/Afghanistan all follow the same pattern.
We do have President Moon's statement, cited by a seemingly clueless Patrick Buchanan, that he is nonetheless grateful to Trump for bringing the North Koreans to the table. Trump's overtly bad behavior makes it easier for Kim to move against the entrenched forces on his own side.
Just a possibility. But it fits Trump's personality, if you go by indications over the decades rather than the last two years.
The sex slave trade out of South Korea to America is massive, and forgotten too.Anonymous Disclaimer , January 20, 2018 at 7:43 am GMT@reiner TorThatDamnGood , January 20, 2018 at 8:00 am GMTSo what? America is not an angel either. Doesn't give America the right to interfere. I'm glad other countries have the balls to give America a bloody nose. Never has there been such a dishonest and immoral country.
Where are you from Europe lol?
Hope your not expecting your obedience to pay off someday.
"When are the American people going to wise up to the US propaganda and false cries that the evil wolf is at the door again?"Da Wei , January 20, 2018 at 9:56 am GMTThe hippie paradigm, if the people have awareness, they will care and change things
I think you underestimate the % of people who don't care and those understand, better them than me. Trump was quoted as saying about the next Korean war, better Seoul nuked than us or something to that effect. Do Trump supporters mind what he said that the USA should take the oil at the very least with regards to Iraq?
@Nexus321padre , January 20, 2018 at 1:07 pm GMTNexus321, please, a little respect for our own country. We are the United States of America. Do not curse the family. Now, we are, all of us, disappointed with misdeeds done in our name. But, we are Americans and we can fix this.
We should not judge the essence of ourselves as a nation by what some wayward politician whores do. Check their motives and see on whose behalf they are working. It ain't ours. If what they do keeps the war game alive, ask who benefits. Where does the buck lead? There lies the snake. Curse that. Bad deeds done in our government's name shame us all, but that shame should make us citizens mature and determined, not adolescent and whiny. I repeat, do not curse the family.
We are a good country founded on solid, moral principles. Act like a white man, Nexus321. Let's take this country back and delouse it.
@reiner TorThe Alarmist , January 20, 2018 at 1:24 pm GMTI don't know, what were you trying to say? That North Korea should be nuked, since they are "no angels"? no matter what your personal opinion of them is, the fact, that they didn't attack anybody is still true!
@RenomanAnonymous Disclaimer , January 20, 2018 at 2:08 pm GMT"Since World War Two North Korea has not invaded anybody."
North Korea inarguably invaded the South. The arguable point might be whether or not it was provoked and therefore a response.
I haven't read the histories the author cites, but I am aware of the history and the case that can be made, and it is generally consonant with the gist of this article. The declaration of the DPRK came after the US- backed Rhee declared the ROK and reneged on peninsula-wide elections that had been agreed to at the UN. I guess you can call it a civil war, but that really isn't germane to the question: Why can the US not stomach any rapprochement between the two de facto Koreas two-thirds of a century later, while it was willing to accept a reunification of a historically more aggressive Germany?
@ThatDamnGoodbluedog , January 20, 2018 at 2:15 pm GMTAbsolutely. There are suburbs coast to coast that depend on weapons manufacturing and all things defense. They'll stick to the script. I'm disappointed the author didn't embellish the truth of the Korean war – the way the US went after civilians like the Nazis and used biological agents. Empire has a lot of secrets about fightin' communism they still hide.
@Da WeiTonyVodvarka , January 20, 2018 at 3:44 pm GMTScrew the "family" mafia for the family is just as corrupt as the leaders you curse, do you really think the family gives a shit about how many we killed in Asia, do you really think the family gives a shit about how many we kill in the Mid-East or anywhere else for that matter,and what the country was founded on has no bearing to what it is today, corrupt to the core, immoral degenerate with a fascist type government which the "family" is just as guilty of as its leaders .
According to I.F. Stone in his "Hidden History of the Korean War" (1952), the intent of the Korean War was to destabilize the Chinese Revolution which had consolidated power the year before. As Iraq was told that it was acceptable to the USA if it reunified with Kuwait in 1993, so North Korea was suckered into attempting to reunify their country. Those thirty atomic bombs were not intended for Korea which had already been utterly destroyed by conventional weapons, they were meant for China. McArthur sacrificed a Marine division by sending it without support to the border of China and predictably brought that country into the war; he then demanded the nuclear bombing of China. Truman didn't go along and MacArthur was soon replaced. A fine article from Mr. Pear.Anon Disclaimer , January 20, 2018 at 4:02 pm GMTLots of good stuff but too sympathetic to North Korea which is ruled by a truly vile regime. North Korea is not about nationalism. It's about dynasticism. Also, 'Kim Il Sung' was not the real Kim Il Sung. His real name was Kim Sung Ju and he appropriated the name of a guerrilla fighter. And his cult of personality was obnoxious.anonymous Disclaimer , January 20, 2018 at 4:49 pm GMTBak Jung-Hi worked for the Japanese, but collaboration is par for the course when resistance is futile. Resistance became futile under Japanese who were only defeated by great powers. Sukarno collaborated with Japanese too. And Kim collaborated with the Soviets. North Korea redistributed land to the peasants but then state collectivized the land, and the peasants became slaves of the state. The fact that Red China and communist Vietnam turned to market economics is proof that capitalism works better than communism. Communism is like City Hall running all the economy of a big city. Who wants that?
The US has been threatening to use nukes against the DPRK during and since the war. Is it any wonder that they decided to nuke up themselves as a deterrent? They're not going to give up their nuclear deterrent under the bombast of threats of annihilation but are more likely to dig in and expand it. This doesn't seem to be particularly complex or difficult to understand. Where does the US think it can go from here, what does it think it could realistically do to them? It might be a good first step to stop the bluffing. Can we say 'self-inflicted' when it comes to this confrontation?Avery , January 20, 2018 at 5:10 pm GMT@anonymousAnonymous Disclaimer , January 20, 2018 at 5:43 pm GMT{ Can we say 'self-inflicted' when it comes to this confrontation}
The confrontation is not 'inflicted ' as such: it was and is carefully planned. This is not the first time South Korea has tried to approach North Korea: US previously also threatened SK leaders, and forced them to back off. US needs maximum tension on the Korean peninsula to have an excuse to keepa large contingent of armed forces in the region. If South and North Korean make peace, US will be asked to leave SK. Next might be Japan. Then US is completely cut out of the region.
So in desperation, US will do anything, possibly even instigating a military clash, to stay in SK and Japan. Last thing US MIC wants anywhere in the world is peace: it's bad for business.
What we need are more psyops like the recent drill in Hawaii. More fear and loathing so empire can create a virtual camp x-ray with live updates from Facebook and twitter to coddle the sheep. It's a shame North Korea can't buy Democracy to keep it from Dying in Darkness. But how dare Russia try to use our twitter weapon that we use on Americans that the Russians want to use on Americans too.Anonymous Disclaimer , January 20, 2018 at 7:01 pm GMTPussy hat controlled resistance, doom porn and fake antiwar will continue to play an important part of the lives of the American porn consumer. In the name of security the CIA may give us the race war, or hatred of the wealthy or the ol' immigrant rat trap. The possibilities are endless but the dictatorship is making itself clear with endless promotion of scarcity through their scribes in social media.
Post on social media everyday – what you think matters!
To make matters much more confusing, we have hypocritical stealth DOD contractors like Code Pink play up fake resistance to the threat of war. Barging into meetings as if the whores on Capitol Hill are calling the shots is an uniquely insidious form of stunt based propaganda. The motive for groups like Code Pink is to have a group that part of the press can immediately call "far left, unpatrioric" endearing them to at least half the sheep who are convinced they are the real McCoy of antiwar dynamite.Carroll Price , January 20, 2018 at 7:13 pm GMTCode Pink first crushes any questions about whether Democracy even exists in the USA. "Look at us, we are right here where it matters isn't the country wonderful"
Then the absolute suffocation of anyone who dares question empires' gun running operations outside of state approved stunt idiocy and clown show electoral politics.
Dying North Koreans Prove US Sanctions are Working. https://www.rt.com/usa/416354-tillerson-un-sanctions-north-korea/Hapalong Cassidy , January 20, 2018 at 7:47 pm GMTIt must be especially galling and humiliating to be dominated by a country that on average is 10 points lower in IQ (per the Lynn study).reiner Tor , January 20, 2018 at 8:14 pm GMT@Carroll PriceAlden , January 20, 2018 at 8:15 pm GMTHe managed to achieve Madeleine Albright level depravity after less than a year in office. Sad!
@BiffEliteCommInc. , January 20, 2018 at 8:57 pm GMTWhy did you omit the fact that the S Korean sex trade is completely run by S Koreans not Americans? I do remember an American colonel in the occupation forces stating that he basically ran a brothel.
@Carroll PriceCarroll Price , January 20, 2018 at 10:02 pm GMTThe US has had sanctions on N. Korea for more than forty years. During that period, more than one S, Korean government has entertained re-unification. The reason we might challenge that reunion if because should we actually have to go to war at some point with China, a friendly Korea with China would be a problem.
But what is driving unification at least when I visited was the population.
But the choice by Pres Trump to entertain conversation -- is a wise choice.
@AldenCarroll Price , January 20, 2018 at 10:20 pm GMTSo? Most of the propaganda put out during the Cold War by the Soviet Union turned out to be more accurate and closer to the truth than propaganda put out by the United States government though the US State Department. For instance, Russia's version (at the time) as of what transpired immediately prior to and after Francis Gary Powers was shot down over Russia in 1959 (?) turned out to be much more accurate than the US's version which was essentially a pack of lies.
@Carroll Pricedaniel le mouche , January 20, 2018 at 10:58 pm GMTBrief history of the Francis Gary Powers fiasco. https://history.state.gov/milestones/1953-1960/u2-incident
@Joe Hidedaniel le mouche , January 20, 2018 at 11:04 pm GMTNo idea what you're talking about with 'the Truth'. This article is highly accurate, it seems to me: it's description of endless and ongoing US atrocities is absolutely true, as is the author's statement that never has such a rotten, lying government existed, a government that perpetually provokes any and all countries on earth, that hates peace, that destroys any attempts at decency. I have only read IF Stone, cited here, 'The Hidden History of the Korean War' or something similar. It is a staggering book. Essentially the war was a military exercise, a chance for troops to see action, test out new machines and weaponry. Most importantly, my interpretation here, it presented a vast theater for psy ops and 'country building' ie utter destruction. These kinds of great experiments are a Brit and by extension US govt specialty. This is really thinking big, thinking long term. Cut countries in two after first murdering millions and utterly destroying literally everything–in this case, for example, Seoul was literally first evacuated then set on fire by US troops, just kinda for fun. It's the kind of really big thinking going on now too (and in all the intervening years), eg with the utter destruction of Libya, Syria, Iraq, Afghanistan, and Yemen. Britain (a misnomer–it is really England but wants others to share the burden. I mean, the Welsh??) did this to Ireland four centuries ago, to India more recently, to mention nothing of Africa and others.
@Michael KennySeraphim , January 20, 2018 at 11:36 pm GMT'Then there's a whole range of wild attacks and accusations going all the way back to 1871(!).' It's called history, not an American specialty. But rather important to understanding the present and future. Your whole post is very ignorant.
@sid18JVC , January 21, 2018 at 12:35 am GMTYou forgot Australia. The poodle who wants to play the pit bull.
@The AlarmistJVC , January 21, 2018 at 12:41 am GMTIt was the same in VietNam–we installed a dictator (Diem) who had lived mostly in the US, and reneged on the national elections that had been agreed on as a part of the peace agreement after the French defeat.
After JFK tried and lost, nothing has been able to stop the Military bla bla bla complex that actually rules this country.
@VinteuilErebus , January 21, 2018 at 1:07 am GMTIf South Korea officially requested this, would the US refuse?
Of course the USG would refuse such a request -- it thinks it is master of the world. The greatest hindrance to world peace since WWII is the monster on the Potomac.
@Ilyana_RozumovaVinteuil , January 21, 2018 at 1:14 am GMTI do have to side with you this time.
Michael Kenny's comment ignores the fact that the rocket motors could have been airshipped from the Dnipro factory directly to DPRK, or even shipped by sea.
Maybe they came via China. The bottom line is we don't know when or how they got there.What we do know is that Rocket Man's displays of prowess have brought things to a head in one of the Empire's critical nodes. The background for this crisis is ROK's desire to participate in China's BRI. The chaebols are drooling over the opportunities, but DPRK isolates them in the southern end of the Korean peninsula. Hence, Putin & Moon's joint announcement in Vladivostok of the "9 Bridges" initiative bringing DPRK into the Eurasian fold.
It would appear DPRK likes the idea, and the suddenness of the thaw in North – South relations is an indication that big wheels are turning behind the scenes. The US' recent statements indicate it finally dawned on them as well, and that they are, in their typically knee-jerk fashion, actively trying to torpedo further peaceful developments.
If ROK loosens its tethers to the US sufficiently to gain direct land access to the rest of Eurasia, Japan's Keiretsu will not allow themselves to be sidelined. Abe & Putin have met 17 times, perhaps as a result of the pressures Abe is already feeling from them.
The US' absurd statements, the patently silly "Vancouver Summit", the flip-flopping, all indicate that the US and its Imperial satraps have no idea what to do in the face of Rocket Man's exposure of their irrelevance in the N.W. Pacific.
@JVCNJ Transit Commuter , January 21, 2018 at 1:20 am GMTSo let them, officially, invite us to leave. My bet – and certainly my hope – is that we'd bow out, more or less gracefully. And if we refused – well, that would certainly clarify things.
@The AlarmistGrandpa Charlie , January 21, 2018 at 1:27 am GMTThe Korean Peninsula is cursed by geography. Reunification of Korea would mean one of two things.
1. A Korean Peninsula allied with the US. This would put US troops on the Chinese border. No one should want this. Too easy for a border incident to escalate into a war between the two most powerful countries and economies on the planet.
2. A non-aligned Korean Peninsula. No way this would happen. Without US support the entire peninsula would become a Chinese satellite. Japan fought two wars because it saw Chinese / Russian control of Korea as an existential threat. Japan would get nukes if this happened and the entire NW Pacific would be greatly destabilized.
The sad reality is that a buffer state in the north part of the Korean Peninsula is in the best interest of South Korea, China, Russia, Japan and the US. What everyone needs to figure out is how to make N. Korea more like East Germany, and less like Stalinist Russia at its worse.
@AnonAnon Disclaimer , January 21, 2018 at 2:48 am GMT"North Korea is not about nationalism. It's about dynasticism." -- Anon
Except that the current Kim may actually be a Korean nationalist, not a North Korean nationalist, in which respect he is in agreement with all the Korean people. Korea will become reunited, but the price of reunification may be, probably will be, that it will become part of Han China.
China regards Korea as it does Tibet, only more so -- as now and since ever throughout all time, as part of China, speaking and writing Mandarin, integrated into the PRC economically, culturally and politically.
I'm sure this will please the anti-USA crowd gathering here around this article by Pear -- as they always do to show support for any Leftist revisionist supporter of the "USA==Evil" dogma.
@Grandpa CharlieAnon Disclaimer , January 21, 2018 at 3:03 am GMT"Except that the current Kim may actually be a Korean nationalist, not a North Korean nationalist, in which respect he is in agreement with all the Korean people. Korea will become reunited, but the price of reunification may be, probably will be, that it will become part of Han China."
No, Little Rocket Man is a self-centered spoiled brat who puts himself above all else. He was raised as a spoiled princeling and acts like it.
"China regards Korea as it does Tibet, only more so -- as now and since ever throughout all time, as part of China, speaking and writing Mandarin, integrated into the PRC economically, culturally and politically."
No, China always regarded Korea as a separate kingdom and left it alone as long as Korea paid tribute. It was Japan that tried to swallow Korea twice, not China.
The only time Korea became part of Han Empire was when China itself was conquered by foreigners. Mongols conquered China and Korea. Later, Manchus, using Mongol archers, also conquered China and Korea. It was not China conquering Korea but non-Chinese conquering both.
Even so, the Manchus regarded Korea as a separate kingdom in the end.Tibet is a different because of its small population. It's a huge area and had less than a million people when it came under Han hegemony. Same with the Turkic Northwest. It's like US could easily swallow Alaska and sparsely populated SW territories but didn't try to take Mexico proper.
In a way, Mongols really changed China and Russia. If not for Mongols, Russia might be much smaller and China too. Both Russia and China were conservative powers. Russian expansion was paradoxically defensive as, lacking sufficient natural barriers, Russia could only survive as an empire. Even so, Russians might not have been interested in East Siberia and North Asia if not for concerns of invasions from the East. Pacifying Siberia and North Asia became a priority because of the memory of threat from the East. Also, the Mongols proved that the vast area could be traversed if the people had the will to do so.
And if not for Mongols, Current China might be much smaller. Han China used to be much smaller and was restricted to the East Coast. Chinese were very conservative and not very adventurous, exploratory, and/or invasive. Instead of trying to conquer northern territories, China just built walls to keep the barbarians out. And Chinese had little interest in areas outside Han areas.
So, for most of Chinese history, their civilization was mostly along the east coast.
The massive expansion of Chinese borders happened under Mongols who were adventurous and expansive. Mongols not only invaded China but went far beyond.
Later, the Manchus, using Mongol archers and warriors, expanded much further into the West, regions that the Han Chinese mostly neglected. These semi-barbarian warlords had the aggressive zeal that the conservative Han Chinese lacked.Thus, it was Manchu-Mongol ambitions that expanded the size of China, and when the Manchus and Mongols were either expelled from or dissolved into Han China, their conquests became absorbed into China. Mongolia would be part of China too if not for Soviets. Like Tibet, Mongolia is huge and sparsely populated. Easier for Chinese to control. Also, both Mongols and Tibetans are less developed than Koreans who are more adept at imitation.
Likewise, Byzantine Greeks had an empire they inherited from the Romans.
@reiner TorAstuteobservor II , January 21, 2018 at 3:47 am GMT"Highly unlikely. He called himself Kim Il Sung already when people who have met the original Kim Il Sung were still around. Such change of identity is not impossible, but not too easy either."
No, 'Kim Il Sung' was a fraud. He had been part of some resistance movement, but he was not THE Kim Il Sung who's more legend, like Robin Hood.
Kim was so unknown in Korea that Soviets initially had trouble installing him as leader. Most people saw him as Soviet stooge, which was what he was.
So, as in the South, the domestic patriots had to be repressed or executed, and a cult of personality had to be built up around Kim that became more and more ridiculous.Kim was an unimaginative Stalinist.
That said, I don't see how his 'invasion' of South was a bad thing. How can a Korean invade Korea? The north/south divide was artificially imposed by great powers on a nation. As idiotic as both Kim and Rhee were, there was nothing wrong in their dream of reuniting the nation. The great wrong was in the (1) division of Korea itself (2) installing puppet rulers in both artificially created entities.
Suppose China and Russia divided Israel into north and south. Would it be wrong if either Israel, north or south, tried to reunify the nation? If north Israel entered south Israel to unify the nation once again, would that be 'invasion'?
Kim's Stalinism and personality cult would have been bad for Korea, but I don't see anything wrong with his desire to unify his nation. And in that, Rhee had every right to want to unify the nation.
Where Rhee and Kim were idiotic was in blaming one another instead of blaming the great powers that divided their nation. But how could either blame his sponsor? If not for USSR, Kim would not have been installed as leader of north. If not for US, Rhee would not have been shoehorned in as leader of south. They gained power as dogs to foreign masters.
If they really had sense, both would have stepped down as leader(as both were installed by empires) and graciously allowed for unification and new leadership chosen by the people than by foreign powers. But both had petty egos, and Kim wanted to be ruler of all Korea, and Rhee wanted to be ruler of all Korea. Neither blamed the great powers but just one another.
If Israel were divided by great powers, I think Jews would have enough sense to come together and act in unison. After all, Israel itself was created by the coming together of all kinds of Jews: capitalist, communist, socialist, liberal, conservative, secular, religious. Jews may be neurotic and crazy, but they have enough sense of world affairs and the nature of power.
But Koreans are a stupid people. Divide them and set them against each other like dogs, and they are like two pitbulls. A culture of slavish servitude and emotions-over-reason made them act like dogs than sensible humans.
@daniel le moucheAstuteobservor II , January 21, 2018 at 3:56 am GMTWhen the british empire ended, I think a lot of borders were drawn to create ever lasting problems/conflicts. Israel was also it's creation with american backing of course.
Carroll Price , January 21, 2018 at 3:59 am GMTWhen are the American people going to wise up to the US propaganda and false cries that the evil wolf is at the door
I doubt the masses will ever awake from the constant propaganda. I mean, all major information outlet is controlled. and besides, the smart ones also believe it is necessary to keep their way of life.
ask any american if their way of life will end, everything will become 100% more expensive, they can no longer take vacations, work twice as hard for the same pay or less, they will instantly think nothing of the current wars
very, very very few people are selfless humanists.
I am just scare of the fact if usa attacks NK unilaterally in the near future, china will get involved = WW3 + maybe nuclear war.
@JVCGrandpa Charlie , January 21, 2018 at 4:40 am GMTThe United States uses the economic sanctions as a substitute for diplomacy.
@Anonymousreiner Tor , January 21, 2018 at 11:15 am GMTI read similar drooling nonsense to what you just wrote all over the internet: "Look, first off, I don't support the guy but this is obvious lefty slander".
Ok. You don't support the guy but you need to qualify that non-support by saying he's being impuded. In other words you support the guy, warning of the coming leftists
– Anonymous
What am I supposed to asy? "I feel your pain" or what? I mean you have to read "similar drooling nonsense all over the internet" so what?
First off, it's not that I don't support Pear, but I actually condemn him as a Leftist revisionist. And then there's no' but', there's an 'and' it's obvious lefty drool. BTW, my "non-support" for Pear is unqualified, as is my disrespect for you,, Anonymous. Are yoo actually Pear writing under that pseudonym?
@AnonAnon Disclaimer , January 21, 2018 at 4:32 pm GMTNo, 'Kim Il Sung' was a fraud. He had been part of some resistance movement, but he was not THE Kim Il Sung who's more legend, like Robin Hood.
He was made into such a legend by North Korean propaganda after Kim became the leader. He was the most daring Korean guerrilla commander, but that's not saying very much, because he couldn't do much against the Japanese.
Kim was an unimaginative Stalinist.
Oh, he had a lot of imagination and original ideas. They led to a dystopia, but original he was. He also was a skillful and daring politician, who managed to get rid of his pro-China and pro-Soviet factions simultaneously in the late 1950s, at a time when he depended on both. That was quite bold and required a lot of political skills. Founding a dynasty in a nominally Marxist-Leninist society was not very easy either. There was some opposition to it even among his otherwise loyal associates, who wanted a normal communist succession with one of the top dogs becoming the new leader.
@reiner Toranon Disclaimer , January 22, 2018 at 5:01 am GMT"Oh, he had a lot of imagination and original ideas. They led to a dystopia, but original he was."
He was shrewd, not original. But then, he was surrounded by second-raters and hacks, not men of talent.
"He also was a skillful and daring politician, who managed to get rid of his pro-China and pro-Soviet factions simultaneously in the late 1950s, at a time when he depended on both. That was quite bold and required a lot of political skills."
No, purges were quite common in Stalinist systems. Stalin, Mao, Tito, and the rest all purged 'bad elements'. Nothing original about that.
And it's not so much that he got rid of pro-China-elements and pro-Soviet-elements as he balanced them out. If not for the Korean War, he would have leaned to the USSR. But China played such a huge role in the war that it gave him an opportunity to lean to China as well. so, he played on both USSR and China for aid. Now, where he was skillful was maintaining this balance even after the Sino-Soviet rift."Founding a dynasty in a nominally Marxist-Leninist society was not very easy either. There was some opposition to it even among his otherwise loyal associates, who wanted a normal communist succession with one of the top dogs becoming the new leader."
It turned out to be pretty easy because he did it and then his son did it too. It was easy because North Korea under Kim was more about the dynasty than ideology. People were raised to worship Kim, not to think ideologically. And Kim surrounded himself with yes-men and hacks. If there was overt opposition, it was easily dealt with. The gulag.
Kim was a stupid bumpkin who got to leader because Stalin saw him as pliable and obedient.
@AndrewRBach , January 22, 2018 at 8:05 am GMTExcellent point. Their only other neighbors are China and Russia.
@David William PearBach , January 22, 2018 at 8:15 am GMTJust a few corrections:
The US was largely responsible for the division of Korea and backing dictatorships in South Korea until 1993. Americans do not know the US treachery, but Koreans do. Why would they trust the USA now?
Most SKoreans do not know, either. And those who do and talk about it probably risk imprisonment for treason.
Moon's predecessor Park Geun-hye sang from the US hymnbook until she got caught with her hand in the cookie jar. In 2017 the South Korean people went to the street and demanded the granddaughter of former dictator Park Chung Hee be impeached, and now she is in prison.
She is the daughter.
Korea itself has not invaded anybody since the 16th century.
Korea was invaded by Japan in the 16th century. It's difficult to pinpoint when Korea invaded anyone. We'd have to go back to a time prior to their nominal unification at least in the 7th century.
@NJ Transit CommuterBach , January 22, 2018 at 8:27 am GMTThe Korean Peninsula is cursed by geography. Reunification of Korea would mean one of two things.
It's the 21st century. There's no curse of geography. It's a global village. Trade is global. Communication is global. Cultural exchange is global. It has a combined population of 70M. SKorea is technologically/economically advanced. Its biggest threat is its own lethargy/apathy.
The sad reality is that a buffer state in the north part of the Korean Peninsula is in the best interest of South Korea, China, Russia, Japan and the US.
No, that's only in the best interest of the US and Japan.
@Aldenhopsing , February 13, 2018 at 6:32 pm GMTWhy did you omit the fact that the S Korean sex trade is completely run by S Koreans not Americans?
Sounds familiar. That's what Japan says about WWII sex slaves.
I do remember an American colonel in the occupation forces stating that he basically ran a brothel.
The subtext being that SKorea turned itself into a brothel? US forces, war and starvation had nothing to do with women selling their bodies to survive?
I agree. As much as I hate to admit as much, and also being a veteran, the USA government is rotten to the core. Manipulation and coercion all across the board. Hard to escape the feeling we will pay for these misdeeds somewhere along the way. Cosmic Justice demands as much. Neither nation nor person can continue on in such manner indefinitely. USA is the agitator. If the Koreans could just tell Uncle Sam (er . Sap) to pack his bags and get out of Dodge, they would be on their way to a much better future. nxJosh Stewart , March 13, 2018 at 3:29 am GMT@SinghJosh Stewart , March 13, 2018 at 3:50 am GMTYou're just going along with this article and making up shit. That's not something Americans did. Your people are the ones who are mentally and spiritually enslaved by the British till this day. Your people are so engrained with wanting to be White, even after your motherland was invaded, occupied, murdered by the British, that your people bleach their skin and praise, put a whites on a pedestal, and strive to be like their oppressors.
@The AlarmistJosh Stewart , March 13, 2018 at 6:09 am GMTThe reason why the United States doesn't want the two Koreas to reunify, is because if they reunite, the United States loses its revenue. South Korea pays to have American soldiers stationed in their country. The U.S. sells it's weapons to South Korea, out of fear mongering. The longer the U.S. can keep the two Koreas separated, the more they can make money off of the fear of war. War creates revenue for the United States. That's why we keep going at it with the Middle East. It's always the U.S. going to war with others, usually, over false pretenses. Let's not forget, how we lied about weapons of mass destruction to go to war with Iraq. Fear mongering, allows the U.S. government to sell weapons to not only South Korea, but to other countries in Asia. That's why.
@NJ Transit CommuterJosh Stewart , March 13, 2018 at 3:51 pm GMTKorea, is actually blessed by geography. They're not in Europe & part of the E.U. So they're not forced to have migrants by the millions in their country against their will, with open borders. They're not located where the U.S. is, where Latinos invade their country by the thousands. They're not where Japan is, to get butt raped by mother nature and thank goodness, they're not located where china is. I visited china. It was horrid. Korea's ecosystem is rich, diverse & unique because it's a peninsula. China, never controlled Korea. If anything, Korea fought against china, defeating them many times throughout history. They did this before America existed. Koreans are clever people who have a strong military and several decades of stockpiled weapons on hand, along with new ones. They don't need American soldiers in Korea after reunification, to protect them. Japan, is afraid Korea will reunify, because that means Korea will be even stronger. The same goes for china. A stronger one unified Korea, is a threat to other Asian countries.
@Daniel ChiehJosh Stewart , March 13, 2018 at 3:56 pm GMTYou've worked for "Samsung." Lol. and I'm the King of England. China, has the highest suicide rate per capita. 22.24 for every 100,000. That makes them the country with the highest suicide rate in the world. Japan is close behind.
@AnonJosh Stewart , March 13, 2018 at 6:44 pm GMTBy the way, japan, has the lowest birth rate in Asia. They're not reproducing enough male japanese babies to replace the old, sickly, & dying in the work place. Japan, is screwed. Again, deflecting other's short comings on to Korea.
@AnonIt's actually the Middle East, Dubai, that is the plastic surgery capital of the world. They get the most rhinoplasties. Plastic surgeons go there months out of the year, to make the most amount of money in the shortest amount of time. Then it's the United States & the UK close behind. Plastic surgery is on the rise in ethnic chinese countries, like taiwan, hong kong, & singapore, china, japan, & in southeast asian countries, like philippines, thailand, veitnam, and indonesia, more than ever. As of 2017, these asian countries get the most procedures done & they compete with each other in who does it the most percentage wise. No one wants to admit their race of people get plastic surgeries, so they deflect, finger point to others, especially to better looking people as an excuse as to why others are far more attractive than their ugly selves. (I'm pointing at you.) Asians do it out of jealousy. They can't stand seeing a Korean get compliments. Whites get the most plastic surgeries in the West, but asians don't finger point at them, unless they're discriminated by Whites, because asians think Koreans are far better looking than Whites. I'll have to remind you that if Korea, in which this is all true, have a technologically advanced country, are an advanced people, who excel in intelligence, inventions, sports, have a booming economy, are talented, have the most popular genres of music in the world and one of the most addictive forms of entertainment, (K pop) and Korean dramas, movies, have the most amazing style unlike other races & nationalities, both men and women have the best complexions, their skincare products are the most popular in the world, that do what they say, have two electrictronic companies in which one has completely dominated the globe, a successful car manufacturing industry, Korean foods & alcohol, that all races love, an amazing rich history unlike any other, which draws people in to want to learn more about Koreans, the first in asia to always break records and make history, before any other asian country, the most popular race in asia, and the best looking in asia and in my opinion, better looking than any other race of people other than some Whites. So with all these great attributes Korea has, there's no reason to think and hate on them or to think they're less in any way, unless one is a jealous person or a whole jealous race of people who only hate online, because they themselves, don't have any of these attributes the Koreans have, hence, making them haters like you, whether you're asian or not.
|
|
|
Jun 13, 2018 | turcopolier.typepad.com
Bolton must be "turning and burning." Good! Will Kim survive this at home? We will see. Will the North Koreans actually follow through on this? We will see. Will the US follow through on this? We will see. Who will be the poor bastard who will be the first McDonald's manager in Pyongyang? Will he end his days in the Gulag? What will Nancy Pelosi say about this? Where was Kim's dishy sister during the Singapore expedition? She is the head of propaganda in NOKO. pl
I couldn't be happier with the outcome of this summit. No one is talking war in Korea anymore. So Trump gave away future military exercises on the Peninsula and characterized them as provocative. So what? In exchange we have a North Korea feeling a little less threatened. The idea of a denuclearized Peninsula could lead to a minimal or even nonexistent US presence along with a complete dismantling of the North's nuclear weapons program. That would be grand. There will be a lot of fault found in this summit and its outcome, but I don't care. This was a bold and courageous move on Trump's part. Some may think it was a courage born out of ignorance, but it was also born out of a willingness to try something new, a willingness to deal with KJU as a partner. This is refreshing. Trump done good and the world is better today than it was a few short months ago.Eric Newhill -> TTG , 9 hours agoPerhaps Trump can apply this same reasoning to other military deployments and exercises. Recognize their potential provocativeness and withdraw. Withdraw from Syria. Withdraw from Europe. Apply the same type of conciliatory engagement to Iran, Cuba and others that he showed to North Korea. Now that would be a legacy.
TTG,TTG -> Eric Newhill , 6 hours agoTrump is blowing holes in old paradigms. The concepts he's applying aren't particularly genius; rather just sensible, but he's the only one who seems to be able think outside the box enough to even consider making a try for a new way. I'm sure that a lot of prep work went into this historic meeting; lots of wheeling and dealing. However, the simple yet elegant, idea behind it all is that it's better for all parties to be friends than enemies. Trump has transcended all the moralizing that holds back others (e.g."But North Korea has gulags!"). He realizes that redemption of bad actors is possible through friendship and prosperity. An adversarial relationship fixes nothing unless an actual existential war is waged and one winner emerges from the carnage- and war is costly. This kind of acting on cost/benefit analysis is one reason why some of us voted for a businessman as opposed to a career pol. Glad you are able to give credit where it's due.
Eric Newhill,TTG -> TTG , 6 hours agoNow if Trump can just blow holes in the old paradigms concerning Iran and Cuba. Now would be the time to do it. Obama was doing that in the case of Iran and Cuba and the neocons and Republicans gave him holy hell for daring to question those old paradigms. If Trump could get over supporting anything Obama supported, I believe he could carry these policies of reconciliation to fruition despite the opposition. He's like the honey badger. He just don't give a f#ck. And that's just what the situation calls for.
The ultimate paradigm that needs holes blown into it is Israel's parasitic relationship with the US. I've said it before. The sooner Trump realizes our policies regarding Israel are a cost center, the better off we will all be.Eric Newhill -> TTG , 5 hours agoTTG,Rob -> TTG , 15 hours agoIMO, he'll get there. First he needs to build momentum and trust. He has to prove himself to the world. NoKo is a great place to start. The neocons and borg are less invested in certain outcomes there - therefore the probability of sabotage is lower. Trump has to deal with both the external powers as well as the internal (I think the internal are the bigger barriers to success). I don't think he really gives a flying f###k about how Kushner or his daughter feel about Israel. He tossed Israel and the US rightwing a bone w/ the embassy move. That's as much as they'll get from here on out if they get too pushy. Despite some Islamic quarters making big noise about it, I don't see them actually doing anything more than protesting and getting shot for it. We've annihilated Iraqi uniformed forces twice in recent history. That serves as an object lesson to the rest of the countries in the region. So a cost free bone toss by Trump as far as he is concerned.
Yes your last paragraph explains the neocon hysteria, their bitterness tastes sweet.LeMoore00 -> TTG , 8 hours agoHello TTG,Pat Lang Mod -> LeMoore00 , 7 hours agoI agree largely with your post, however I just cannot see how it can lead to further withdrawals, simply because it kind of implies the US is there for the benefit of others and not for themselves. They could pull out of Europe now. Pretty sure everyone knows Russia is not going to invade Europe, right?
But yes, Trump has shown good faith, and lets hope NK reciprocate. I think they will. The idea that Kim wants his country in its current state is just ignorant.
Explain to me how the presence of US forces in Europe or Syria benefits the US.LeMoore00 -> Pat Lang , 6 hours agoI'd say the same reason why the US has bases all over the world. Please excuse my ignorance, I am just a lay man with a keen interest. Why have bases in Japan? Or indeed anywhere? Hegemony, no? Why not pull out years ago? Genuine questions. The US seems to want to check EU growth - why would they pull out their military presence there? Or, say, Japan? There are no "allies", just overlapping interests, right?Babak Makkinejad -> LeMoore00 , 6 hours agoSince Commodore Perry's mission to Japan in 1853, what has US gained except war and unemployment in her interactions with Japan? Would it not have been a superior policy to leave Japan alone to wallow in her brutal feudalism and delay or prevent the unleashing of that brutality on the rest of East Asia?LeMoore00 -> Babak Makkinejad , an hour agoYes.Pat Lang Mod -> LeMoore00 , an hour agoOne could say the same about all empires I guess. The pursuit of power and domination seems to cloud all judgment. So, in your opinion, should the US have any bases outside of the US? I am from the UK, so there are still bases lingering from our own days of rule. They really just kept as forward operating positions, right? For example, the UK base in Cyprus used for ME operations.
The two Cyprus bases are just springboards for adventurism. IMO we should abandon NATO as a vestige of the Cold War an leave you Europeans to your own devices. Korea? We should leave as soon as Trump can arrange it. Australia? Why are we there? So that we can meddle in Asia? Where else? I can't think of anywhere we should stay off our own territory.Pat Lang Mod -> LeMoore00 , 6 hours agoLeMoore00 "Hegemony" as a goal or reward has no value except to the collective ego of the Borg. If there was some economic value derived from these commitments and deployments there would be some basis for your remark but there is not.LeMoore00 -> Pat Lang , 6 hours agoAgree. But the"benefit" part of my comment was from the perspective of said Borg, not the people. So I think we're in agreement here.Pat Lang Mod -> LeMoore00 , 5 hours agoAnd the benefit is a psychological benefit.LeMoore00 -> Pat Lang , 5 hours agoSo is Trump genuinely trying to extricate the US from these situations? There is a view amongst the commentariat that perhaps he is trying to alienate allies in order for them to begin cutting lossening ties with the US, causing the very isolation Trump made a significant part of his campaign. Thoughts?Babak Makkinejad -> TTG , 19 hours agoNorth Korea will not denuclearize...Rob -> Babak Makkinejad , 9 hours agoUS bid for Caesarism, in the absence of a new Peace to replace that of Yalta, will only make nuclear war more probable, in my opinion.
Yes, Trump might have reduced tensions on the Korean Peninsula but the fundamental insecurity of North and South Korea remains.
Who will guarantee the continued existence of the North Korean state?
South Korea is strong and rich enough to look after the North. The complicated matter of how reunification will occur will be for them to work out between them. The nuclear issue is really the easy part.Babak Makkinejad -> Rob , 6 hours agoSeeing is believing.Jaime -> Babak Makkinejad , 4 hours agoWe have seen this show 5 times already.
The necessary framework for nuclear disarmament or re-unification is a Global Peace - a la Peace of Yalta - is lacking; in my opinion.
We have entered a period of Warring States - waiting, I suppose, for the Shi, Hwang Ti moment - but until such time a multipolar world does not make itself conducive to such strategic settlements - certainly not with NATO still existing.
When one considers the fact that Arms Control is dead, NPT is dead, Peace of Yalta is dead, JCPOA is dead then one cannot rightly expect a strategic settlement on the Korean Peninsula between US and DPRK.
No doubt, for what can the NK leadership conclude when they have seen a consistent foreign policy -be Republican or Democrat- of destroying any nation whose policies are seen as a threat by the US? There is no basis of trust.Michael -> TTG , 19 hours agoThanks TTG,FB , a day ago
I fully approve and share this happiness(ex Charles Michael according to disqus)
Today the world has seen a historic day...sbnat1ve -> FB , a day agoTrump deserves huge credit for the way he handled himself with a man who has been demonized by our propaganda ministry media and the deep state criminals who have been trying to pull a regime change in Washington since January 2017...
I have to admit I gave up on Trump quite a while ago...today changes everything...
Is it surreal that President Trump is the most moderate and sensible voice not only in the room but in the entire country...?
This is what the people voted for...and this is what 'presidential' looks like...Trump is headed for the history books in a very very large way...
I have to believe that he is consolidating control of the machinery of state...I was actually first surprised by Pompeo's breakthrough and surprise visit to DPRK...and even Bolton has turned out not to be the spoiler I had feared...
What in the world is going on here...?
Did the universe just turn upside down...?
All of the questions Col Lang asks are relevant, but just the huge success that this day has become overshadows everything for now...
What next...will Putin and Trump finally get together and really start putting the screws to the enemies of mankind that are besetting both men...?
Let us dare to hope...
Which enemies of mankind would that be? Climate change, famine, water scarcity? THAT would be miraculous!Babak Makkinejad -> FB , 18 hours agoGreat day for North Korean diplomacy.JohnA -> FB , 11 hours agoGregory Copley is interviewed by John Batchelor in these two episodes explaining the whole thing in geopolitical terms:sbnat1ve , a day agoHow will Trump strategically transform North Korea and North Asia?
https://audioboom.com/posts...
What do Tokyo and Moscow want strategically from the Trump taming of Kim?
https://audioboom.com/posts...
Very enlightening. Very hopeful.
This seems to be the meat of the summit from the George Stephanopoulos interview:Makoshark -> sbnat1ve , a day agoG: Did you talk about pulling troops out? U.S. troops out of South Korea.
T: We didn't discuss that, no. But we're not gonna play the war games. You know, I wanted to stop the war games, I thought they were very provocative. But I also think they're very expensive. We're running the country properly, I think they're very, very expensive. To do it, we have to fly planes in from Guam -- that's six and a half hours away. Big bombers and everything else, I said, 'Who's paying for this?' I mean, who pays, in order to practice.
Apparently the South Koreans were caught by surprise (again).
I'm assuming canceling war games once in a while is fine....but what happens to readiness if they are cancelled over a long time and how important (and specific to a North Korean context) are these games? Experts...please weigh in? How long would it take North Korea to take over South Korea with conventional troops and weapons?
Kim invading SK, its 600,000 effectives (3mln reserves), 30,000 US servicemen & nukes & Carrier strike group, on the eve of a diplomatic breakthrough that could end up with engraving his name in gold throughout history...sbnat1ve -> Makoshark , a day agoSounds a bit like Assad gassing his civilians right on the brink of a strategic victory. But on a devastating, enormous, monumental scale.
I wasn't thinking he would do it right away...and he sure would wait til Trump had pulled those expensive troops out of there.SurfaceBook -> sbnat1ve , 16 hours agoi dont know if you aware that south korean military is estimated 5x stronger compared to NK , and it is a folly to compare the 1950 SK and NK in term of combat strength , readiness and whatnotPat Lang Mod -> SurfaceBook , 10 hours agoYes, I know that. The small US ground force are just hostages to insure a US nuclear response to successful invasion.william mcdonald , 9 hours agoI can't help but think that events like this might have occurred earlier in his term if not for this Russian collusion thing.Sid Finster -> william mcdonald , 6 hours agoThat is precisely why the Deep State has pushed Russiagate so hard.Pat Lang Mod -> Sid Finster , 6 hours agoIt delegitimizes Trump and restricts his freedom of action to do things neocons don't like.
It SEEKS to delegitimize Trump.TTG -> william mcdonald , 6 hours agowilliam mcdonald,TTG -> william mcdonald , 6 hours agoThe key condition that triggered this series of events was NK's development of a nuclear weapon and delivery capability. That put KJU in a position to make conciliatory moves towards SK and the rest followed. However, Trump's disposition to try something
william mcdonald,Pat Lang Mod -> TTG , 5 hours agoThe key condition that triggered this series of events was NK's development of a nuclear weapon and delivery capability. That put KJU in a position to make conciliatory moves towards SK and the rest followed. However, Trump's disposition to try something new was also instrumental... and fortuitous.
It is inherent in his character, not fortuitous.TTG -> Pat Lang , 4 hours agopl,Pat Lang Mod -> TTG , 4 hours agoI meant it's fortuitous for us. I agree it's inherent in his character. That's why i think it's entirely possible he and/or his organization conspired with Russians to circumvent election laws and norms to gain some kind of advantage in the election. He would feel no inhibition to trying something new. It's inherent in his character.
Thus fsr you have no proof whatever that he "conspired" with the Russians.Valissa Rauhallinen , 17 hours agoHurray for peace-making!ex-PFC Chuck , a day agoHere's a fascinating tidbit on the Trump Teams PR efforts...
White House Created Production Video to Assist Singapore Summit Talks With North Korea . https://theconservativetree...
Details are surfacing of a video put together by the White House to assist in diplomacy messaging toward Kim Jong-un and the team of North Korea negotiators. According to reports, toward the end of the talks between President Trump and Kim Jong-un the video was shared in both Korean and English languages to the audience of both teams. The video was also shared with the international media audience prior to President Trump's remarks at the press conference
------------------------The 4 min video is very well done, and as one commenter pointed out is a great example of positive propaganda.
You can also watch it at YouTube
Play HideAs forBabak Makkinejad , a day agoBolton must be "turning and burning."
Perhaps his hiring as NSC chief was a case of "Keep your friends close and your enemies closer." Or as LBJ put it, "Have them inside the tent pi**ing out."This is the 5-th time we have seen this show.The Beaver , a day agoColonelPat Lang Mod -> The Beaver , a day agoKim's sister was in Singapore. She is the one who handed him all the documents to be signed , after bringing him the pen which has been dusted and verified by a NOKO agent.
Good I am looking forward to seeing more of her. She would clean up beautifully.David Lewis , a day agoSeems like Trump echoed what I assume is a N Korean view..no nukes anywhere around the Korean peninsula which, I'd imagine, in the view, would include S. Korea and Japan and perhaps...and in return POTUS gets to build some resorts on N Korean beaches...I hope I'm wrong but that seemed the between the lines messagePat Lang Mod -> David Lewis , a day agoNo more war games with S. Korea??? as added inducement for Kim..to sign an agreement that didn't expand beyond previous agreements with respect to nukes?
"and in return POTUS gets to build some resorts on N Korean beaches." If this is not irony you may actually be too stupid for SST. that would put you in an elite group.David Lewis -> Pat Lang , a day agoThis is the age of Trump...today's irony is tomorrow's reality..http:// www.businessinsider.com/tru... .Eric Newhill -> David Lewis , 9 hours agoA lot of people totally miss that Trump jokes around quite a bit.FB -> Pat Lang , a day agoLOL...Bill Herschel , a day agoIf you want some insight into DT's or Kim's personalities, look at the list of people Sammy "The Bull" Gravano murdered. DT and Kim are both criminals who have risen to the "top" through criminality. This current claptrap is DT trying to bring out the base for the midterms. How are things in Yemen these days?Fred -> Bill Herschel , a day agoI'm pretty certain that zero of Trump's supporters live in Yemen. How about the Obama replacement 2020 candidate; are they going to run on liberating Yemen? I'm sure that will pull the democratic base out to vote.Pat Lang Mod -> Bill Herschel , a day agoI didn't know you were a Democrat. Something new every day. Yemen?
|
|
|
Mar 02, 2018 | www.youtube.com
This People and Power film from 2010 investigated accusations that in 1952 the United States acquired and used germ-warfare technology on North Korea.
The film followed professor Masataka Mori as he journeyed inside the secretive regime of North Korea to take eye-witness testimony from survivors of, and witnesses to, the germ-warfare attacks. Together with Professor Mori, who has investigated these claims over a twenty year period Al Jazeera's team travelled to the villages and townships where the US Army/Air Force allegedly dropped bombs containing infected insects, rodents and food.
Mori's painstakingly acquired trust, and the remarkable evidence he has collected, produced a film which is both extraordinary and controversial - not least because it comes at a time when America and its allies are so determined to prevent North Korea developing nuclear weapons - the most potent of all weapons of mass destruction.
In Harbin, China, Mori located survivors of the wartime Japanese army's Unit 731 responsible for germ warfare attacks on China. After the war, the man behind this research co-operated with US Army scientists in return for not being prosecuted for war crimes.
Harbin also houses a small research museum dedicated to uncovering the extent of Unit 731's activities - both during World War Two and in the years when America allegedly adopted it.
Jacob Coffelt , 2 months agoIs amazing how those insect field bombs we're laying perfectly on top of a layer of snow that it did not penetrate after falling from an airplane and the capsules weren't even dented or destroyed in any way amazing
Innaman Joubert , 2 months agoRussia vetoed resolutions to investigate the allegations, the US pow's who "confirmed" the use of biological weapons later admitted to being tortured to make those statements and renounced everything they said, in the 1990's the US released Soviet documents and communications confirming it was a disinformation campaign by NK which was then backed up by former Soviet officials.
And one year later in 1953 they clandestinely tested LSD in the bread of an unsuspecting French town of Pont-Saint-Esprit while France was considered a "friend".Some psycho friend the US is...
|
|
|
May 28, 2018 | www.defenddemocracy.press
28/05/2018
by Melvin Goodman
25 May, 2018 President Donald Trump's abrupt decision to run away from a summit meeting with North Korean leader Kim Jong Un should not be a surprise to anyone. The White House is encouraging the notion that China's Xi Jinping is to blame for souring the notion of a U.S.-North Korean summit and for toughening Kim Jong Un's negotiating position, and the mainstream media is doing its predictable best to validate such a self-serving explanation. In actual fact, the Trump administration was never prepared to discuss any issue that resembled arms control and disarmament, and national security adviser John Bolton, the formidable chairman of the new "war cabinet," was never agreeable to the idea of U.S.-North Korean diplomacy.Any exercise in arms control and disarmament involves two sets of negotiations: first is the internal set within the administration itself; second is the external set with foreign counterparts. Typically, the internal negotiations within any administration is the tougher road. One of President John F. Kennedy's greatest successes was disciplining the Pentagon in 1963 in order to negotiate the Partial Test Ban Treaty. Over the past fifty years, there has never been an arms control and disarmament treaty that the Pentagon has welcomed.
President Richard Nixon and national security advisor Henry Kissinger were particularly skillful at disciplining the national security bureaucracy that found the civilian and uniformed military leaders of the Pentagon opposed to any arms control negotiations with the Soviet Union. Nixon and Kissinger had to win the bureaucratic battles before garnering the Strategic Arms Limitation Treaty and the Antiballistic Missile Treaty in 1972. Nixon and Kissinger also knew how to prepare for summitry, which finds the Trump administration particularly clueless.
President Ronald Reagan learned important lessons in the 1980s when Secretary of Defense Casper Weinberger and his senior advisor, Richard Perle, had to be defeated bureaucratically on the way to the Intermediate Nuclear Forces Treaty in 1987. Weinberger and Perle were routed and ultimately resigned. It is not an exaggeration to say that the internal negotiations on the home front were just as difficult as the external negotiations with the Soviet Union. And in some ways, negotiating with Soviet leaders Khrushchev, Brezhnev, and Gorbachev was less problematic because they had a genuine interest in disarmament and they had more control over their military establishments than their U.S. rivals.
Read also: Bernie Sanders, Israel and PalestineIn the case of the U.S.-North Korean summit, which probably would not have led to North Korean denuclearization, there was a reasonable opportunity of arranging a serious deescalation of U.S. and North Korean military activities on the Korean peninsula. National security adviser Bolton has never shown any interest in deescalating military rivalries with any U.S. adversaries, and the general officers around President Trump are not prepared to reduce the U.S. military presence in South Korea or to temper U.S.-South Korean exercises that are so threatening to the North Koreans. Communist military doctrine views such exercises as a possible prelude to an actual attack.
Bolton is new to Trump's national security team, but he is clearly the major winner in this diplomatic setback. Other members of the team, including the Secretaries of State and Defense were not consulted prior to the sudden announcement on May 24, 2018, and there is no record of any deliberations at the National Security Council for preparations for an historic meeting with Kim Jong Un, let alone the possible trade offs in any disarmament discussion. In record time, Bolton has taken charge of the national security and foreign policies of the Trump administration, and has quietly built a neoconservative team of staffers at the NSC that will take hardline positions on all items on the international agenda.
Inside and outside government, Bolton has typically surrounded himself with a like-minded group of advisers and staffers who share his bellicose views and his bellicose manner that deprived him of any chance to gain congressional confirmation for a senior position in previous administrations. Bolton is already consulting with former members of the Pentagon's short-lived Office of Special Plans (OSP) that was responsible for falsifying intelligence in 2002-2003 to make the case for war against Iraq. In previous assignments at the United Nations and the Department of State for the Reagan and Bush administrations, Bolton had a well-earned reputation for falsifying intelligence on a variety of issues in order to justify hardline positions and to argue against arms control negotiations.
Read also: The Only Thing That Can Save Trump's Presidency Now Is War With North KoreaAny connection to OSP is particularly revealing because of the results of a study by the Pentagon's Inspector General that determined the office's major mission was to provide the White House with "intelligence" to make the case for war. According to the IG, David Wurmser was the creator of a provocative and specious Power Point presentation that linked Iraq and al Qaeda for which there was no credible evidence. The phony intelligence on Iraqi weapons of mass destruction and possible Iraqi-al Qaeda links were the keys to making the case for war. Wurmser is now advising Bolton on staffing decisions at the NSC.
Secretary of State Mike Pompeo may not have been involved in the decision making to scuttle the summit, but it is noteworthy that his first selection of an important ambassadorial post was a senior uniformed officer and not a foreign service professional. One of Pompeo's first decisions as secretary of state was to select Admiral Harry Harris Jr. as ambassador to South Korea. It was predicted at the time that Harris would join Bolton and Pompeo in arguing against the pursuit of a diplomatic bargain with North Korea. Admiral Harris was well known for his hard line briefings over the years before the Senate Armed Services Committee, and the Obama administration actually issued a "gag order" on Harris prior to President Barack Obama's meetings with Xi Jinping.
The emergence of Bolton and the neoconservative staffing at the NSC points to more hardline decision making that will be influenced by cherry-picked data, unexamined assumptions, and an unwillingness to hold open debates on foreign policy options. President Trump survived his first foreign policy crisis in Syria last month because of the effective and moderating role played by Secretary of Defense James Mattis. Bolton's "success" in halting the diplomatic minuet between Washington and Pyongyang points to greater instability in the near term with U.S. allies as well as adversaries. And if Bolton's neoconservative allies dominate the debates at the NSC, there will be little room for Secretary of Defense Mattis to operate and more room for Bolton's pursuit of hardline foreign policies.
Read also: 1,400 US Mayors Just Slammed the White House for Risking Nuclear War With Russia* Melvin A. Goodman is a senior fellow at the Center for International Policy and a professor of government at Johns Hopkins University. A former CIA analyst, Goodman is the author of Failure of Intelligence: The Decline and Fall of the CIA and National Insecurity: The Cost of American Militarism. His latest book is A Whistleblower at the CIA . (City Lights Publishers, 2017). Goodman is the national security columnist for counterpunch.org .
|
|
|
May 25, 2018 | www.moonofalabama.org
Since the very first summit talk National Security Advisor John Bolton set impossibly high expectations for the results. Trump fell for it.
The various 'hostile statements' go back to remarks by Bolton who has for some time compared disarmament of North Korea to Libya. On April 29 Bolton again asserted that the 'complete de-nuclearization' of North Korea would follow the 'Libya model'. North Korea never really offered to 'de-nuclearize'. It rejects the 'Libya model' for two reasons:
- When Libya made peace with the U.S. it was not a nuclear capable state which North Korea is. North Korea demands to be seen as equal to other nuclear armed states.
- Libya's transfer of the little nuclear production equipment it had was followed a few years later by a full fledged war waged by France, the U.K. and the U.S. against Libya and its government under Muhammad Ghaddafi. The war destroyed the country. North Korea has no intent to allow a repeat of such treason.
North Korea pushed back against the Bolton statement. On May 16 the White House made amends by not endorsing what Bolton said :
Referring to the Libya comparison, White House press secretary Sarah Sanders said Wednesday that she hadn't "seen that as part of any discussions so I'm not aware that that's a model that we're using."I haven't seen that that's a specific thing. I know that that comment was made. There's not a cookie cutter model on how this would work."
But a day later Donald Trump was asked about the Libya comparison and he seemed to agree with it:
"The model, if you look at that model with Gaddafi, that was a total decimation . We went in there to beat him. Now that model would take place if we don't make a deal , most likely. But if we make a deal, I think Kim Jong-un is going to be very, very happy."We called that the 'art of the mafia deal': "Sign here or we will kill you." Signing under threat is something North Korea will never do.
The U.S. media played down Trump's talk as somewhat off-the-cuff. North Korea did not react to it. The summit train was still on track.
But on May 21 Vice President Pence revived the issue in an interview with Fox News :
PENCE: We really hope that Kim Jong-un will seize the opportunity to dismantle his nuclear weapons program and do so by peaceable means. You know, there were some talk about the Libya model last week. And you know, as the president made clear, you know, this will only end like the Libya Model ended if Kim Jong-un doesn't make a deal .MACCALLUM: Some people saw that as a threat.
PENCE: Well, I think it's more of a fact. President Trump made it clear the United States of America under his leadership is not going to tolerate the regime in North Korea possessing nuclear weapons and ballistic missiles that threaten the United States and our allies. We've made it clear that we are continuing to bring economic and diplomatic pressure to bear on North Korea that all options are on the table to achieve that end .
It was clear from the beginning that North Korea would not negotiate a complete de-nuclearization and would not talk while under such a threat. As the Washington Post noted: The more Pence and Trump say 'Libya,' the angrier North Korea gets .
The continuation of the Libya comparison was now a tactic to avoid the little prepared summit talks while blaming North Korea for the failure.
Ace Hanlon , May 24, 2018 12:10:40 PM | 1
possible silver lining? will continued Korea tensions make it harder for US to deploy military assets against Iran?karlof1 , May 24, 2018 12:26:40 PM | 3Propaganda System says summit cancelled because of DPRK's "aggressive talk." Well, it's very clear that all the "aggressive talk" came from the Outlaw US Empire, making Trump's letter a fraud despite its authenticity.psychohistorian , May 24, 2018 12:34:52 PM | 6As for JCPOA, yesterday I provided this link to Khamenei's "conditions" to EU for Iran to remain within JCPOA. Today, Khamenei has tweeted a listing of his "Experiences from the #JCPOA for decisions to make today and in the future" with point #2 being the most important as it goes to the root of the impasse existing between the Islamic Republic and the Outlaw US Empire.
I am going to disagree with your projected outcome b while thanking you again for such fine reporting.dh , May 24, 2018 12:40:22 PM | 7I project the reunification of North and South Korea as a result of this latest "throw America under the bus" move by the plutocrat "Apprentice" Trump.
It is sad to comment that we are watching our species "leadership" battle about who will be in charge and no time is spent on discussing what sort of future might be best for humanity..........sigh
The last paragraph in that letter is a jewel of Trumpspeak.Christian Chuba , May 24, 2018 12:54:02 PM | 9"If you change your mind having to do with this important summit do not hesitate to call me or write....."
Didn't Trump just change his mind?
Now even more aggression against Iran ...Mike Maloney , May 24, 2018 1:08:45 PM | 14This may seem counter-intuitive but the crazies will say that it is more imperative than ever to stop Iran before they get nuclear armed ICBM's from N. Korea or help N. Korea build nuclear ICBM's. I've already heard this crazy talk on FOX and the FDD brigades.
Can't wait to hear Sean Hannity bray ... 'appeasement doesn't work, Trump is Winston Churchill. It's all Bill Clinton's fault.'
Trump suffered two big losses this week: 1) he got rolled by the Chinese in trade negotiations, and 2) he won't take home a Nobel to Trump Tower.Red Ryder , May 24, 2018 1:09:52 PM | 15Trump won a very narrow election because he was going to bring jobs back, and he wasn't going to fight any stupid wars.
Now he's painted himself into a corner where his only options are war: a trade war with China or, as jawbone speculates, a jailhouse scenario where Trump targets the weakest opponent. I think he's cooked.
US/Trump gain several levers in this cancellation.dh-mtl , May 24, 2018 1:29:41 PM | 16
With the Trade Talks w/China going nowhere, they get to use sanctions hard against China. The excuse will be North Korea. Banking and commodities moving again to N.K. will be the excuse.This gains leverage for Trade Talks.
Also, South China Sea, requires the forceful presence of the QUAD navies. To bring them into SCS and ECS to show Maximum Force to Pyongyang also is leverage against China.
It whips up Japan, India and Australia to a froth against China's naval power.
So, Trump gains useful tools to look like the Hegemon he is.
Parity with Kim was a big problem in Singapore meeting. Trump never wants parity. He always wants dominance.
One reason why he doesn't want to sit with Putin as equals.There's always a lot more to any of these "events".
China, Eurasia and Russia are the game for the Hegemon. North Korea is just a sector on the GO board.
It was clear from the start that the 'Globalist/Deep State' wanted nothing to do with this summit. The U.S. presence on the Korean Peninsula depends on a permanent state of war.Mike Maloney , May 24, 2018 1:30:23 PM | 17However the damage may already be done. The U.S. now clarifies its role as being at the root of the problem, not the solution.
It will be interesting to see if the U.S. will be able to maintain its control over South Korea, or will South Korea begin to move closer to the Multi-polar World Order.
Red Ryder @ 16: You assume that Trump enjoys Putin-like levels of support domestically. He does not. Yes, now he can ratchet things up now against China. But eventually the pain must come home, and the U.S. population has very little capacity to endure pain, and certainly not on behalf of political leadership engaged in brinkmanship.Robert Snefjella , May 24, 2018 2:00:27 PM | 22 Circe , May 24, 2018 2:17:46 PM | 23Trump is cooked.
Den Lille Abe , May 24, 2018 2:33:05 PM | 241.How John Bolton Sabotaged The North Korea TalksTrump is fully responsible for this outcome. Trump hired Bolton and has been itching to have him on board since day one. Trump put a hawk like Pompeo at State. Trump thinks he can bully everyone into submission and he used the Libya model to threaten Kim if he doesn't agree to de-nuclearize. Trump has shown all his full Neocon colors, soliciting Neocons to boost his poll numbers by declaring Jerusalem capital of Israel and destroying the JCPOA and then threatening the EU to submit to this disastrous decision, and since his polls numbers are rising. Trump is a thug and a fraud so quit treating him like he's a man-baby in baby pants who still doesn't know any better. It's all intentional and was planned from the start with his Zionist financiers.2.Giving up its nuclear capabilities would be suicidal as the U.S. will not honor any security guarantees it might give in exchange. Trump proved such when he canceled the JCPOA deal with Iran.Did you think that maybe, just maybe when Trump realized Kim was playing hardball and would not cower to de-nuclearization; he turned on the fake outrage to postpone, yes postpone the summit because there would be no way that he could justify giving NK a deal that was more lenient and weaker than the JCPOA? I've been writing, that upon recognizing that Kim is no pushover, Trump would find an excuse to save face; a way to slither out of this, so he could justify the irrational demands being exacted against Iran.
3.The U.S. media played down Trump's talk as somewhat off-the-cuff. North Korea did not react to it. The summit train was still on track.NO it wasn't still on track. North Korea had already given the U.S. the shut out and channels of comm. were cut after Max Thunder military exercises offended and humiliated Kim who had just recently made the gesture of releasing of releasing 3 U.S. prisoners.
The U.S. was already shut out and NKn officials incommunicado and the WH was keeping this under wraps. So, to save face, Trump used NKs reaction to the Pence comments to postpone while he still had a chance to posture strength.
Trump has no clue how to operate in good faith and respect because he's a thug, an egotistical opportunist and a blowhard and has surrounded himself with Neocon birds of a feather that he chose deliberately thinking that he could bully Kim into submission and then claim the Nobel Prize for himself when really all the rapprochement diplomacy was initiated by Kim around the Olympics and then through subsequent gestures towards Moon.
Trump is getting a well-deserved schooling from young Kim.
It was to be expected. Never trust the US. It is all just a theater, as it was withh Hussein an Qaddafi and others before them. The Evil Empire will not budge.Kalen , May 24, 2018 2:35:51 PM | 25
The Evil Empire needs a "color revolution", methinks. So we will just fund some outlying "LEGAL" radical group, :) , free speech and all, you know like the IRA back in the day, just fund them. They will find they way.Majority of South Koreans see unified nuclear Korea as strongly stabilizing politically and militarily factor in the region.Trailer Trash , May 24, 2018 3:59:25 PM | 36Yes, SK does not trust US that ignores openly returning of Japanese militarism while Japanese are capable of building 100 nukes in 9-12 months while missiles threatening Koreans they already have.
Both Koreans want nukes as guarantee that Japanese occupation and Chinese influence will never happen again.
Of course blinded globalists do not want to see it in DC as much as in Beijing or Moscow.
Posted by: Den Lille Abe 24gepay , May 24, 2018 4:17:56 PM | 40
The Evil Empire needs a "color revolution", methinks.It will never happen. Fifty years ago Uncle Sam learned how to crush all resistance movements. Here in Uncle Sam Land we are living with the results: a militarized police state where folks are regularly gunned down for failure to instantly obey police commands. Even obeying their commands can still result in death.
Police gun down three civilians a day. Every day. Three hundred and sixty-five days a year. When the police strap on their gun belt at the beginning of each duty shift, they are confirming their willingness to gun down a civilian on a moment's notice. Not even the military does that - they train to kill combatants, not civilians. Yes their definition of "combatant" is very loose, but they still claim most of the dead are "combatants". Not so the police.
Anything that has even a *hint* of being a potential movement is co-opted or crushed, like the "Occupy Movement" a few years ago. Instead of a non-violent revolution there will be more repression, more police murder, and more suffering as the empire continues to decay from the incompetence, greed, and corruption of Our Dear Leaders.
I'm not sad to be closer to the end of my life than to the beginning. The near-term future looks to be very, very grim indeed.
The very real possibility of China carrying through on its statement that it would not help N Korea if it initiated hostilities but would come to N Korea's aid if it was attacked make a war in Korea unlikely. Israel really wants the US to go to war with Iran. It almost succeeded in 2006 with Bush junior in office. The realists in the US military know that war with Iran would be a no-win contest. That doesn't mean it won't happen. However, Hezbollah is still in Lebanon and Syria has won its war against the jihadis although many more will die before its over. So unless Israel can manipulate a unilateral US attack on Iran it won't happen in the near future. When the inevitable next economic downturn happens (which will be worse than 2008 because they really didn't fix anything but just created 10s of trillions of dollars to kick the can down the road - this coming downturn will be worse) the war needed to keep control will happen. That leaves Venezuela. It's nearby. It has oil. The Venezuelan military will be a slam dunk for the US military. I can remember Grenada and Panama.Red Ryder , May 24, 2018 4:29:14 PM | 41#17Pft , May 24, 2018 6:24:59 PM | 57The public counts for nothing in Hegemonic policy. 17 years of war in Afghanistan is meaningless to the voter. Trillions missing, 11 T, 20 T. is nothing. They only care about their wallet, their stomach and today's Latte.
This move was to disrupt Moon's influence, to separate (again and forever) the South and the North, and to leverage against China.
You can judge American domestic sensibilities as integral to this policy, but I think you are really off base.
Hegemony is Empire. And the citizens of the Empire enjoy security at all costs. They have given their privacy to the Deep State, their jobs to Global Liberalism, their children to drugs (legaliziation is universal) and just want a Latte in the a.m. and the blue pill to get hard.
Most males are neutered. The Army is Volunteer. They fear nothing but random terror or psychotic events or false flag violence.
But they could care less if Trump nukes Pyongyang and Teheran in the same day.
Cooked? The enemies of Empire are cooked, and the dolts called voters are cooked.
US and its European/British commonwealth vassal states do not want peace. It wants perpetual war and conflict. Nothing new hereRobert Snefjella , May 24, 2018 7:17:26 PM | 62We are in the calm before the storm. Events in June will keep b awful busy me thinks. Just a feeling. Hope I am wrong.
South Korea has over 20 nuclear reactors and has re-evaluated its nuclear enthusiasm after the Fukushima catastrophe involving primarily four reactors. Japan has over 50 reactors, most idle since Fukushima. But these reactors whether operating or not have also left a legacy of large amounts of highly radioactive materials, for example spent fuel pools.Curtis , May 24, 2018 7:46:54 PM | 67Japan has attempted to cleanup its contaminated environment, and one of the highly visible results is tens of millions of large plastic bags containing radioactive material.
Much of the radioactive material from Fukushima ended up in the North Pacific Ocean, and much has been deposited around Earth. The North Pacific Ocean coincidentally over the last few years has experienced unprecedented loss of life.
A real war in the region, even without involvement of nuclear weapons, would have the potential to create a global scale nuclear catastrophe, among other terrible results.
So for this, as well as other reasons, there is an enormous incentive for all the countries in the area to find peaceful solutions.
The problem is, as often noted, that the US has a war habit, a war dependence, and a war 'belief system'; simultaneously, a declining military and financial Empire to hang onto. They also have an elite and deep state with deeply pathological characteristics. And they are at a seeming 'safe' distance from the Koreas etc. So the horrific remains a possibility.
One of the great problems with the 'Russia did it' crazy-dishonest meme, and the Ukraine coup, is that it is now difficult for the Americans to have any kind of sensible dialogue with Russia, let alone one that Russia could trust. And by making China into the 'next big enemy' an adult type dialogue is again made near impossible.
Mike Maloney 17karlof1 , May 24, 2018 7:51:56 PM | 68
The US support for foreign wars has dropped a bit. TPTB don't care. If they can't get support, they'll take a lack of protest. It's boots on the ground that gets attention. And the media is on board with either keeping things like Libya below the public radar or only one-sided viewpoints as with Syria.Circe 23
I tend to agree that it's not Bolton wagging the tail (Trump). But it is back to birds of a feather. Trump brought him in of his own accord. It's like the way the media portrayed Obama as being on the fence for wars with the usual suspects (Hillary, Kerry, Power, Rice) pushing for war. Whether Obama, Bush, or Trump, Harry Truman was right that the "buck stops here" (the President's desk).Ron Paul's video headline says "Trump yields to Bolton" but in the video they admit it was Trump who brought in Bolton.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mHywLqNz7uw
Putin and Russian Senators on Summit cancelation . Their observations are similar to those expressed by us Barflies. None seemed surprised by Trump's backing out.Yeah, Right , May 24, 2018 8:18:19 PM | 71Has anyone considered that this is simple a face-saving exercise from both sides?Debsisdead , May 24, 2018 8:28:25 PM | 72As in: both sides have understood that the chasm between them is much too wide to warrant a top-level summit and, therefore, that meeting should be delayed until there is at least *some* prospect of something coming from it.
I mean, the idea that Trump can be offended by belligerent rhetoric is, well, it's pretty outlandish, don't ya' think?
And, after all, despite the "suddenness" of Kim and Moon meeting on the DMZ line, it bears mention that when Kim did step over the line there was - surprise! surprise! - a pre-prepared document just waiting for both of them to sign.
As I said earlier in another thread before this one went up, the prevailing emotion that drove the orange incompetent to tip over the card table and deny the chance of cutting a deal with North Korea, has nothing to do with paper tiger Bolton's aggression and everything to do with Trump's lack of spine - cowardice in short.dh-mtl , May 24, 2018 8:29:15 PM | 73Last weekend the NYT ran a story highlighting the chaotic manner that trumpist 'negotiators' aka sunkist fell into when attempting to do a trade deal with China. This was a 'home' match conducted on amerikan soil where there could be no problem with screwy communications being intercepted yet still orangekist failed to present a unified front - chiefly because trump had provided no leadership about negotiation priorities - how could he? Trump remains ignorant of the nuts and bolts inner workings of the policy positions that he trumpets should be adopted.
In the middle of high level talks with China the two lead amerikan negotiators have to step outside for a quick blue. Coats didn't come off but the cursing out of each other could be heard back in Beijing without any reliance on 'new tech'. What a joke. Now the other side were free to run a wedge play and get what they needed.I apolgise to those who cannot get past the nyt paywall, I only lucked in/out because I never read the f##kin' rag any more.
I was wised up to orange negotiating incompetence by this article Trump Has No Idea How Diplomatic Deals Work at FPdotcom. In it a former oblamblam era negotiator outlines the screwups which orangekist idiots make:Based on these experiences, what was stunning to learn about the China trade negotiations was how at every step of the way, U.S. President Donald Trump's economic team did precisely the wrong the thing. Treasury Secretary Steven Mnuchin, U.S. Trade Representative Robert Lighthizer, Director of Trade and Industrial Policy Peter Navarro, Chief Economic Advisor Larry Kudlow, and Commerce Secretary Wilbur Ross executed a textbook case study in how to not conduct international negotiations.
yep the writer one Ilan Goldenberg is likely a dem partisan and maybe even a liberal interventionist zionist to boot, but he/she does set out a cogent set of reason about how orangekist screwed the pooch listed under three main hedings which detail exactly how orangekist destroyed any chance of a viable outcome. They are elementary school mistakes in negotiating but sunkist made them:
Failure to prepare
Leaking sensitive negotiating positions
Circular firing squadThe NYT on the other hand in typical pseudo-intellectual bitchy style it uses concentrates on the gossip around last week's summit that led to the collapse of negotiation. The NYT kicked off with:
"On Friday, Mr. Trump's chief economic adviser, Larry Kudlow, told reporters that China had offered to reduce its trade surplus with the United States by $200 billion. Two days later, he said that the number was merely a "rough ballpark estimate," and that the two countries never expected to reach an agreement and merely planned to issue a statement laying out next steps.It was a muddled end to a chaotic process -- one that revealed an American team riven by conflicts over tactics and policy, working for a president eager for a victory but torn by his desire to have a smooth summit meeting next month with North Korea, over which China wields enormous influence."
Yep so what? Given that both these publications are like user manuals for empire, who reads 'em except as a somewhat amusing way to see the collapse of amerika Inc. Certainly not me, or most readers at MoA I imagine, but the idjits of pennsylvania ave have lived and died on the NYT since they first nutured their megalomania. Being taken apart so publically hurt everyone on the sunkist team sure, but Trump couldn't a flying F*ck bout that. However it also made him look like a prize goose hanging around the oval office waiting to be cooked.
trump has become what he claimed to despise - the criticism has cut his fragile persona and he has now decided only re-election can give him the acceptance and validation to which he aspires.
Consequently instead of calling in his team and giving them an exact & achievable set of outcomes, with fallback positions and a workable toolbox of targets, li'l donnie tells the world he has lost his balls attempting to conceal his cowardice with the usual trumpian bumptious bluster.What a mess; both China and the people of North Korea can have a quick laugh up their sleeves and then get down to factoring trumpian cowardly incompetence into any further dealings.
Japan's Abe creep will be alternating between anger at the crass stupidity and fear at the way this issue has suddenly been boiled down to one option - extreme violence, when even old blind Freddie can see that the amerikans really have no stomach for conflict with a comparably strong, superior strategically China. Japan will have no choice but go through 'back channels' to cut a deal with China and by proxy North Korea.A major bulwark has been pulled outta the foundations of empire and replaced with a yellow belly. hahahha it couldn't have happened to a bigger hatful of arseholes.
This is not about North Korea. It is about controlling China and Russia.blues , May 24, 2018 8:29:26 PM | 74The 'Globalists/Deep State' want regime change in North Korea so that they can put their military on the N.K./Chinese border. N.K. nuclear capability is just an excuse. For the 'Globalist/Deep State' this summit is the worst news possible.
Russia and China want the U.S. out of East Asia altogether. They have already told the U.S. that they will not allow the U.S. to attack or take over N.Korea.
I look for the gamesmanship around de-nuclearization to continue. The question is whether or not Russia/China will be able to shake South Korea loose from U.S. control. I am not sure that Trump even knows what the real game is.
There will be no U.S. attack on North Korea, for the same reason that they haven't attacked Syria (beyond token strikes with no follow-up). The U.S. cannot afford to show the world that it is just a paper tiger, and thus dares not face Russia directly.
The following items are very nearly certain to be correct. The USSA is not going to reach any direct agreements with N. Korea, since the only card in play is N. Korea removing its nuclear deterrent, and that card will never be played. (The whole Trump and Kim meeting was doomed from the start.)dh , May 24, 2018 8:54:34 PM | 75The USSA is most unlikely to attack Iran. The geographic obstacles alone would make it very cost ineffective, and they also have Russian anti-air. Plus they would destroy the Saudi oil facilities. Besides, the Chinese would not put up with either of these adventures; all they would have to do is recall their giant cargo ships and the USSA economy would sink like a rock.
So that leaves Venezuela. Where might that go? Nobody knows. Brazil would likely be very unhappy about that. Brazil is probably the third most powerful nuclear power. But the assholes are fairly likely to go for Venezuela.
@71 "Has anyone considered that this is simple a face-saving exercise from both sides?"Debsisdead , May 24, 2018 8:58:58 PM | 76Yes but this is very high stakes poker they are playing. More than just saving face is involved.
Trump was losing the 'diplomatic game' and his advisors kept reminding him of that. So now he is looking for a major concession from Kim.
The question is what happens if he doesn't get guaranteed denuclearisation before agreeing to talks? And it's hard to see that happening.Posted by: blues | May 24, 2018 8:29:26 PM | 74Ghost Ship , May 24, 2018 9:00:07 PM | 77Yeah probably correct amerika has been pushed off the block and now it can only hide behind the high walls n locked gate of it's funky and unkempt backyard playing cowboys and indians with itself.
It would be great if the honest injuns leapt out from behind that rotten orange tree down the back whooping & waving tomahawks but I just don't see that happening since foggy bottom has hospitalised injun leaders by dobbing them in to mommy. That gave power back to the slimy arse kissers of yesteryear. That shift is only temporary but the timing does mean there won't be much initial push back until the people of Latin America take back what has been stolen.
Of course JCPOA plays a role here too since europe won't sit on it's hands for a south american fuck over, but equally they may use that situation as a trading card for their own agenda...I get the feeling Trump is like Hitler - he makes his expectations known and then sits back while all the competing groups within his regime squabble with each other over who does what. Didn't work too well for Hitler, why does anybody think it'll work any better for Trump.OJS , May 24, 2018 9:46:33 PM | 78Otherwise, this is just the neo-con fuckwits like Bolton hammering a few more nails into the exceptionalist coffin - in a few days or weeks Trump will realize what a threat to Trump's ambitions Bolton is and sack the cretin.
@Jen | May 24, 2018 7:33:49 PM | 65Grieved , May 24, 2018 9:54:17 PM | 79......If the US cannot hold onto its beach-head in SK, then a future invasion of China becomes near-impossible .
My goodness such radical dream "future invasions of China become near-impossible"
Two countries the fucking USA should never invade: One is India and the other China. Why you might ask? These are two most populated countries. The populations multiples fast and swallow its invaders. Both arms with nuclear weapons. They were invaded and colonized for centuries. They learned and moving fast into the next century not as frens but arch rivals. China unlike India took an aggressive>peaceful dictatorial system while India the fucking western Democracy . Nevertheless both systems are doom to fail as history had shown to date. The dictatorial and democracy systems still control by the rich and powerful Oligarch - sugar coated outside to please its citizens.
I think there was general consensus here beforehand that the US never wanted a summit with Kim.Yeah, Right , May 24, 2018 10:33:00 PM | 82But also some had said that North Korea didn't want a meeting either, and I agree strongly with this. But talking with the US seemed a piece of the necessary protocol that had to be played out.
So we've seen the round of betting go full circle, and the US checked the bet - and it could be argued, so did North Korea, since its own actions were not very costly. It's like the face-saving suggested by commenters, but it's even more than this, it's much more simply an empty play, a "free round" in the poker parlance. [Explanation of checking the bet , for non-poker players.]
The protocol has been observed with the US for this round, now the play moves back to the Koreas. The next round of betting increases the pot. Would this be the peace treaty? I don't know. One supposes that the US remains in the betting to an extent, but the Koreas will continue to drive the game. This round has shown all of Asia that the US is not serious. The day comes closer that China and the UN can sponsor the reunification of the Koreas, and the US will have to leave.
This game is being run by Korea. As far as I can tell, it proceeds apace.
@65 "If the US cannot hold onto its beach-head in SK, then a future invasion of China becomes near-impossible. "It always was an impossibility. But a US military presence all the way up to the Yalu River is the ultimate prize for the USA, in the same way that pushing NATO up to the very border of the Russian Federation gives the USA a major strategic advantage.
In both cases it brings the idea of a 1st strike nuclear decapitation into the picture, and that is just as big a nightmare to Beijing as it is to Moscow.
It is a crazy way to deal with other nuclear powers, but that's modern-day America for you.....
|
|
|
May 18, 2018 | www.unz.com
It's got to be either one of the stupidest acts that I can recall or a very wicked plan by Washington neocons to sabotage Korean peace talks. How else to describe the decision by Big Brother USA and junior sidekick South Korea to stage major air force exercises on North Korea's border. The prickly North Koreans had a fit, of course, as always when the US flexes its muscles on their borders. Continuing South and North Korean peace talks scheduled this week were cancelled by the furious North Koreans. The much ballyhooed Singapore summit between US President Donald Trump and North Korea's Kim Jong-un is now threatened with cancellation or delay. Who can blame the North Koreans for blowing their tops? As Trump administration mouthpieces were gabbing about peace and light, the US Air Force was getting ready to fly B-52 heavy bombers and F-22 Raptor stealth fighters around North Korea's borders and missile-armed subs lurked at sea. This provocation was the first of two major spring military exercises planned by the US and its reluctant South Korean satrap. In case North Korea failed to get the message, the second exercise is code-named 'Maximum Thunder.' And this right after Trump and his neocon minions reneged on the sensible nuclear treaty with Iran. In a policy one could call 'eat sand and die,' Trump demanded that Iran not only give up any and all nuclear capacity (Iran has no nukes), but also junk its non-nuclear armed medium range missiles, stop backing the Palestinians, Hezbollah in Lebanon and the Houthis in Yemen, roll over and be good, don't do anything to upset Israel, and pull out of Syria. In short, a total surrender policy leading to future regime change. Hardly an encouragement for North Korea. North Korea was right on target when it accused arch-neocon John Bolton of trying to sabotage the peace deal. In 2005-2006, Bolton served as the Bush administration's ambassador to the UN. He established a tradition for the post of being anti-Muslim, pro-Israel and anti-Russian, a policy continued to this day by the current US UN rep, loud-mouthed neocon Nikki Haley. In the 2005-2006 period, after years of negotiations, the US and North Korea were close to a nuclear/peace deal. Enter John Bolton. He succeeded in sabotaging the US-North Korea deal. Why? Because Bolton, as an arch neocon, was fanatically pro-Israel and feared that North Korea might provide nuclear technology to Israel's foes. As usual with the neocons, Israel's interests came before those of the United States. Trump's newly named Secretary of State, Michael Pompeo, is also an ardent neocon. Last week, Bolton went onto US TV and actually suggested North Korea might follow the course set by Libya, of all places. Libya's then ruler, Muammar Kadaffi, bought some nuclear equipment from Pakistan so he could hand it over to the US as a gesture of cooperation after the Bush administration invaded Iraq. The handover was done with much fanfare, then the US, France and Britain attacked Libya and overthrew Kadaffi. The hapless Libyan leader was eventually murdered by French agents. Is this what Bolton has in mind for North Korea? The Northerners certainly seemed to think so. Some wondered if Bolton and perhaps Pompeo were trying to sabotage the North Korea deal. Or were at least being incredibly obtuse and belligerent. Was Trump involved in this intrigue? Hard to tell. But he can't be happy. His minions and bootlickers are promoting Trump for the Nobel Prize – rather ahead of events. Or was the US military rattling its sabers and trying to protect its huge investments in North Asia? The Pentagon takes a dim view of the proposed Korean nuclear accords. The burst of sweetness and light coming from Pyongyang just sounds too good to be true. Veteran Korea observers, this writer included, find it hard to believe Kim Jong-un will give up his nuclear weapons, particularly after seeing Trump's deceit in dealing with Iran and Kadaffi's murder. Speaking of de-nuclearization, why does North Korea not demand that the US get rid of its nuclear weapons based in South Korea, Okinawa, Guam and with the 7 th Fleet? Many are targeted on North Korea. US nuclear weapons are based on Diego Garcia in the Indian Ocean. Others are secretly based in Japan. Why not demand the US pull out all its 28,500 troops in South Korea and some 2,000 military technicians at air bases? Conclusively halt those spring and fall military maneuvers that raise the threat of war. End the trade embargo of North Korea that amounts to high level economic warfare. Establish normal diplomatic relations. Pyongyang has not even begun to raise these issues. Smiles and hugs are premature.
epnngg , May 18, 2018 at 10:57 pm GMT
The US Empire has no desire for diplomacy and realistic concessions on both sides when it comes to North Korea. The US will attempt to have its way and its way only with NK. The great tragedy is, as long as the US remains entrenched on the Korean peninsula, North and South Korea cannot make the peace process work that is so long overdue their peoples.melpeexxx , May 18, 2018 at 11:16 pm GMTMilitary industries are imbedded into major economies. North Korea and Iran keeps war profits churning. Same old story.Chris Mallory , May 19, 2018 at 12:58 am GMTCan you imagine the squealing from the "conservatives" if North Korea and Mexico ran some military exercises in the Gulf of Mexico?Anonymous [989] Disclaimer , May 19, 2018 at 5:28 am GMTIran sent a destroyer and a couple of supply ships into the Atlantic and I thought the "conservatives" were gonna have aneurysms.
Who is really in control? The US seems like a country at war with itself. One minute, one decision, another minute, the opposite decision. Trump himself started out with promise but now follows the Jewish agenda to the letter.jilles dykstra , May 19, 2018 at 7:03 am GMTCould it be that the US power structure is completely split along the lines of MAGA vs. Zionists and everything the rest of the world experiences is secondary?
My advice to Kim – keep the nukes, and try to eat less.
USA stupidities have long consequences.Jake , May 19, 2018 at 11:22 am GMT
The British, experienced in ruling an empire, did not want outside interference in the Korean civil war.
The list of USA stupidities is long, Philippines, Japan, China, South America, Iraq, Iran, Libia, Syria, two world wars.
Peter Lowe, The Origins of the Korean War, London, 1986
Barbara W. Tuchman, 'Stilwell and the American Experience in China, 1911- 45', New York, 1970, 1985
William L. Neumann, 'America encounters Japan, From Perry to MacArthur', 1963, 1965, New York
Charles Callan Tansill, 'Amerika geht in den Krieg', Stuttgart 1939 (America goes to War, 1938)
Charles A. Beard, 'President Roosevelt and the coming of the war 1941, A study in appearances and realities', New Haven, 1948
Roy Mottahedeh, 'The Mantle of the Prophet, Religion and Politics in Iran', Oxford, 1985, 2000
Barbara Hinckley Sheldon Goldman, American Politics and Government, Glenview Ill.,1990
Alan Friedman, 'Spider's Web, Bush, Saddam, Thatcher and the Decade of Deceit', London, 1993
There are more books I could mention, but this seems enough.
The USA's problem, as I see it, that, until now, foreign policy could be determined by internal political reasons.
Trump's problem, making clear that this is over.Eric Margolis is one of the 2 or 3 best 'mainstream' published columnists in the country. He nails the nearly innumerable problems with Neocons about as well as can be done.jacques sheete , May 19, 2018 at 11:38 am GMTAnonymous [426] Disclaimer , May 19, 2018 at 11:52 am GMTAs Trump administration mouthpieces were gabbing about peace and light, the US Air Force was getting ready to fly B-52 heavy bombers and F-22 Raptor stealth fighters around North Korea's borders and missile-armed subs lurked at sea.
Yet it's them Eye-rainianz what's da threat to whirled peas.
Hey Eric, perhaps instead of "gabbing," you really meant "gabbling?"
US foreign policy: Say one thing, do the opposite, piss on yer own citizens, blame it all on someone else, and laugh all the way to the bank.
The sad fact is the American troops and nukes are staying in S. Korea to use as a cudgel against China. The tension, rhetoric and sanctions will continue; though, unless Trump and his war cabinet are criminally insane, no war will ensue that allows Kim's forces to get in a punch. Needless American and S. Korean losses wouldn't play well in the media, especially in an election year. Pre-emptive genocide on a vast scale (implying a nuclear attack), however, is always possible from the Americans and their "free world" vassals wouldn't dare to criticise it, nor would the compliant American media. Not when we've been brainwashed to believe that American cities are N. Korean targets. Once an American military infestation occurs in a country it cannot be extirpated without killing the host, and the parasite is too deeply embedded in S. Korean tissue to be driven out or just walk away.macilrae , May 19, 2018 at 1:24 pm GMTJohn Bolton does indeed present a quite ferocious image and I am sure the only thing that held him back from a military career was the possibility that, one day, he might have to fight.Greg Bacon , Website May 19, 2018 at 1:54 pm GMTThere's one nation that will benefit from the NK deal, as they have been playing footsies with the N. Koreans for some time. That nation is Israel.Johnny Smoggins , May 19, 2018 at 2:02 pm GMTTrump the Schlump: Iran Nuclear Deal Is Bad; North Korean Nuclear Deal Is Good
The only country that stands to benefit from this disjointed and hypocritical U.S. nuclear proliferation policy is Israel. It was the far-right government of Israeli Prime Minister Binyamin Netanyahu, aided and abetted by Israel's wealthy American Jewish billionaire troika of political influence peddlers – Sheldon Adelson, Paul Singer, and Bernard Marcus – who, in the end, convinced Trump to trash the JCPOA. Trump's two new additions to his national security and foreign policy team, Pompeo and National Security Adviser John Bolton, have long advocated blowing up the JCPOA, charging that Iran has been violating the deal. Nothing is further from the truth, as demonstrated by conclusive reports on Iran's nuclear program from the International Atomic Energy Agency, Israel's own Mossad intelligence service, and the U.S. Central Intelligence Agency..
Israel's clandestine links with North Korea date back to the operations of the Israel Corporation, which controlled Israel Aircraft Industries and Zim Israel Navigation Shipping Company. Eisenberg was the first Israeli to establish trading links with the People's Republic of China, which eventually extended to North Korea and Khmer Rouge-controlled Cambodia. Eisenberg's chief exports to China and North Korea were weapons. In the latter part of his life, Eisenberg was found more often in Beijing, where he died in 1997, than in Tel Aviv. As with Israel's covert oil business with Iran, Eisenberg's weapons sales to China and North Korea were handled by a shell corporation in Panama called United Development, Inc.
Wow, imagine that, our foreign policy being run by neoCONs and Zionists in service to Apartheid Israel.
Those that know 9/11 was an Israeli masterminded False Flag will recall ZIM as the Israeli shipping outfit that broke their WTC lease–costing them over 50k–several weeks before 9/11 and got the hell out of Dodge, as if they knew something bad was going to happen.
Gosh, what would the USA do without our good friend and ally Israel always stabbing us in the back?
Margolis seems like a pretty worldly, well connected guy. He should send the video of Ghaddafi being sodomized with a sharpened stick to Kim as a reminder of what can happen to him if he gives up his nuclear deterrent.Harold Smith , May 19, 2018 at 2:41 pm GMT"North Korea was right on target when it accused arch-neocon John Bolton of trying to sabotage the peace deal. "Che Guava , May 19, 2018 at 2:44 pm GMTBolton is merely the stalking horse in this particular scam. (It is for this kind of role that Bolton was picked in the first place). Apparently we're to infer that orange clown really, really, really, really, really, really, really wants some kind of a peace deal with North Korea, just like he really, really, really, really, really, really, really wants better relations with Russia for example alas there's always a fly in the imperial ointment.
In reality of course there was never any chance of a peace deal with North Korea, just like there was never any chance of a troop withdrawal from Afghanistan, or a withdrawal from Syria, or cooperation with Russia (on anything), or a real investigation into 9/11, etc. Instead what we get is affectatious posturing by actors on a stage; "government" by diabolical jewish-supremacist-inspired dialectics.
@padreErr, Saudi Arabia?
and for no concessions and a ridiculously slavish subordination of the U.S.A., Israel?
|
|
|
May 19, 2018 | www.theamericanconservative.com
... ... ...
The larger problem with Thiessen's "analysis" is that it fails to grasp that North Korea's government won't accept the "offer" Trump is making because accepting it means giving up the one thing that does more to guarantee the regime's security than any promise that the U.S. could ever make. Trump talked about giving Kim "very strong protections" if he agreed to get rid of the nuclear weapons, but there are no protections that the U.S. could offer that would be any stronger than the ones he currently possesses. Kim is coming to the summit as the leader of a nuclear-weapons state conducting talks at the highest level with the global superpower, and he isn't going to agree to give up that status in exchange for obviously worthless promises from Donald Trump. The more that the Trump administration and its boosters delude themselves into thinking that they have North Korea on the defensive, the worse the summit will go for the U.S. and its allies.
SF Bay May 18, 2018 at 11:14 pm
" The more that the Trump administration and its boosters delude themselves into thinking that they have North Korea on the defensive, the worse the summit will go for the U.S. and its allies."b. , says: May 19, 2018 at 10:50 amThis summit can really only go one way. Trump, ever the fool, will swagger in, offer nothing, bluster, and in the end be handed his hat. I don't think there's anyway to spin this as anything other than the poop storm that it is. No Nobel is Trump's future. Sad.
"giving up the one thing that does more to guarantee the regime's security than any promise that the U.S. could ever make"b. , says: May 19, 2018 at 10:54 amIt could be argued at this point that nuclear proliferation in a world of unipolar aggression might well be stabilizing not only whichever regimes the US decides to destabilize on a given day, but also the international order and even peace. Certainly, China's modest arsenal of minimum means of reprisal and Russia's outsized arsenal matching US folly warhead for warhead and warhead for interceptor demonstrate that US impunitivism is not even deterred by that. But Iraq was attacked precisely because Bush and his cronies were certain Saddam had no effective WMD deterrent – no nukes, everything else a desirable post-hoc justification.
Trump has the EU "cornered", and only fools will believe that this is to the benefit of the world, or even the US – unless the EU finally recognizes the magnitude of its "ally" problem, and their captive populations elect politicians that, for good or ill, will break with the US.
Trump has zero leverage over Iran and North Korea, not only because he is already committed to acts of aggression including all-out economical warfare and soon naval blockade, but also because both nations – and their backers in China and Russia – have long realized that any possible "appeasement" on their part will have as much impact on US conduct as EU "consultations" or South Korean "coordination" – now with a US theater commander as "ambassador". The Moon government has relegated itself to the bleachers as the welfare of South Korea is at stake because, just like the EU3, it does not dare question the unilateral "alliance" it has acquiesced to over decades.
We live in the age of a nation unhinged. But Guatemala, Paraguay and Romania are following from ahead, demonstrating that the US might be acting unilaterally, but not alone, and this "coalition of the unseemly eager" is, in terms of outcomes, no different from posturing collaborators in Germany, France and the UK, or the hapless hostages in South Korea.
Surely, Thiessen and Trump have the world outnumbered and surrounded. What could possibly go wrong, with leaders of such sparkling brilliance in charge?
The most pathetic display here is the establishment biparty published opinion applauding Trump for pursuing the purest expression of Godfather Diplomacy, turned into farce. America's sickening fascination with and glorification of organized crime and racketeering aside – prosperity gospel wins – it is quite obvious that we cannot make "offers they cannot refuse" by putting a horse's ass on a pillow.A. G. Phillbin , says: May 19, 2018 at 2:32 pm@b.Blimbax , says: May 19, 2018 at 6:24 pmAmerica's sickening fascination with and glorification of organized crime and racketeering aside – prosperity gospel wins – it is quite obvious that we cannot make "offers they cannot refuse" by putting a horse's ass on a pillow.
Actually b., that was a horse's head on a pillow in "The Godfather." Were you thinking of Trump or Bolton when you wrote that?
Speaking of horses, John Bolton is the south end of a north-bound horse.
|
|
|
May 18, 2018 | www.unz.com
The biggest obstacle Donald Trump is going to face in his upcoming negotiations with Kim Jong-un, is not Kim's unwillingness to abandon his nuclear weapons program, but resistance from powerful elements in the foreign policy establishment who will do everything they can to scuttle the agreement. We've already seen an example of this just this week when US nuclear bombers were included in the US-Korea joint military drills that are currently underway in the south. The B-52′s were clearly added to the massive "Max Thunder" exercises to provoke the DPRK leadership, increase tensions, and convince Kim that it was pointless to trust Washington. The move was bitterly criticized in North Korea's state media which summed up the situation like this:
"At a time when the DPRK-U.S. summit is approaching, the U.S. has launched the largest ever drill involving B-52 strategic nuclear bomber, F-22 Raptor stealth fighters and other nuclear strategic assets. This is an extremely provocative and ill-boding act going against the trend for peace and security on the Korean peninsula .The extremely adventurous 2018 Max Thunder joint air combat exercises are aimed at precision strike on key strategic objects of the DPRK and the seizure of the air control together with the U.S ."
The North's assessment is entirely correct. The drills are a simulation of a preemptive attack on North Korea that would annihilate the military, level Pyongyang and "decapitate" the leadership. They are a deliberate provocation designed to poison the atmosphere prior to the June 12 summit in Singapore. They're also a clear violation of the Panmunjom Declaration which affirms the mutual commitment of the North and South "to completely cease all hostile acts against each other in every domain, including land, air and sea, that are the source of military tension and conflict." (Panmunjom Declaration)
What we'd like to know is whether Trump was consulted about the drills? Did he give the go-ahead? Was it his decision to tweak Kim's nose after Kim had just made a number of conciliatory gestures including the total banning of nuclear weapons and ballistic missiles tests, the returning of three US prisoners to US custody, and meeting with leaders in the south in order to end hostilities and normalize relations? Is Trump responsible for this diplomatic disaster?
Of course not. Trump's objectives are completely clear. He wants to win the Nobel Prize and he wants to be recognized as a foreign policy genius, both of which are within his grasp if he persuades Kim to ditch his nukes. Trump does not want to provoke Kim who, so far, has acted in good faith. He wants to cut a deal with him. The exercises represent the interests of some other constituency, some deeper faction within the national security state who have a stake in the outcome of future negotiations. They want the talks to fail so they can preserve the status quo. They want a divided Korea that "languishes in a permanent state of colonial dependency". That works just fine for them, which is why the military drills were not postponed or cancelled. It's also why John Bolton has been making incendiary comments about the "Libya model", and why the media has been fueling public pessimism while misrepresenting US position. According to many media reports, the North will be expected to 'totally decommission its nuclear weapons, missiles and biochemical weapons' without any immediate compensation.
That's not the deal. That's never been the deal. No one on the North Korean side ever said that Washington was going to get something for nothing. And it's not going to happen either. Kim is looking for a tradeoff, a decommissioning of his nuclear weapons in exchange for basic security guarantees. That's the deal.
So who's spreading all these false rumors and what is their objective? Here's more from North Korea's state media:
"The U.S. is miscalculating the magnanimity of the DPRK as signs of weakness and trying to embellish and advertise as if these are the product of its sanctions and pressure.
The U.S. is trumpeting as if it would offer economic compensation and benefit in case we abandon nukes. But we have never had any expectation of U.S. support in carrying out our economic construction and will not make such a deal in future .
If the Trump administration takes an approach to the DPRK-U.S. summit with sincerity for improved DPRK-U.S. relations, it will receive a deserved response from us. However, if the U.S. is trying to drive us into a corner to force our unilateral nuclear abandonment, we will no longer be interested in such dialogue and cannot but reconsider our proceeding to the DPRK-U.S. summit." (End of statement)
The North doesn't want Washington's money or its economic inducements. The North wants assurances that the US will not attack it in the future. That's it. That's what Kim wants. He wants an end to the hostilities so he can move ahead with a regional economic-integration plan that will draw the two Koreas closer together, end the North's isolation, strengthen the North's economy, and pave the way for prosperity. In other words, Kim is offering to give up his nuclear weapons to (essentially) get Washington off its back and out of its hair.
None of this has anything to do with Trump's absurd "maximum pressure" campaign, which had no impact on Kim's decision at all. The North is not motivated by Trump's hysterical threats of "total destruction", but by a once-in-a-lifetime opportunity to emerge from its long-term seclusion and become an active participant in an ambitious economic integration plan that will link North and South Korea to the rest of Asia via massive infrastructure and energy projects. The only catch to this proposal, is that the DPRK must abandon its nuclear weapons program and agree to resolve its issues with Seoul. In other words, Kim's eagerness to denuclearize is not an attempt to placate Washington, but an effort to meet the minimal requirements of his economic partners in Beijing, Moscow and Seoul.
The United States is not central to the critical economic-political developments on the peninsula, in fact, the region is making a concerted effort to sever its ties with Washington by creating a giant free trade zone that will connect the region through " large trilateral infrastructural and energy projects," to Japan, Southeast Asia, Central Asia and Europe. Check this out from the Kremlin website:
"The Korean Government has recently created the Northern Economic Cooperation Committee This has completed the creation of a management system that will make Korea the leader in the development of the Far East. The Committee is tasked with strengthening economic cooperation with Northeast Asian and Eurasian countries. In the future, cooperation between the Committee and Russia's Far Eastern Federal District and the Ministry for the Development of the Russian Far East will play a key role in the development of the Far East.
Next year, we will create a Korean-Russian Regional Cooperation Forum. It should bolster contacts between regional governments in Korea and the Russian Far East. Cooperation channels between regional economic communities and small and medium-sized businesses will greatly expand contacts between people and promote practical cooperation ..
The North Korean nuclear and missile ambitions are the biggest threat to the development of the huge potential of the Korean Peninsula and the Russian Far East. This is why we have come to the conclusion that this problem must be settled as soon as possible." (Kremlin website)
See what's going on? Kim has been asked to choose between prosperity or nukes, and he has wisely chosen prosperity. He has decided to participate in a common economic space that allows commerce to flourish without the bulk of the profits to be siphoned off by the voracious western corporations. Is it any wonder why powerful members of the foreign policy establishment want to torpedo the plan?
The integration plan is not some pie-in-the-sky apparition, but a broad and detailed economic blueprint for regional development; power plants, highways, high-speed rail, and pipeline corridors. It's the whole nine yards. Here's more from The South China Morning Post:
"President Moon Jae-in gave the North's leader Kim Jong-un a USB drive containing a "New Economic Map of the Korean Peninsula" at the fortified border village of Panmunjom on April 27. The initiative included three economic belts – one connecting the west coast of the peninsula to China, making the region a centre of logistics; one connecting the east coast to Russia for energy cooperation and one on the current border to promote tourism.
"The new economic map includes railway links between the two Koreas and China's northeast stretching all the way to Europe ."
"The plan would have a huge impact on China's northeastern region as it would transform the region as a centre of logistics in East Asia, which could function as a driving force for the rapid economic growth of the region .A railway connection would bring a myriad of investments from overseas and would help the economy take off."
Yet observers added that the initiatives were dependent on Kim accepting Seoul's definition of denuclearisation – namely the complete, verifiable and irreversible dismantling of the North's nuclear programme." (The South China Morning Post)
Kim must denuclearize in order to take advantage of this unprecedented opportunity, which is why he is eager to make hefty concessions to Trump while getting very little in return. Think about it: Trump gets the nukes and the Nobel Prize while Kim gets a lousy piece of paper with Washington's guarantees for security. That's a great deal for Trump but not a very good deal for Kim. Even so, Kim is prepared to cooperate in order to meet his obligations and move forward with an economic plan that will strengthen his economy and improve the lives of his people. He's making the right choice.
Some of Trump's deep state opponents probably think that they can derail Kim's plans by sabotaging the June 12th Summit. But that's not entirely true. Kim does not need to reach an agreement with Trump, he merely has to convince his main trading partner, Beijing, that he's made a sincere effort that was rejected by an unreasonable and tyrannical Washington. If Kim proves that he's willing to go the extra mile for peace– by offering to decommission his nuclear arsenal– then Beijing is going to reward his behavior by easing the sanctions and restoring the DPRK's economic lifeline. Bottom line: Kim is going to win one way or another.
In my opinion, the cat-n-mouse game Kim is playing with Trump is a bit of a ruse because, in truth, Kim is going to have to give up his nukes whether he makes a deal with Trump or not. As we said earlier, Moscow, Beijing and Seoul have all made denuclearization a basic requirement for participation in their economic integration plan, so it's a done deal. Kim is going to have to abandon his nuclear weapons. The fact is, Russia and China don't want the smaller, surrounding nations to have nukes any more than the US wants Mexico, Canada or Cuba to have them. It dramatically impacts regional security.
Finally, it wouldn't surprise me if Washington's deep state powerbrokers are more concerned about the proposed regional free trade zone, then they are about the North's nuclear weapons. In order for the US to be a major player in the most populous and prosperous region in the world, it must implement its "pivot to Asia" strategy that controls China's explosive growth and prevents the emergence of an economic or military rival. The so called "Putin Plan" for vast economic integration is a direct threat to Washington's dream of maintaining its dominant position in the global economy. If successfully implemented, the Putin Plan will greatly accelerate the pace of imperial decline.
So far, I don't see any indication that Washington knows how to deal with this threat. ← Did Trump Scrap the Nuke's Deal to Pay ... Category: Foreign Policy Tags: China , Donald Trump , North Korea Recently from Author
Did Trump Scrap the Nuke's Deal to Pay Back His Pro-Israel Campaign Donors? Bob Mueller Smackdown Is This Trump's "Samson Moment"? The Mueller Inquisition Has Ballooned Into a Fourth Branch of Government Kim Jong-Un Is Not Trying to Pull a "Fast One" on Trump
Related Pieces by AuthorTrump Did NOT Convince Kim to Ditch His Nukes. China Did Kim Jong-Un Is Not Trying to Pull a "Fast One" on Trump If There's a War in Korea, Blame Trump Why Trump Won't Start a War with North Korea Why Can't Wheeler-Dealer Trump Cut a Deal with North Korea?
Of Related Interest Reasons Trump Breaks Nuclear-Sanction Agreement with Iran, Declares Trade War with China, and Meets with North Korea James Petras 46 Comments Reply Trump Did NOT Convince Kim to Ditch His Nukes. China Did Mike Whitney 134 Comments Reply Herding Hamsters and Other Cosmic Reflections Fred Reed 101 Comments Reply ← Did Trump Scrap the Nuke's Deal to Pay ... Hide 56 Comments Leave a Comment 56 Comments to "Foreign Policy Insiders Try to Scuttle Trump-Kim Nukes Deal" Commenters to Ignore Commenters to ignore (one per line)
Save ListCancel ...to Follow Commenters to follow (one per line)
Save ListCancel Endorsed Only Trim Comments? []
Carlton Meyer , Website May 18, 2018 at 4:17 am GMT
North Korea has been trying to cut a peace deal for decades, but our Deep State blocks all such efforts. I documented the wasteful and aggressive efforts of US Army generals to thwart peace in a series of articles. This was the latest:Monty Ahwazi , May 18, 2018 at 4:59 am GMThttp://www.g2mil.com/casey.htm
Taxpayers are shocked to read what's been going on this past decade to stop peace and profit from warmongering!
The MIC will be under tremendous amount of pressure from the American people if it didn't create phony and perceived enemies by propaganda! The MIC knows that if it didn't do that the military budget will erode over time meaning less money in the MIC pockets!renfro , May 18, 2018 at 5:35 am GMT@Carlton MeyerMEFOBILLS , May 18, 2018 at 5:47 am GMTVery informative and disgusting.
Thanks.So far, I don't see any indication that Washington knows how to deal with this threat.jilles dykstra , May 18, 2018 at 6:16 am GMTAmerica pivots away from Atlantacist doctrine.
America turns away from finance capitalism (state sponsored usury) and resurrects the "American System" of Peshine Smith and Henry Clay. The American System is internal growth using Industrial Capitalism, where Treasury Money (not corporate bank credit) channels into the commons and industry.
In other words, America resurrects Constitutional Money and Industry. This type of economy was at the birth of the U.S., especially in Massachusetts and Pennsylvania colonies.
America can make all it needs internally, it doesn't need Atlantacist "ship-borne" movement of minerals and goods. America is a continental country like Russia with everything it needs.
Island countries like U.K. need "Atlantacist" doctrine to control the world. BIZWOG (Britain and Israel World Government) is the core of Atlantacism, not the U.S.
Oligarchs in America who benefit from the Atlantacist system will have to be ejected by force. A good parasite makes its host think said parasite is beneficial.
I suppose Kim understand quite well that giving away his atomic bombs and missiles is the beginning of his end like Saddam and Ghadaffi.Anon [178] Disclaimer , May 18, 2018 at 6:54 am GMT
In the good old days deposed dictators went to their south of France mansions and died in their beds.
The USA changed this custom.
This change does have repercussions.
A USA at crossroads, dominating the world or not, causes much uncertainty in the world.The same kind of thing happened back during the Cuban Missile Crisis: elements of the government attempted to provoke the Soviets into attacking American reconnaissance aircraft so they'd have an excuse to fire back and invade.Anonymous [392] Disclaimer , May 18, 2018 at 8:06 am GMTBolton's comments about "Libya" were a transparent attempt to scuttle the deal. He knew that the N. Korean leadership had watched the tapes of Qaddafi being killed; N. Korea directly stated that Libya was the reason for them developing nukes, so Bolton knew how the comments would be taken. He was hoping to sneak them by unnoticed. Meanwhile, neocons like William Krystal say "we need to be willing to walk away from negotiations." That's what they are hoping for.
Interesting.animalogic , May 18, 2018 at 8:25 am GMTI think the author might be saying that Kim might cut out Trump from all de-nuke talks and instead go around him.
In this case, Kim would ignore Trump and the US altogether and turn his nukes over to China. China and Russia would give security guarantees to N Korea which is worth a million times more than a US guarantee and China and Russia have a clear incentive to back it up.
Meanwhile the US and especially Trump would look bad. Trump would be viewed as having a Nobel prize within his grasp but bungling it at the goal line while letting China and Russia steal his thunder.
The US, if they tried any funny business, would look really bad. What could they do amyway?
Ironically, it could actually be Kim that gets the Nobel prize instead. Lol if it goes down that way.
Great article.jacques sheete , May 18, 2018 at 10:15 am GMT
As per usual, msm misrepresents reality of Nth Korea's reaction to military drills: no mention of the added full compliment of strategic air force. Failure to properly explain the meaning of "Libyia solution". No wonder the Nth questions the competence & good faith of the Sth.
I believe its time for China-Russia etc to come out of the shadows: how can the Nth agree to discarding its nuclear shield without security guarantees from its friends ? That the US can't be trusted with its enemies -- OR its friends is obvious to all but the self-interested & the fanatic.Here, no doubt is the problem as the rulers of the USA see it.jacques sheete , May 18, 2018 at 10:20 am GMT[Kim] wants an end to the hostilities so he can move ahead with a regional economic-integration plan that will draw the two Koreas closer together, end the North's isolation, strengthen the North's economy, and pave the way for prosperity.
None of that must be allowed to happen unless it's under the authority of our jealous commercial and political G-ds. It's essentially the big reason for all US involvement in foreign wars since 1898 if not earlier. Probably the big reason for the Lincoln's War of Northern Bankers Against Southern Planters as well.
What was needed to make the world safe for peace, [the old liberals] argued, was to implement economic freedom, free trade and goodwill among the nations, and popular government. I want to stress the importance of both of these requirements: free trade at home and in international relations, and democracy. The fateful error of our age has consisted in the fact that it dropped the first of these requirements, namely free trade, and emphasized only the second one, political democracy. In doing so, people ignored the fact that democracy cannot be permanently maintained when free enterprise, free trade, and economic freedom do not exist.
-Ludwig von Mises, Economic Causes of War
I would also add that people ignored the fact that peace cannot be permanently maintained when free enterprise, free trade, and economic freedom do not exist and I believe that's the point Mises was making. Neither can peace be maintained when we allow ignorant crackpots to pilot the ship, and that's what "we've" been doing since the institution of the so called "democratic republic."
Also, I'm not a huge fan of democracy, especially for a large state, and there should be no large states especially world government. All states claim a monopoly on force and all inevitably lead to political and economic slavery. They are not compatible with either freedom or peace.
Oops, I should have read further before posting my comment, above.jacques sheete , May 18, 2018 at 10:41 am GMTMike already made the point and is spot on, here
He has decided to participate in a common economic space that allows commerce to flourish without the bulk of the profits to be siphoned off by the voracious western corporations. Is it any wonder why powerful members of the foreign policy establishment want to torpedo the plan?
@AnonRenoman , May 18, 2018 at 10:43 am GMT
The same kind of thing happened back during the Cuban Missile Crisis: elements of the government attempted to provoke the Soviets into attacking American reconnaissance aircraft so they'd have an excuse to fire back and invade.
True, and there is a pattern.
" this entire myth, so prevalent then and even now about Hitler, and about the Japanese, is a tissue of fallacies from beginning to end. Every plank in this nightmare evidence is either completely untrue or not entirely the truth.
If people should learn this intellectual fraud about Hitler's Germany, then they will begin to ask questions, and searching questions "
Murray Rothbard, Revisionism for Our Time
Mr. Rothbard was an American Jew and an historian of the very highest caliber.Nowadays we can add Saddam, Qadaffi, Kim, Putin, and others to the list.
America is simply evil. Evil evil evil.The Alarmist , May 18, 2018 at 11:07 am GMTCold N. Holefield , Website May 18, 2018 at 11:59 am GMT"So far, I don't see any indication that Washington knows how to deal with this threat."
Sure they do: They plan to act like the proverbial chess-playing pigeon, wings-a-flapping, knocking down all the pieces, and shitting all over the board.
They will keep emphasizing the grave threat the Norks pose to the American people, they will ratchet up sanctions on the nations that "prop up" the Nork regime by trade (though they will continue to be lenient to South Korea as long as it buys US arms), they will start locking those other nations out of SWIFT, etc., and ultimately they will strike to decapitate the Norks, even if they have to go it alone. They are banking on the belief that the Chinese and South Koreans will stand down in the face of all of our awesomeness.
It's not the Libya Plan , it's the Chile Plan . Trump promises Kim he can be Dictator for Life , like Putin and Trump if he has his druthers and Xi too, if he promises to drop his Nuke Program .Cold N. Holefield , Website May 18, 2018 at 12:12 pm GMTThis is where the world is headed. The Post Carbon World is to be divvied up into Fiefdoms run by Oligarch Tyrants and they all belong to the Consortium known as The Worldwide Oligarch Network . A Confederacy of Oligarchic Fiefdoms .
In otherwords, a giant Global Plantation of sorts.
Here's yah julip, Massa Hawkins, all minty & frosty, jus like you like it!!
Get accustomed to saying that or something akin to it because it's coming to a theater near you in the not-too-distant future.
Sean , May 18, 2018 at 12:27 pm GMTSee what's going on? Kim has been asked to choose between prosperity or nukes, and he has wisely chosen prosperity. He has decided to participate in a common economic space that allows commerce to flourish without the bulk of the profits to be siphoned off by the voracious western corporations. Is it any wonder why powerful members of the foreign policy establishment want to torpedo the plan?
Stop with this nonsense. Yes, you're correct, Kim doesn't want that prosperity siphoned off by Western Corporations . Why? Because he and his cronies will be doing the siphoning, thank you very much. Let's not paint this tyrant as a Goody Two Shoes , because he's not.
Fyi, my criticism of Kim doesn't mean I agree with threatening North Korea or that I agree with how the Western Foreign Policy Establishment has treated North Korea historically. What it means is, there are no Good Guys in this equation. They're ALL Bad Guys .
http://www.tampabay.com/opinion/editorials/Trump-backs-off-China-tariff-threat-as-China-pumps-money-into-a-Trump-family-project_168320640DESERT FOX , May 18, 2018 at 12:38 pm GMTThe biggest obstacle Donald Trump is going to face in his upcoming negotiations with Kim Jong-un, is not Kim's unwillingness to abandon his nuclear weapons program, but resistance from powerful elements in the foreign policy establishment of China who will use Trump's desire for a foriegn policy success to weaken the trade agreement so China can continue deindustrialising Ameraica and the rest of the West .
Kim put Trump in the land of the promised, then went back on his word to get Trump to concede on trade, and of course Trump is doing just that. The deep state will sell out the long term interests of their country in the name of security consideration. Politicians want to get that foreign policy coup, which the North Koreans are perennially dangling. They Koreans will never give up the nukes that China effectively gave them unless the Chinese order them to, and that will only happen isTrump completely sells out the US on trade. The US would not dare attack North Korea and risk Chinese military intervention AGAIN. China is holding all the cards unless Trump just refuses to play diplomatic dupe to decepticon Korea (north and south for South Korea also wants access to the Western market) . Korean diplomacy basically consists of giving America false hope. The best thing is would be to leave North Koreato stew in their own juice, and impose tariffs on China, Japan and South Korea too. They are all aggressor states.
How courteous is the Japanese;
He always says, "Excuse it, please."
He climbs into his neighbor's garden,
And smiles, and says, "I beg your pardon";
He bows and grins a friendly grin,
And calls his hungry family in;
He grins, and bows a friendly bow;
"So sorry, this my garden now."Ogden Nash,The Japanese (1938)
Trump is a puppet of the Zionists who are the controllers of every facet of the U.S. gov and these warmongers want the America people kept in a world of continual hysteria and war to further the Zionist goal of a NWO.EliteCommInc. , May 18, 2018 at 12:49 pm GMTThe zionist warmongers created the wars in the mideast by Israels attack on 911 and blaming it on the muslims in Afghanistan and Iraq and thus started the bombing and invasion of these countries and then the zionists included Syria and followed their plan of regime change in 7 countries , all for the greater Israeli goal and their NWO goal.
If anyone doubts that Israel and their zionist dual citizens control the U.S. gov , just remember they did 911 and got away with it.
Assuming all of this isn't merely "drama queening" for the nobel prize gambit. And I have my suspicions that it is.bob sykes , May 18, 2018 at 12:50 pm GMTAn article that posits as major contention a Nobel peace prize for this president is not going to taken seriously by me.
As for the joint exercises -- and the President's ignorance, that's a very hard sell. No sale at all. At this juncture that President Moon Jae-in did not put a halt of a postponement on the matter leaves his decision making in doubt. Certainly there are those in S. Korea and the US who prefer to maintain the status quo. But neither President Trump nor President Moon get to cry foul play by their subordinates on this question.
A nobel peace prize -- good grief.
@AnonymousEliteCommInc. , May 18, 2018 at 12:53 pm GMTThis would work if the Russians and Chinese made their security guarantees visible by putting some token ground forces in the DMZ.
The US has shrifted North Korea before on the question of disarmament.Z-man , May 18, 2018 at 1:00 pm GMTThis all smells like Kabuki theater of sorts. My subordinates made me do it in this case does not wok for me. -- laugh. Given the lean on the use of force, I suspect that the admin wanted to make a show of force to the point and if I buy any this -- it backfired.
Yeah the Deep State. Isn't it ridiculous, even Trumps own advisers are sidetracking him. Trump and the Chinese president should make a grand bargain . Denuclearize Korea, help them unify make a 100 mile wide demilitarized zone against the Chinese border and reduce and keep US forces well south of the current DMZ or get them out completely. Let the Koreans, mostly the South pay, for the unification.Seamus Padraig , May 18, 2018 at 1:13 pm GMT@AnonSeamus Padraig , May 18, 2018 at 1:20 pm GMT
N. Korea directly stated that Libya was the reason for them developing nukes, so Bolton knew how the comments would be taken.
Really? But didn't the Norks proliferate back in the mid-1990s, years before Khaddaffi cut his disarmament deal with Washington?
anon [217] Disclaimer , May 18, 2018 at 2:03 pm GMTThink about it: Trump gets the nukes and the Nobel Prize while Kim gets a lousy piece of paper with Washington's guarantees for security. That's a great deal for Trump but not a very good deal for Kim.
I'm sure there's something missing from your formula, Mike. In order for this deal to make sense from a N. Korean perspective, they would have to have been extended security guarantees by China, Russia, or perhaps both. Washington's promises aren't worth jack. Go ask Iran. Hell, go ask Libya.
Otherwise, spot on!
Bolton is doing his job, being the neocon mouthpiece. His bosses figured out that in order for NK to denuke, the US might have to demilitarize in S.Korea altogether, while China will reap the benefit of modernizing NK. Neocons need to constraint China as much as possible. They do not accept a multi-polar world.Mike P , May 18, 2018 at 2:04 pm GMTTrump again shows himself as the weak minded fool controlled by neocons. He is blaming China for this fall out, instead of his own generals for staging the unnecessary military exercises and John Bolton for his maniacal zeal to create trouble the world over.
@SeanMike P , May 18, 2018 at 2:07 pm GMT
China who will use Trump's desire for a foreign policy success to weaken the trade agreement so China can continue deindustrialising Ameraica and the rest of the West.
Any kind of trade agreement can be reneged upon at any time; so, extorting concessions on trade cannot be a long-term strategy. China isn't "deindustrialising Ameraica and the rest of the West" – the West is doing it all to itself; and it doesn't really affect all Western countries: the industry in South Korea, Germany, and Taiwan is humming along just fine. Within Europe for example the common currency has done much more damage in this regard than the Chinese.
It is clear that China doesn't see trade with the U.S. as the foundation of future prosperity, but instead focuses on trade with everyone else , particularly in Eurasia and Africa; kind of like a reverse Monroe doctrine. As part of that strategy, they want to push the U.S. out of Korea, and they are probably quite prepared to cut their losses if the Americans choose to respond by severing financial and trade relations. It is very clear that the U.S. are unable and unwilling to engage in honest dealings with anyone anyway.
@bob sykesMike P , May 18, 2018 at 2:14 pm GMT
This would work if the Russians and Chinese made their security guarantees visible by putting some token ground forces in the DMZ.
The U.S. MIC would be in raptures if that happened. Overnight, the military budget would double again.
@Seamus PadraigAnonymous [392] Disclaimer , May 18, 2018 at 2:15 pm GMT
In order for this deal to make sense from a N. Korean perspective, they would have to have been extended security guarantees by China, Russia, or perhaps both. Washington's promises aren't worth jack.
Precisely, and they likely already have obtained those guarantees (whatever they may be worth). The North Koreans (in coordination with China and Russia) are trying to trade their nukes for a complete U.S. withdrawal from South Korea.
@Cold N. Holefieldc matt , May 18, 2018 at 2:20 pm GMTSo what. Better his countrymen profit than the guy holding a gun to your head.
Name me a country that doesn't practice cronyism. You cant. So your objection is a moot point.
convince Kim that it was pointless to trust Washington.c matt , May 18, 2018 at 2:23 pm GMTBecause Iraq, Syria, Libya, Iran, and just about everything else the US has done was not enough. If anyone is stupid enough to trust Washington, they deserve what's coming to them.
basic security guaranteesanonymous [478] Disclaimer , May 18, 2018 at 2:35 pm GMTHahahahahaha – used toilet paper would be more valuable than the paper any US "basic security guarantee" was written on.
It's possible that Kim's own military might force him to pull out of this de-nuke proposal. They'd be giving up their one major deterrent in return for promises of riches which may never be delivered. Their fears of being double-crossed are grounded in reality. Also, a Korea that's unified may not be desired by other countries. It might become too much of a regional power and want to ease the US out. The calculation may be that it's best to continue to see it divided and at loggerheads with each other. What's good for the Koreans may not be considered good for other interested parties.AnonFromTN , May 18, 2018 at 2:50 pm GMTThe biggest obstacle Trump will face is non-trustworthiness of the US. One agreement with the NK was already reached more than 10 years ago, and the US pulled out of it under Bush Jr. Now the US pulled out of the Iran deal. Basically, the US consistently demonstrates that it is useless to come to any agreements with it, as it cannot be trusted to abide by them. That's yet another example that no enemy did as much damage to the US as its own governments (all of them).jacques sheete , May 18, 2018 at 3:29 pm GMT@Cold N. Holefieldjack daniels , May 18, 2018 at 3:41 pm GMT
They're ALL Bad Guys.
Yup.
Ol' Ben commented to the effect that scum floats to the top in politics and bad government. He should have added that "bad government" is a redundancy, since all of them are all bad too.
The best guarantee of security, of course, is to have a nuclear deterrent. A US promise not to attack would be a poor substitute. America's main concern is that NK not sell arms to Iran or Syria, thereby menacing Israel. If Kim formally agrees to that, maybe we can make a deal. It's largely up to China, since we don't want to fight them in order to get rid of Kim.jack daniels , May 18, 2018 at 3:56 pm GMTBolton's role may well be to scare Kim. He's pretty scary.
@SeanYourBunnyWrote , May 18, 2018 at 4:12 pm GMTIn general the bad guys are telling Trump to bargain away the MAGA agenda in return for traditional Republican goals, e.g. tax cuts for the rich and anything that is good for Israel, such as an NK that can't sell WMD to Iran. Since Trump is all too willing to go along. The RINOs and the Big Donors always win because money talks louder than votes, or that's the way professional politicians insist on looking at it.
Zerohedge is reporting the B-52s have been withdrawn from the exercise.mike k , May 18, 2018 at 4:15 pm GMTBeautifully done Mike W! Your writing is so clear and compact. The question remains as to how far the US will go to stop the peace and prosperity process from unfolding in Korea? Are the neocons crazy enough to attack N. Korea? We can only stay tunedSean , May 18, 2018 at 4:57 pm GMT@Mike PPer/Norway , May 18, 2018 at 5:12 pm GMT
Any kind of trade agreement can be reneged upon at any time; so, extorting concessions on trade cannot be a long-term strategy.
North Korea has been using its on/off nuke program to trick the US into concessions for decades now. Trump is just the latest.
https://moneyweek.com/kim-jong-un-north-korea-wavers-over-nuclear-talks/
"Welcome, President Trump, to the infuriating, indecipherable game of North Korean nuclear diplomacy," says CNN's Stephen Collinson. An "unexpected series of threats" has "threatened to nix next month's planned summit in Singapore between Trump and North Korea's leader Kim Jong-un". Kim lashed out at US-South Korea military drills, cancelled a high-level meeting with South Korean officials, and warned that there was "little point" in the US summit if the White House was going to require its nuclear arsenal to be dismantled "up front".
Korean diplomacy is underrated As Mearshimer says, following the treaty of "Kang-wah (February 1876), which opened three Korean ports to Japan . Neither Japan nor Russia was able to gain the upper hand in Korea, mainly because Korean policymakers skillfully played the two great powers off against each other ". Eventually the Russia-Japan war resulted and you could make an argument that WW1 (and even 2) stemmed from the Russian deterrent being removed from the international equation in 1905.
China proved to the US it would not stand for North Korea being crushed, and the US would not dare test that again. In 2000, China openly threatened the US mainland with a nuclear strike in any war over Taiwan declaring independence.
China isn't "deindustrialising Ameraica and the rest of the West" – the West is doing it all to itself; and it doesn't really affect all Western countries: the industry in South Korea, Germany, and Taiwan
China is deindustrialising the West , and Germany is deindustrialsing Europe while being deindustrialize itself by China . The only difference is that the process started later in Germany and there is more resistance. The EU single market is a barrier to non EU trade and is about creating a Germany dominated area. the capital goods China uses are bought from Germany in a great many cases.
South Korea, Taiwan and Japan are happy to have the North Korean nuke menace ,
https://www.unz.com/efingleton/north-korea-why-trump-should-kims-feet-to-the-fire/
North Korean nuclear distraction has long had unwelcome ramifications way beyond military policy. Repeatedly since the Clinton era, it has cramped Washington's style on international trade, for instance. And trade, of course, is absolutely central to the new administration's program.
It is fair to say that all the more important East Asian nations have a vested interest in exaggerating the North Korean threat. The more terrifying North Korea is made to appear, the more desperately Washington will seek out advice and help from China, Japan, and South Korea. That tends to ensure that trade talks with these mercantilist nations are consigned to the backburner.
Moreover at times of tension, Pentagon officials inevitably take charge. As the East Asians have gleefully realized for generations, the Pentagon is a remarkably soft touch on trade, and in return for the merest hortatory support for its military objectives will pull the rug from under the most carefully conceived plans drawn up elsewhere in Washington to get East Asia to open up.,/b>
The business class of the West love the returns they get in China, they are not going to switch to investing in the West, but rather will wait out the era of Trump, whereupon the investing in China will resume apace. It won't be possible to slow the growth of China down and so America will be eclipsed. The military won't be much use then, because China will have bigger and better toys.
@Carlton MeyerEliteCommInc. , May 18, 2018 at 5:15 pm GMTinformative, thnx:)
Thee is a logical hole in the article that I was going to leave alone -- but as yet no one else noted it, I will.Sean , May 18, 2018 at 5:21 pm GMTThe article pushes some press for a nobel peace prize *that really bugs me -- I voted and have defended this president, even being called a moral reprobate and utterly unchristian in doing so.
Despite the press for this so called prize. The author never states what the president contributed to the peace process the than the president's contend of "massive pressure." But in this the article athe cleanly indicates no such pressure had any effect. If the pressure failed, I am unclear why thee is any talk at all about nobel awards.
This president has done one monumental shift in our North Korean policy -- open and direct talks including both heads of state and staff. While long over due and laudable -- one of the jobs of the white house is manage policy to our advantage that taps down on the use of force. It doesn't take a genius IQ to figure out direct talks is a key step in that process. And as such requires no special recognition. I took a look at why President Roosevelt received a novel peace prize -- and if that is the model neither Presidents on the this or the previous administration should be so honored.
If they have removed the bombers, it's a double fault. The response should have been.
We conducted these exercises routinely as preparation for the unfortunate worst case scenario. And while we are disappointed our routine has been misinterpreted -- It is our intention to proceed forward in peace negotiations.
deception fo deception's sake is a foul practice.
@jack danielsAnonFromTN , May 18, 2018 at 5:31 pm GMTNorth Korea's sudden nuclear and ICBM twin leap is a function of how useful China finds it to have Trump asking them for help. North Korea does nothing on its own account.
The smart money wants to be in China that is where the big returns are, so business is waiting out Trump. Subordinating the well being of the nation's population to profit is called economic rationality. The alternative is called fascism. Trump does not have the popular support to go against economic rationality.
@SeanMike P , May 18, 2018 at 5:39 pm GMTToys don't win wars, people do. In Afghanistan, the US and NATO troops with all their fancy toys are scared to stick their noses out of the bases, whereas Taliban with medieval mindset and automatic rifles roam the country freely.
republic , May 18, 2018 at 5:46 pm GMTChina is deindustrialising the West The business class of the West love the returns they get in China, they are not going to switch to investing in the West
So whose fault is it – China's, or the Western capitalists? Pick one.
Germany is deindustrialsing Europe while being deindustrialized itself by China. The EU single market is a barrier to non EU trade and is about creating a Germany dominated area. the capital goods China uses are bought from Germany in a great many cases.
The EU common market as such wasn't a problem; as long as each European country had its own currency that was allowed to float, the trade imbalance problem was mitigated. It was the Euro, which was foisted on Germany by the French as a price for their consent to German reunification, that caused the trade imbalances within Europe to explode.
But with or without the Euro, Germany's manufacturing sector will survive and thrive. China's labour cost advantage over Germany will vanish, just like Japan's did. Just wait and see.
@AnonSean , May 18, 2018 at 6:44 pm GMTBolton's remarks sound like an updated version of the Melian dialogue
When Athens gave Melos an ultimatum during the Peloponnesian War.@AnonFromTNJVC , May 18, 2018 at 6:48 pm GMTCannon fodder wins wars. The first born tend to be cleverer and less likely to fight because they get and inherit the best of everything (including first place in the womb).. There are a lot of big families in Afghanistan. Many young men of the burgeoning population are second sons and are thus reckless. The Taliban roam and die freely, but there are a lot of them growing up and stepping into the place of the dead,.
the Trump/Kim meeting was not instituted by the USG. China, Russia, and SK have all been in negotiation with Kim, and they all realize that the USG word is essentially worthless. I suspect Kim has agreed with his neighbors to de-nuclearize in return for some robust security agreements along with the opening of trade in the region. The U.S. will need to think hard and long about doing anything to disrupt what is essentially a regional policy shift. I think Trump has been invited along on the ride just to stroke his and the USG's sense of self importance. The world is changing, and the future lies in the east. Unfortunately, too many of those behind the curtain controlling USG foreign policy are too blinded by their arrogance and hubris to realize that, and instead of welcoming a peaceful multi-centered world, will continue on their chosen path of aggression, demands and sanctions until we become the isolated one.EliteCommInc. , May 18, 2018 at 7:12 pm GMT@JVCSean , May 18, 2018 at 7:43 pm GMTSince President Moon Jae-in has been working in this matte with North Korea for more than twenty yeas, I find it hard to believe he intends to allow an opportunity to slip by based on training routine exercises.
@Mike PArt , May 18, 2018 at 7:45 pm GMT
China's, or the Western capitalists?
Trump was elected to punish both, so a lot of Americans apparently blame both.
The EU common market as such wasn't a problem; as long as each European country had its own currency that was allowed to float, the trade imbalance problem was mitigated.
At the cost of throwing people out a job, which only worked when people knew things would eventually get better. Things are not going to get better for the lower orders of West, they are good and getting better for the financial elite and China.
But with or without the Euro, Germany's manufacturing sector will survive and thrive. China's labour cost advantage over Germany will vanish, just like Japan's did. Just wait and see .
China is 10 times larger than Japan, hence the economies of scale are probably going to become more salient than labour costs (there is a new factory complex in China making laptops that has a bigger workforce than the British Army). German business are going to do well out of China's rise. American business have no objection to China making everything and America being supreme in financial services. Unfortunately the country would become weaker than China while a substantial part of the population became increasingly disgusted with their lot in life (in real terms worse of than their parents). The majority ethnic population and state institutions must object to a policy that creates ever increasing numbers of unemployed and ignores state power for the profit of a minority. Therefore the people (there a lot of them) and the deep state are diverging from the business community–increasingly seen as an fifth column with interest in destroying the country as a nation-state. But nation states are a thing with emergent properties not found in their parts. Hence untrammeled capitalism with money sloshing around the world wrecking states and the people who make up nations is a fundamentally unstable system that leads to ethnic nationalism and militarism. The deep nation-state is nothing you can put your finger on. but at bay it will turn on the business elite and try to wrest control from them.
@AnonAnonFromTN , May 18, 2018 at 8:39 pm GMTMeanwhile, neocons like William Krystal say "we need to be willing to walk away from negotiations." That's what they are hoping for.
Sorry but the Jew's trash talking days are over. There is NO there there!
The Jew is losing his power. Truth is starting to gain strength. The world's attitude is turning away from Jew coercion, through their control of the US government.
Jew power is a function of US government power. And US power is losing out, all around the world.
Trump's overbearing, tuff talking sing-song, is losing its steam. Bolton's big mouth has complicated the NKorea nuke deal. He illustrates to the world, the dishonesty of the US foreign policy under Jew control.
The Israeli embassy deal was a total embarrassment. Innocent blood was flowing as Jarrad and Ivanka were speaking their hollow words. Gaza innocence won the day.
Europe is fighting to preserve the Iran nuke deal. They are passing laws to protect their businesses from US sanctions. China and Russia are stepping up with deals to counter Trump's Jew favoring sanctions.
Jew led America is getting no respect.
Think Peace -- Do No Harm -- Maintain Hope -- Art
@JVCAnonymous [400] Disclaimer , May 18, 2018 at 10:06 pm GMTThe world does not revolve around the US any more. The US elites still did not realize that – they degenerated too much after 1991. However, some of the US vassals are even more deluded than the US elites. Grown up Europeans (like Germany, France, and even the UK) are learning, judging by their refusal to follow the US lead on the Iranian deal, which is totally illegal from the point of view of the international law (when there was one, before it was repeatedly trampled by the US). But the pathetic inconsequential poodles, like Poland, Ukraine, and Baltic vaudeville states, refuse to learn. More fools them.
@SeanRealist , May 18, 2018 at 10:10 pm GMT
China is deindustrialising the West , and Germany is deindustrialsing Europe while being deindustrialize itself by China . The only difference is that the process started later in Germany and there is more resistance. The EU single market is a barrier to non EU trade and is about creating a Germany dominated area. the capital goods China uses are bought from Germany in a great many cases.
How is China deindustrializing Germany if the EU is a barrier to non EU trade? You don't see many US, Japanese, or Chinese goods in Europe.
Anonymous [400] Disclaimer , May 18, 2018 at 10:32 pm GMTTrump's objectives are completely clear. He wants to win the Nobel Prize and he wants to be recognized as a foreign policy genius
Trumps chances of being recognized as any kind of genius by intelligent people are slim and none.
That's not the deal. That's never been the deal. No one on the North Korean side ever said that Washington was going to get something for nothing. And it's not going to happen either. Kim is looking for a tradeoff, a decommissioning of his nuclear weapons in exchange for basic security guarantees. That's the deal.
If Kim has any intelligence at all he will demand full denuclearization of the Korean peninsula (South Korea has had US nuclear weapons stationed there for decades) and removal of all US military personnel and material.
US guarantees are worthless.@SeanRabbit , May 18, 2018 at 10:43 pm GMTNorth Korea's demands are pretty clear: a formal end to the Korean War and a peace treaty with the US, and the removal of the US military from the Korean peninsula.
These demands are supported by China and many South Koreans. They're opposed by Japan and some South Korean conservatives. I don't think your notion that China, North Korea, South Korea, and Japan are all aligned on the North Korea issue is true.
If the US wanted to satisfy most of the parties here, and satisfy the isolationists and anti-foreign policy adventurers that supported Trump, then obviously the US would agree to North Korea's demands. This would also, by the way, satisfy Russia. You would only upset Japan and some South Korean hardliners.
So why doesn't the US make a deal that agrees to NK's demands, satisfies most of the parties involved and many Trump supporters and Americans? Clearly Trump, being an astute negotiator and businessman with an instinct for what people like and is popular, is inclined towards such a deal. Obviously what's holding the US back from such a deal are American foreign policy hawks and the deep state, who want to maintain the US military presence globally.
Kim's laughing his ass off. Americans are so stoopid. What makes anyone think NK will go out of it's way to get along with the US? Why would they? Kim's doing just fine and he has Trump as jester to amuse him. I'm sure he's enjoying the hell out of this.EliteCommInc. , May 18, 2018 at 11:24 pm GMT
Trump's fans really thought he had the Nobel sewed up. That's really funny. What's funnier is they think he's helping them.
All of these morons ripe for milking. I should have become a preacher and had an easy, rich life."If the US wanted to satisfy most of the parties here, and satisfy the isolationists and anti-foreign policy adventurers that supported Trump, then obviously the US would agree to North Korea's demands. This would also, by the way, satisfy Russia. You would only upset Japan and some South Korean hardliners."ohmy , May 19, 2018 at 12:10 am GMTAs someone who supports this admin and the agenda that was advanced during the campaign, you description is fa afield from why I voted. I am not an isolationist, though the county could use some minding its own affairs for a time. Nor was my vote premised on being anti-foreign policy. In fact, I have never head of anyone being anti-foreign policy. A policy less reliant on the use of force as its main thrust was and is the issue.
,@MEFOBILLSHow to get the banksters out of their position. It seems they have printed enough cash to buy everyone. Top to bottom.
|
|
|
May 18, 2018 | www.unz.com
After Pyongyang railed this week that the U.S.-South Korean Max Thunder military drills were a rehearsal for an invasion of the North, and imperiled the Singapore summit, the Pentagon dialed them back. The B-52 exercises alongside F-22 stealth fighters were canceled. But Pyongyang had other objections.
Sunday, NSC adviser John Bolton spoke of a "Libyan model" for the North's disarmament, referring to Moammar Gadhafi's surrender of all his weapons of mass destruction in 2004. The U.S. was invited into Libya to pick them up and cart them off, whereupon sanctions were lifted.
As Libya was subsequently attacked by NATO and Gadhafi lynched, North Korea denounced Bolton and all this talk of the "Libyan model" of unilateral disarmament.
North Korea wants a step-by-step approach, each concession by Pyongyang to be met by a U.S. concession. And Bolton sitting beside Trump, and across the table from Kim Jong Un in Shanghai, may be inhibiting.
What was predictable and predicted has come to pass.
If we expected Kim to commit at Singapore to Bolton's demand for "complete, verifiable and irreversible denuclearization," and a swift follow-through, we were deluding ourselves.
At Singapore, both sides will have demands, and both will have to offer concessions, if there is to be a deal.
What does Kim Jong Un want?
An end to U.S. and South Korean military exercises and sanctions on the North, trade and investment, U.S. recognition of his regime, a peace treaty, and the eventual removal of U.S. bases and troops.
He is likely to offer an end to the testing of nuclear weapons and long-range missiles, no transfer of nuclear weapons or strategic missiles to third powers, a drawdown of troops on the DMZ, and the opening of North Korea's borders to trade and travel.
As for his nuclear weapons and the facilities to produce them, these are Kim's crown jewels. These brought him to the attention of the world and the Americans to the table. These are why President Trump is flying 10,000 miles to meet and talk with him.
And, unlike Gadhafi, Kim is not going to give them up.
Assuming the summit comes off June 12, this is the reality Trump will face in Singapore: a North Korea willing to halt the testing of nukes and ICBMs and to engage diplomatically and economically.
As for having Americans come into his country, pick up his nuclear weapons, remove them and begin intrusive inspections to ensure he has neither nuclear bombs nor the means to produce, deliver or hide them, that would be tantamount to a surrender by Kim.
Trump is not going to get that. And if he adopts a Bolton policy of "all or nothing," he is likely to get nothing at all.
Yet, thanks to Trump's threats and refusal to accept a "frozen conflict" on the Korean peninsula, the makings of a real deal are present, if Trump does not make the perfect the enemy of the good.
For there is nothing North Korea is likely to demand that cannot be granted, as long as the security of South Korea is assured to the degree that it can be assured, while living alongside a nuclear-armed North.
Hence, when Kim cavils or balks in Singapore, as he almost surely will, at any demand for a pre-emptive surrender of his nuclear arsenal, Trump should have a fallback position.
If we cannot have everything we want, what can we live with?
Moreover, while we are running a risk today, an intransigent North Korea that walks out would be running a risk as well.
ORDER IT NOW
A collapse in talks between Kim and the United States and Kim and South Korea would raise the possibility that he and his Chinese patrons could face an East Asia Cold War where South Korea and Japan also have acquired nuclear weapons and the means to deliver them.
In the last analysis, the United States should be willing to accept both the concessions to the North that the South is willing to make and the risks from the North that the South is willing to take.
For, ultimately, they are the one who are going to have to live on the same peninsula with Kim and his nukes.
Trump ran on a foreign policy that may fairly be described as a Trump Doctrine: In the post-post-Cold War era, the United States will start looking out for America first.
This does not mean isolationism or the abandonment of our allies. It does mean a review and reassessment of all the guarantees we have issued to go to war on behalf of other countries, and the eventual transfer of responsibility for the defense of our friends over to our friends.
In the future, the U.S. will stop futilely imploring allies to do more for their own defense and will begin telling them that their defense is primarily their own responsibility. Our allies must cease to be our dependents.
Patrick J. Buchanan is the author of a new book, "Nixon's White House Wars: The Battles That Made and Broke a President and Divided America Forever."
Copyright 2018 Creators.com.
|
|
|
May 03, 2018 | failedevolution.blogspot.gr
A top member of the cabal made some statements proving one more time his level of commitment to execute the sinister plan. John Bolton spoke to "Face the Nation" and said that the US will seek the 'Libya model':
" We're looking at the Libya model of 2003, 2004 ... " and " One thing that Libya did that led us to overcome our skepticism was that they allowed American and British observers into all their nuclear related sites ... "
Let us translate and expand the latest phrase:
Once we "overcome our skepticism", meaning "make sure that our next target gives up its nukes, or, has no nukes", then "we are free to invade". Apparently, that's the 'Libya model'. Of course, we all know now what happened to Libya.
https://www.youtube.com/embed/ISHYBvopwg0
As Larry Wilkerson, former chief of staff to Secretary of State Colin Powell, told to Sharmini Peries and the RealNews :If I were Kim Jong-un I would not be very happy about that. After all, that ended in " we came, we saw, and he died " - I believe it was the way Secretary Clinton in her warmongering stance characterized it.
Looking at what Libya has been made to turn into without Gaddafi there, and with the removal of Gaddafi the way we did, I'd be very alarmed if I were North Korea, if that was the proposition I was looking at, coming from the Secretary of State and the President of the United States.
It appears that Bolton indirectly certifies the position supported by many, that the US and allies invade a targeted country after they make sure that it has given up its nuclear arsenal. It seems that the warmongering cabal understands the relations with other nations only in terms of power and level of losses in case of war.
Recall that the Western hypocrites eventually decided that puppet Gaddafi should change role and become again the 'bad guy' in his last 'permformance' . You know the rest: Libya sunk in chaos, but the neocolonial hyenas didn't care that much. They just started a race for country's resources on behalf of their beloved corporate monsters.
|
|
|
May 01, 2018 | www.unz.com
There is no doubt that the people of Korea, of the North and the South, want peaceful reunification and the prosperity of their country. But so far the US has prevented it. The US deep state preferred to have its military bases in South Korea with its nuclear weapons aimed not only at Pyongyang, but also at Beijing and Vladivostok. Last year, the US brought in its THAAD missile defence system to South Korea, directly threatening the North, Russia, and China.
The Americans outlined the goal of the talks as they see it – the nuclear disarmament of North Korea. This is all that interests them. A North Korea without nuclear weapons is always vulnerable to a volley of Tomahawks, as in Syria. But Kim is not that simple. Instead of "nuclear disarmament of North Korea," he proposed "the liberation of the Korean peninsula from nuclear weapons" – and, importantly, these words were repeated by the president of the South.
The liberation of the peninsula from nuclear weapons means, first of all, the removal of American bases and occupation forces, and the banning of American ships capable of carrying nuclear weapons from entering Korean ports. And then, without the invaders being present, the two independent Koreas will agree on their own terms. This, roughly, is the logic of Kim – and Moon accepted it, uttering the cherished words "the liberation of the peninsula" instead of "the elimination of the North Korean nuclear program."
Russia as an original member of the nuclear club has traditionally supported the idea of nuclear disarmament of all non-member countries. But it does not actively insist on it, if only because India, Pakistan and Israel are among the new nuclear powers, and the last not only did not sign the non-proliferation treaty, but also does not agree with any control over its nuclear weaponry. Under these conditions, it makes no sense to insist on the nuclear disarmament of North Korea. But, let us repeat, Russia is for disarmament. If this disarmament brings about the elimination of US bases in South Korea, this can only be welcomed.
The summit in the DMZ (demilitarized zone) has already had an effect. We have no doubt that the North is short of freedom, but in the South, there is certainly freedom of speech, isn't there?
It turned out that in South Korea until this very day no one had seen or heard Kim, the North Korean president, on a video or in live broadcast. The Independent , a British quality newspaper, reported :
Until the meeting, many South Koreans had never actually heard Kim Jong-un speak. The leader is usually seen only in heavily edited footage, and accessing more videos of him can land people in jail. "I can't believe I'm listening to the voice of Kim Jong Un. Someone I have only seen as a jpeg is speaking now," South Korean Lee Yeon-su wrote on Twitter. It is a dramatic change for South Koreans, who under the National Security Act are banned on threat of jail from accessing media considered pro-North Korean.
Internet resources "sympathetic to North Korea" or, worse, praising North Korea, are banned there; and accessing such sites, or listening to Pyongyang Radio can send a South Korean to prison for several years. A good word about the northern neighbour can earn you a long stretch in jail under the Law on Combating Terrorism.(The law also provides for the death penalty, but it has not been used for the last ten years.) Anti-communist propaganda in the South is part of the school curriculum, part of the news program, part of everyday life.
After the summit, the surprised South Koreans wrote in their social media that the bloody tyrant from the North looked like a teddy bear, small, plump and cute.
And he speaks the same language as they do. And he eats buckwheat noodles, which they love.
ORDER IT NOW
Demonization of North Korea was the first victim of the summit: the South Koreans saw that the much besmirched Kim was quite a worldly guy, even with a very slight trace of Swiss German in his speech. Women's diplomacy also played a role: Kim's sister, Kim Yo Jong, made the first contact with the President of the South during her visit to the Olympics. Kim's wife, a well-known actress, became friends with Moon's wife. This North Korean ruler is a regular guy, they say today in Seoul.
At the NATO headquarters there was a lot of teeth gnashing and demands not to relax the sanctions, or rather to add some more sanctions. The Western mainstream media keeps saying that this summit had been just a preparation for the real main thing, for the meeting of Kim and Trump. But a sharp-sighted observer of The Guardian had noticed that it won't be easy for Trump to do his usual bellicose sabre-rattling after the peaceful meeting of the two Korean leaders. He has been trapped. "If Trump tries to play hardball with Kim, he risks looking like a warmonger and a bully whose policies are inimical to Korean interests, north and south. Intentionally of otherwise, Moon, a lifelong advocate of detente with personal connections to North Korea, has spiked Trump's guns."
Actually, there is not much of reason for the Trump-Kim summit. Trump can take his troops home, and let the Koreans to settle their relations as they find fit. If the Russians and the Chinese did it, so can the Americans, too. The world, including Korea, is fully grown up and it can live without American tutelage.
It won't be easy sailing. The US wants to keep its fingers in, and demands "complete, verifiable and irreversible" disarmament of North Korea. But Kim knows what had happened to countries and leaders that trusted the US promises and disarmed. Gadhafi and Saddam Hussein disarmed, and were brutally killed. Russia disarmed in 1991 only to find itself being treated as irrelevant. The US walked out of treaties made in the Soviet days without as much as "by your leave". Non-nuclear North Korea would already be bombed, as it was in 1950-1953. Nothing indicates that Kim is a suicidal maniac or a new Gorbachev.
There was an agreement for the nuclear disarmament of North Korea, and the US reneged on it all right. There is an agreement for the denuclearisation of Iran, and now the US President intends to renege on it, too.
However, if the US withdraws its troops and agrees to denuclearisation of the peninsula, and if this withdrawal will be "complete, verifiable and irreversible", there is a room for some play. North Korea would like to be treated as a responsible member of the nuclear club, on a par with England and France; it may cease nuclear tests and allow observers or suchlike.
Israel, this important power behind the Capitol Hill, bears a strong animosity against North Korea, for North Korea has been instrumental in providing missile technology to the Axis of Resistance.
The Russians are not going to great lengths for the sake of North Korea. The relations between two neighbours are cool, mutual trade is small. Russia will probably follow China's line regarding Korea. The Chinese would like to see a more obedient North Korea, but they are used to fierce Korean independence by now. They apparently agreed to Kim's steps during recent Kim's meeting with President Xi.
In such a happy, happy day for Korea, I do not want to think about possible complications. For the first time in years, light has appeared in the gloomy skies of Korea, divided in 1945, and never reunited, unlike Vietnam and Germany. Maybe now it's Korea's turn?
Israel Shamir can be reached at [email protected]
|
|
|
Feb 15, 2018 | www.theamericanconservative.com
The New York Times reports on the Trump administration's poor grasp of diplomacy:
American officials were more guarded, saying they were open to talks but not a full-fledged negotiation.
The United States, they said, would reiterate its demands that North Korea make concessions and did not plan to offer any in return.
This is being billed as the administration's willingness to "open the door" to holding talks with North Korea, but as we can see here there is no real interest in pursuing a diplomatic solution. If U.S. officials just want to deliver an ultimatum in person to North Korean officials, it is a pointless exercise that would make it harder to enter into real negotiations later. North Korea knows what the U.S. wants it to do, and it has said many times that it will never do that, so why would they agree to talks where the same demands will be put to them once again? The U.S. is not willing to make confidence-building gestures that might lead to more substantive negotiations down the road, and it has no intention of offering North Korea anything in exchange for any concessions it might conceivably make.
In the very unlikely event that North Korea agreed to a meeting with administration officials, they would have nothing to gain from the encounter and every incentive to stay away. The problem isn't just that the administration won't offer North Korea the tiniest of carrots, but that it doesn't accept the idea of using carrots in diplomacy in the first place. The administration's posturing is what a government does when it wants to feign support for diplomacy even as it rejects diplomacy at every turn. If people here at home can see through this ploy, North Korea will definitely take it as more proof of Washington's bad faith.
|
|
|
Feb 14, 2018 | www.moonofalabama.org
So Korean anger at Ramo's comments finally induced NBC to give him the flick . Unfortunately Ramo won't be sweating it as the article I linked to by Japanese academic Joseph Essertier points out. Ramo is thoroughly entangled with the DC political/intelligence elite. He is a former CEO of mercenary zionist lobby corp Kissinger Associates, ex-senior editor of Time magazine as well as a host of other elite gigs which doubtless came his way thanks to grandaddy who put the 'R' in TRW . It amazes me that many amerikans remain largely unaware of TRW, now a division of Northrop Grumman. TRW took a PR hit in the 70's when Christopher Boyce one of their operatives got caught hawking the communications between Langley and the amerikan embassy in Canberra that laid out the strategy for the 1974 coup against the Gough Whitlam government. Yeah yeah I know, ancient history - well that is certainly the way that all Oz politicians and media look at it but for some of us the rage will never subside. Amerikans's fixation with the JFK assassination, a pretty odd fixation since Kennedy was just another arsehole, comes close, but in the case of Gough he did have principles, acted on them, albeit reluctantly, and the smoking gun to the CIA is established.
TRW is interesting - well not really I got pissed with a bunch of mid-level TRW execs at the Frankfurt Hilton one night and what a boring bunch of straightlaced & unimaginative fuckwits. I had just arrived from Northern Thailand, was jonesing like fuck - I had staggered across to the joint and booked a room & hit the bar to get sorted for Europe. The Frankfurt Hilton is right by the airport.
This probably didn't help my sense of tolerance but honestly these guys had no class, it was a wonder they let them outta Cleveland. As standard the bar was chocka with German sex workers looking to make an earner. This was pre 1990 so they were mainly German, but I've never seen the like of these TRW blokes. The women were attractive in that painted manner certain amerikans prefer, no doubt about their beauty and skill, but they were the end result of amerikan post euro war imperialism - preying on victims has no interest. These idjits from TRW were obviously really attracted to the young women, so they were pulling all sorts of weird stunts to engage with the workers while seeming disapproving of their occupational choice. One even pulled out a bible! The women appeared to be well used to this nonsense, after all, a sex worker's primary training is in how to overcome humiliation and go home better than than she/he arrived, so on one level it was amusing.
AFAIK TRW has been winning contracts to provide 'clerical and communications support' to military and intelligence services since euro-war part 1. The communication stuff was beyond the abilities of the double entry bookkeepers; just like with the NSA, inviting smart imaginative fellows in proved their undoing.
This then is Ramo, an unimaginative trust-funder who has sold his soul to empire.
I have no doubt that he knew Koreans would react badly to the insult but that was of no concern. The point was to sow the seed among the great amerikan herd that Koreans are notorious for their ingratitude so one just shouldn't stress over their possible nuking - North or South Koreans. South Korea's kissy kiss to their friends and family in the North should be considered in that light, just another manifestation of that ingratitude.
There is no reason to suppose Ramo's handlers are incorrect in this assumption, after all the most egregious act of the post war amerikan-japanese war criminal conjunction, the proven rendition of Japanese biological warfare research scientists to Fort Dietrick and the subsequent use of germ warefare weapons containing bubonic plague, anthrax and smallpox on Koreans during the 1950 amerikan invasion is unknown to most amerikans and those who are aware, airily dismiss this horror as "propaganda".
In a lot of ways there is nothing at all noteworthy about any of this. Tune your discriminators correctly, and this manner of deliberately subjective, misleading dross comprises the majority of every 'news bulletin'. The difference here of course is that this wasn't a news bulletin, it was a sportscast, allegedly a celebratory sportscast. The celebration was meant to be congratulating South Korea on their capitalist victory over 'the stalinist' North. Nirvana by outproduction of disposable techno tat. Hmm.
Instead of appreciating the opportunity provided by amerika and Japan to pollute their nation and turn the fuckers at the bottom into toxic, diseased slaves, those ungrateful Koreans were cuddling up to the 'stalinists' - Those fucking unappreciative parasites!
We can analyse this stuff and see exactly how transparent it all is, but for the bloke relaxing into his couch with a beer looking forward to an evening trying to check out the latex enveloped skater's bods, political analysis is the last thing on their mind. The next time the subject comes up with the boys in the bar, they will know why 'we' have to stay intransigent - "those koreans are just ungrateful assholes - remember that family which had the 7-11 on Jefferson? Everything was overpriced and past its use-by".
That stuff works which is why the arseholes have been using it for centuries - and that is why the seeming nonsense such as "the Russkies stole the election" must be resisted - fought hard. The net has provided the world with a wide vista of alternative viewpoints - even though most of us hang where we see what we want to see, alternative points of view still slip thru in a way that they never did before. The arseholes are working that out now which is why this site like every other woke joint is subjected to an increasing barrage of lunatic nonsense - no wonder b needs some time off; not only are his threads getting congested with haters (ask yourself if MoA is so awful why do these derps hang around here like spare pricks at a wedding?) some site users are perpetuating the nonsense by engaging with them.
I dunno what to say unity doesn't come about by some little arsehole issuing orders, it happens when people decide for themselves to put the interest of a group asset ahead of their need to purge their liver at an obvious fuckwit. I realise that the concept of unity is alien to most amerikans and increasing numbers of non-amerikans, but of itself that should be considered objectively and the subtle indoctrinations which created that resistance considered before acting out.Posted by: Debsisdead | Feb 14, 2018 10:17:07 PM | 59
|
|
|
Feb 14, 2018 | www.theamericanconservative.com
The New York Times reports on the Trump administration's poor grasp of diplomacy:
American officials were more guarded, saying they were open to talks but not a full-fledged negotiation.
The United States, they said, would reiterate its demands that North Korea make concessions and did not plan to offer any in return.
This is being billed as the administration's willingness to "open the door" to holding talks with North Korea, but as we can see here there is no real interest in pursuing a diplomatic solution. If U.S. officials just want to deliver an ultimatum in person to North Korean officials, it is a pointless exercise that would make it harder to enter into real negotiations later. North Korea knows what the U.S. wants it to do, and it has said many times that it will never do that, so why would they agree to talks where the same demands will be put to them once again? The U.S. is not willing to make confidence-building gestures that might lead to more substantive negotiations down the road, and it has no intention of offering North Korea anything in exchange for any concessions it might conceivably make.
In the very unlikely event that North Korea agreed to a meeting with administration officials, they would have nothing to gain from the encounter and every incentive to stay away. The problem isn't just that the administration won't offer North Korea the tiniest of carrots, but that it doesn't accept the idea of using carrots in diplomacy in the first place. The administration's posturing is what a government does when it wants to feign support for diplomacy even as it rejects diplomacy at every turn. If people here at home can see through this ploy, North Korea will definitely take it as more proof of Washington's bad faith.
|
|
|
Jan 17, 2018 | www.moonofalabama.org
What was behind the false missile attack alarm in Hawaii yesterday. Poynter has some context:
One of the big stories in the Honolulu Star-Advertiser Saturday morning was that military "brass" updated island officials on how the military would respond to a nuclear attack from North Korea . Military authorities warned there was a "real" threat.At 8:07 a.m. Saturday, Hawaiian residents saw a terrifying alert message on their phones.
It took 38 minutes to correct the "mistake". A missile from North Korea would take 32-35 minutes from launch to impact in Hawaii.
But of interest is the newspaper report hyping the "threat" followed by the false alarm. Coincidence? And the " leaking " of the Draft Nuclear Posture Review this week, in which the military demands hundreds of new "small" nuclear weapons to fight North Korea and Russia, is also just a coincidence? Or is all of this part of a public relation campaign designed to increase the acceptance of new nuclear weapons and "limited" nuclear warfare? A preparation for war on North Korea? (Related: Deconstructing the North Korean 'Threat' and Identifying America's Strategic Alternatives
Grieved , Jan 14, 2018 2:30:45 PM | 20What was behind the false missile attack alarm in Hawaii yesterday. Poynter has some context:
One of the big stories in the Honolulu Star-Advertiser Saturday morning was that military "brass" updated island officials on how the military would respond to a nuclear attack from North Korea . Military authorities warned there was a "real" threat.At 8:07 a.m. Saturday, Hawaiian residents saw a terrifying alert message on their phones.
It took 38 minutes to correct the "mistake". A missile from North Korea would take 32-35 minutes from launch to impact in Hawaii.
But of interest is the newspaper report hyping the "threat" followed by the false alarm. Coincidence? And the " leaking " of the Draft Nuclear Posture Review this week, in which the military demands hundreds of new "small" nuclear weapons to fight North Korea and Russia, is also just a coincidence? Or is all of this part of a public relation campaign designed to increase the acceptance of new nuclear weapons and "limited" nuclear warfare? A preparation for war on North Korea? (Related: Deconstructing the North Korean 'Threat' and Identifying America's Strategic Alternatives (pdf))
Scott Creighton has been working up collateral to his theory that the Hawaii false alert was part of a test to sell the Aegis radar system to Japan. Aegis controls the alert system in Hawaii. The sales contract is $2 billion. Japanese and Pentagon officials were in the area last Thursday as part of an ongoing demonstration of the system. This is his written post (he has a later post in a 20-minute video for those who prefer):nhs , Jan 14, 2018 12:03:49 PM | 4So, while it could be a false flag test of some kind, and while it could be tied to the talks between the two Koreas, I can see it could just as easily be corrupt MIC business as usual. It seems unlikely this alert was sent in error. But could it have been sent so the Japanese could see the warning system in action? And US officials reason, well, it's only Korea and Hawaii's closest, so we have a plausible scenario and neither area has any clout to complain? And that's as far as their thinking needed to go, because at that point it all looks perfectly explainable?
CIA had an agent at a newspaper in every world capital at least since 1977Don Bacon , Jan 14, 2018 12:11:47 PM | 5Re: Hawaii and nukes. This behavior is to be expected when generals are placed in charge of foreign affairs because generals are: > ignorant of anything besides warfare. > taught to believe that they are always right and their detractors are always wrong. >of the belief that only wars, properly conduced with maximum force, solve problems.Don Bacon , Jan 14, 2018 12:28:15 PM | 6A couple of President Harry Truman quotes: "It's the fellows who go to West Point and are trained to think they're gods in uniform that I plan to take apart". . ."I didn't fire him [General MacArthur] because he was a dumb son of a bitch, although he was, but that's not against the law for generals. If it was, half to three quarters of them would be in jail."
The Pentagon apparently will investigate the "leaked amateur non-professional" video of the truck driver assault, not the assault itself, and the people connected with the video will be punished, not the shooter. Memories of Chelsea Manning and the video of the helicopter-shooting of the Iraqi Journalists, resulting in Manning's court-martial and imprisonment.Military investigating shooting in newly leaked Afghan combat videonottheonly1 , Jan 14, 2018 6:23:13 PM | 36U.S. commanders have launched an investigation into video footage that appears to show an American service member firing into the cab of a civilian truck as the two vehicles pass on a road in Afghanistan, an action that could have violated the military's rules of engagement and may hamper the alliance with the Afghan government. The shooting briefly appears during a gritty montage of combat footage allegedly recorded by U.S. troops battling the Islamic State's Afghan affiliate. An anonymous user recently uploaded the video to YouTube under the title "Happy Few Ordnance Symphony," then quickly removed it. "The amateur video posted on a public website gives us serious concern," the U.S. Central Command told POLITICO in a statement. "The video in question is not official, not authorized and does not represent the professionalism of the service members of U.S. Central Command. "We are conducting an investigation into this video, and will take appropriate actions as a result of this investigation," it added. . . here
Regarding Hawai'i Missiles Attack:fast freddy , Jan 14, 2018 6:57:51 PM | 38The best treat today is to listen to all those that experienced yesterday's 'nuclear attack'.
Many of us did not receive a missile attack message at all. This was not due to lack of cell phone reception. Their phones worked, but they were not alerted. They also use the same provider. Then, alert messages were different. Some said that the ballistic missile threat would expire at 6pm. Right.
Here are my own experiences. You be the judge:
Driving towards Pahoa and reaching the High School intersection, I saw cops coming from the Kalapana direction with lights and sirens on. They stopped at every pulled over vehicle to talk to the driver. Then they turned into Pahoa road and I also pulled to the side of the road, thinking whom they are after this time.
I had just turned down the radio, where HPR had started the news. That was at 8:01 AM.
The cop told me (both of his windows were rolled down): "The guy in North Korea has fired three missiles at us. You should go home and stay with your family." He drove off to Paul's gas station to talk to other drivers. His co-cop did the same at the propane place.
My first thought was "That's bullshit." Cops driving around talking to folks individually while the ICBM's are homing in. It would take those things 20 minutes to hit their target.
Fuck that shit, I am going to have breakfast as intended. Should that be true, I had at least a last break fast.
At the store the news had already created panic among those who are easily manipulated. The hysteria was quite impressive and my reassuring them that things are okay went in the one ear and out the other.
Mind you that I know these people for years and I am well known for being level headed.
I get my breakfast and sit outside. A few other guys are rolling in. Then, at 8:07 AM, the emergency alert appears on our phones. Those who knew, were all filled in by the cops BEFORE the alert.
The alert caused the store to close. I did my best to calm people down. Explaining to them that they should listen to their body, instead to anything the government says. George Carlin's made that clear a long time ago.
But people are now so disconnected from the 'Here and Now' have been so propagandized and brainwashed, that they are incapable to keep cool and THINK.
IF that would have been the real McCoy, we would have had twenty minutes left from the time the cops 'informed' people.
Then, when it became apparent that it was bullshit, the cops drove around and appeared to be taking license plates of those who did not panic, but have breakfast instead.
Around 8:30 AM, Tulsi Gabbard's tweets had made it around enough for people to calm down somewhat.
The alert cancellation came at 8:45 AM.
Here are some questions.
Who will be the first to become aware of a ballistic missile taking off?
Whom would they inform about that?
Why were cops driving around and telling people personally about the impending attack?
Flight time is approximately 20 minutes, which means that there were only ten minutes left from the emergency alert counted from when I was told.
Likely less than ten minutes from 8:07 AM down to impact.
The excuses and explanations that followed made it even more clear that this was an intentionally triggered false alarm.
That in turn is the dictionary definition of a TERROR ATTACK. To create fear, to terrorize the population. This was not Kim Jong UN terrorizing Hawai'i, this was the US regime creating a false flag Emergency Alert to terrorize the Hawai'ian people.
Who would be the first to be informed about an actually and factually happening attack?
The so called "Commander in Chief"?
Or Bill Maher?
Hopefully, of the flood of people having inundated the islands - especially the Big Island - most will go back where they came from. Ask anybody that lives here, or was born here "WHY?".
Can they stage another 9/11 and get away with it?CarlD , Jan 14, 2018 7:16:05 PM | 43Yes, they can. Manifest Destiny, WW1, WW2, State of Israel, Coup in Iran, Korean War, JFK. Gulf OF Tonkin, Viet Nam, Oil Shortages, Oil Wars, Persian Gulf War, 911 and so on....
Tulsi GAbbard's declarations after the false alarm point to the fact that she is one of the few the very few U.S. representatives witha spine and a real understanding of the Korean issue.mauisurfer , Jan 14, 2018 7:18:14 PM | 44She wants talks without preconditions and give and take to reach the point where Kim no longer feels he needs nuclear clout.
here's what actually happened to cause the false alarm quote Emergency Management Agency Administrator Vern Miyagi said that the employee who made the mistake felt terrible for triggering the alarm.Ian , Jan 14, 2018 8:11:14 PM | 45Miyagi apologized for the "trouble" and "heartbreak" caused by alert. "I accept the responsibility for this," he said. "This is my team. We made a mistake."
But Miyagi also used the opportunity to highlight the fact that if the missile threat were real, Hawaii residents would only have 12 to 15 minutes to react and find shelter.
"I regret what happened this morning," Miyagi said. "But it brings us up to speed again about what to expect and what to do."
Miyagi explained that the mistake happened during a drill that occurred around a shift change at the agency. He said an employee, was using a computer program as part of the drill, and clicked on the wrong button, which sent out the mass alert.
"It's human error," Miyagi said. "There is a screen that says, 'Are you sure you want to do this?'"
According to Miyagi, the employee clicked through the warning prompt, which resulted in thousands of residents receiving an alert that a missile was headed toward the islands. It's unclear how many people actually received the warning.
Miyagi said he was uncertain why some emergency sirens around the state also went off.
Ige said that testing of the alert system will be suspended for now. He also said that two people will now have to approve an alert before it goes public.
The testing on Saturday was part of Hawaii's efforts to upgrade its alert system to provide earlier warning to residents in case of a missile attack.
Ige and Miyagi acknowledged that the state's emergency agency did not have a process in place to cancel a false warning. Furthermore, the agency didn't realize until several minutes later that it had accidentally sent out the warning to the public, Miyagi said.
"We didn't have a message scripted that said this is a false alarm," Ige said. "We were not prepared for that."
"So we have built that now," he added.
While state officials could instantaneously send out the erroneous alert, they required approvals from the Federal Emergency Management Agency to send out the corrected alert -- and that process contributed to the 38-minute delay, officials said.
"We have to clear that to make sure that we can get that out," Miyagi said. On Saturday morning, information technology staff with the emergency agency scrambled to get those approvals "as fast as they could," he added. Civil Defense head Verne Miyagi apologizes to our community/public via media during press conference held at the Diamond Head Emergency Operations Center.
@44:Hoarsewhisperer , Jan 14, 2018 8:25:52 PM | 46Typical government incompetence. Having a dialog box " Are you sure? Y/N " doesn't cut it anymore, as people have been conditioned for years to click on the OK button without reading the prompt, to get to what they want. Waiting for a request of federal funding to upgrade their systems. I can only imagine on what the price tag will be. I suppose the silver lining is that the Japanese government observing the drill, now knows what not to do regarding issuing public alerts.
Interesting comment about the police taking note of non-responders.
... It took 38 minutes to correct the "mistake". A missile from North Korea would take 32-35 minutes from launch to impact in Hawaii. ...V. Arnold , Jan 14, 2018 9:41:14 PM | 48Wow! Good catch, And a nice piece of sleuthing, b... Oz's reptilian MSM didn't bother acquainting its 'consumers' with that vital snippet of relevance. So, was the alert a mistake or was it just another big chunk of pre-emptive Yankee Arseholery from The Swamp?
I'll not waste time on whether or not the warning was legitimate; but rather, on the expressed behavior of the people; it's a sure sign they're scared; which translates to; the U.S. propaganda campaign has been very effective. This is truly frightening and a marker of the true mental state of the populace. I must add; I'm very concerned; it exceeds my vision/perception of today's reality. IMO; we've really crossed the Rubicon I'll re-adjust my perception meter immediately to extreme.PavewayIV , Jan 15, 2018 2:06:13 AM | 50mauisurfer@44nottheonly1 , Jan 15, 2018 2:40:22 AM | 52"...Emergency Management Agency Administrator Vern Miyagi said that the employee who made the mistake felt terrible for triggering the alarm..."
Miyagi should feel worse about remaining on his job despite his lack of management skills and complete absence of system controls. He should also feel bad about having a pre-programmed missile alert message that can be sent without any such alert from Pacific Command and requires nothing more than a few clicks by a low-level employee.
"...But Miyagi also used the opportunity to highlight the fact that if the missile threat were real, Hawaii residents would only have 12 to 15 minutes to react and find shelter. "I regret what happened this morning," Miyagi said. "But it brings us up to speed again about what to expect and what to do..."
Bad, bad time to look for a teachable moment here, Miyagi. I have to doubt the sincerity of his earlier apology if he immediately morphs into a psychopathic, patronizing Homeland Security bureaucrat and takes the opportunity to dispense a few words of government wisdom to the little people since he has their attention. Jesus - I would have punched him in the face at this point.
"...Miyagi explained that the mistake happened during a drill that occurred around a shift change at the agency. He said an employee, was using a computer program as part of the drill, and clicked on the wrong button, which sent out the mass alert..."
There is no such 'drill' or test performed anywhere else in the US that sends anything but the canned test message to the Integrated Public Alert Warning System (IPAWS) on a weekly or monthly schedule.
"It's human error," Miyagi said. "There is a screen that says, 'Are you sure you want to do this?'"
The error is using the damn live IPAWS console for your 'drill'. No home-brew drill or test should ever involve any access to the live IPAWS console for this exact reason. I'm glad Miyagi never crewed a nuclear missile silo - we would all be dead by now.
"...According to Miyagi, the employee clicked through the warning prompt, which resulted in thousands of residents receiving an alert that a missile was headed toward the islands. It's unclear how many people actually received the warning..."
Another reason for Miyagi's immediate dismissal. When you punch in an alert on the IPAWS console, it goes directly to the FEMA IPAWS server, where it is then disseminated to all your other client messaging systems. Wireless Emergency Alerts (WEA) is one of those systems. WEA feeds every cell phone provider in the area (all of Hawaii in this case). Any modern smartphone that's turned on and using a Hawaiian network will automatically display the message with some obnoxious audio alert. 1.5 million people and he thinks this message only reached 'thousands'? He's either a horrible liar or he's a complete idiot.
"...Miyagi said he was uncertain why some emergency sirens around the state also went off..."
Well, that was because his agency programmed IPAWS to fire the sirens for Civil Emergency-type messages. Mostly because that's how you're suppose to activate them if you're using IPAWS. That's what it's for. Didn't he just start testing the 'nuclear attack' sirens last year? Don't tell me this message set off the Tsunami warning horns instead. And why only some of them? Does this HEMA terrorist understand how to make any of his DHS/FEMA junk in Hawaii work properly?
"...Furthermore, the agency didn't realize until several minutes later that it had accidentally sent out the warning to the public, Miyagi said..."
What, NONE of these guys had a cellphone? Everyone in the building with one should have seen/heard the alert within tens of seconds. That's how WEA works. They knew right away - that's why they sent out FB and Twitter messages minutes later.
"We didn't have a message scripted that said this is a false alarm," Ige said. "We were not prepared for that."
Doesn't he know anything about IPAWS? You don't NEED a pre-approved, scripted message. There may be a specific message to deactivate WEA rebroadcasts, but there's nothing that should have prevented them from sending a simple update for everyone to disregard the earlier warning. This is done all the time in IPAWS - they must really be confused or just not know how to use it at all. One would think they would take the trouble to learn since they're inexplicably using the live console for testing.
"...While state officials could instantaneously send out the erroneous alert, they required approvals from the Federal Emergency Management Agency to send out the corrected alert -- and that process contributed to the 38-minute delay, officials said..."
More painfully-obvious made-up BS to cover their butts. HEMA *is* the messaging authority there, period. FEMA has nothing to do with approving any messages for them. The other US operators must be shaking their heads in disbelief.
"...information technology staff with the emergency agency scrambled to get those approvals "as fast as they could," he added..."
Oh, I get it now. Contract IT that had no clue. They had to call FEMA to figure out what to do, since they were apparently as unfamiliar with the system as the HEMA guys and couldn't get it to work either. Good thing they didn't call the overseas help desk - unplugging it for ten seconds wouldn't have fixed much.
What really worries me is how the Pacific Command in Hawaii reacted when all their cellphones suddenly alerted them that THEY had 'detected an incoming ballistic missile'. That's not the kind of erroneous alert I want my nuclear-armed military to see - ever.
In regards to the 'official story':Harry , Jan 15, 2018 2:52:37 AM | 53According to Miyagi, the employee clicked through the warning prompt, which resulted in thousands of residents receiving an alert that a missile was headed toward the islands."
@Mauisurfer
How come, that cops were driving around telling everybody to go home and stay with their families, because "the guy in North Korea" had fired three missiles? Plenty of people can attest to that. If the error was with "this employee", than that would mean that there could have been no prior knowledge of the cops about this ballistic missile threat. How did the cops know before the employee made "a mistake"? That is not possible. The employee made 'the mistake' at 8:07 AM. We here in Pahoa we're warned before 8:07 AM.
There is obviously much more to this than meets the eyes and ears.
The ballistic missile threat was not created by 'this employee'.
Please take the time to read this excellent written review of Daniel Ellsberg's new book about the "Doomsday Machine". It should further the under standing about the scope of the Doomsday Machine that would have responded to any ballistic missile fired at Guam, Hawai'i, or the mainland. https://www.counterpunch.org/2018/01/09/rational-insanity-a the-mad-logic-of-americas-nuclear-doomsday-machine/
@ mauisurfer | 44nottheonly1 , Jan 15, 2018 3:08:06 AM | 54here's what actually happened to cause the false alarmIts not what happened, you just quoted fake BS rationalization of US deliberate terrorising of Hawaii, as clearly explained by nottheonly1 | 36.
The only question is - why? Preparation of public for yet another war?
@paveway #50Hoarsewhisperer , Jan 15, 2018 6:33:15 AM | 62Thank You so much. While I am not familiar with
the intricacies of the IPAWS warning system, I
have experienced a number of tsunami and hurricane
alerts through this system. The cancellation was
always as immediate as the website would report.
(PTWC / CPHC respectively).I get must be impeached and with all lower level
employees be prosecuted and terminated.This 'event' has caused PTSD among a number of
people, especially the countless mother's with
infant babies.This was not an accident, but it shall serve as
a wake up call to dismantle the nuclear Doomsday
machine.
North Korea aquired ICBM's to protect itself from
the people that almost entirely exterminated it
by the likes of Curtis LeMay.The country with the most nukes must start unilaterally
to abolish its Doomsday Machine. Others will follow.The threat by North Korea is a psychological projection
by the only people to ever have dropped nuclear bombs....Hoarsewhisperer , Jan 15, 2018 6:33:15 AM | 62 Heros , Jan 15, 2018 6:58:12 AM | 63
In that case North Korea would have lots of targets to chose from.
Posted by: somebody | Jan 15, 2018 5:43:22 AM | 60Yes, interesting point reinforced, somewhat, by this extract from SST's January 13 post about domestic US Military base closures...
"What's more, at the same time that the domestic base closings are proceeding, the U.S. military footprint abroad is expanding. According to American University professor David Vine, there are presently 800 American military bases abroad, in 70 countries, with an annual cost of $160-200 billion, including American theaters of combat--Iraq and Afghanistan. Recent Pentagon studies of the need to devise a "third offset strategy" to address the increased vulnerabilities of American military bases around the globe raise further questions about the viability of the current military posture."
Unfortunately for the Yankees, Kim (correctly) regards the US Homeland as the top priority target for NK retaliation to US Military violence inflicted on North Korea. Why Nuke Hawaii, or some other island outpost, when he can Nuke Washington, New York, Boston, plus the 5 biggest US freight ports and airports - at the same time on the same day? He only has to convince the Yankees that it's "do-able" and NK will be AmeriKKKa-proof.
And let's not forget that China has said that if NK is attacked, China will respond on NK's behalf.@54 nottheonly1somebody , Jan 15, 2018 7:04:12 AM | 64"The threat by North Korea is a psychological projection by the only people to ever have dropped nuclear bombs."This reminds me of a famous expression out of 16th century Poland:
"The jew cries out in pain as he strikes you"The evidence here clearly indicates that by signalling this alarm, which automatically sent it out to IPAWS/HEMA/FEMA/PACCOM/NORAD/[who knows else where], someone was trying to provoke a missile exchange and start a war.
Some miracle or god prevented this war that the MIC is so horny for from getting started and the US nuking North Korea. It must be the same god that in 1967 prevented the Zionists from sinking the Liberty after 2 hours of bombs and torpedoes, which would have directly pulled the US into Israel's war against her Arab neighbors.
Posted by: Hoarsewhisperer | Jan 15, 2018 6:33:15 AM | 62somebody , Jan 15, 2018 7:20:05 AM | 65NK has been America-proof since the last war. The difference being that they have convinced the US now that they can act on their own - without Chinese or Russian support. That means the US will have to talk to North Korea directly.
http://www.cbc.ca/news/politics/north-korea-diplomacy-message-trump-white-house-1.4484793">Meeting in Canada on North Korea"Rex Tillerson has been advocating for a diplomatic approach to this crisis, that is a point of view that Canada shares, and so the purpose of this meeting is to talk about economic and diplomatic ways of getting North Korea to the table," Paris said."I think it's the main purpose of this meeting," said Shin Maeng-ho, South Korea's Ambassador to Canada, who is attending the meeting.
During an interview on CBC's The House with guest host Alison Crawford, Shin added: "I think diplomacy is the only option left to us. War on the Korean peninsula means death of millions of people."
"All foreign ministers in Vancouver will seek all the ways and means for diplomatic solution," Shin said.
|
|
|
Jan 17, 2018 | www.moonofalabama.org
Don Bacon | Jan 15, 2018 10:08:20 AM | 76
@somebody 60
> Regarding North Korean US military targets, the Guardian failed to include what might its primary target. Camp Humphreys which is 57 miles from the DMZ, in DPRK 300mm rocket range, and currently houses 12,000 Americans and is growing. So DPRK can't be attacked unless those Americans are evacuated first, and that won't happen. The host country would no permit it, and go crazy if they did. It would be mass mayhem.
> In fact the whole concept of forward basing actually puts a damper on any Pentagon aggression. Another example is the 40,000 Americans at various bases in the western Persian Gulf, well within Iran rocket and missile range. That means no attack against Iran.
> Finally, these bases are financially supported by host countries. In South Korea the current Camp Humphreys $10 billion expansion is reportedly being funded by ROK.
test , Jan 15, 2018 11:42:36 AM | 83
Dangerous Idiot Category: "It's Time to Bomb North Korea" says neocon writer.
|
|
|
Jan 16, 2018 | www.moonofalabama.org
/div>
What was behind the false missile attack alarm in Hawaii yesterday. Poynter has some context:
One of the big stories in the Honolulu Star-Advertiser Saturday morning was that military "brass" updated island officials on how the military would respond to a nuclear attack from North Korea . Military authorities warned there was a "real" threat.At 8:07 a.m. Saturday, Hawaiian residents saw a terrifying alert message on their phones.
It took 38 minutes to correct the "mistake". A missile from North Korea would take 32-35 minutes from launch to impact in Hawaii.
But of interest is the newspaper report hyping the "threat" followed by the false alarm. Coincidence? And the " leaking " of the Draft Nuclear Posture Review this week, in which the military demands hundreds of new "small" nuclear weapons to fight North Korea and Russia, is also just a coincidence? Or is all of this part of a public relation campaign designed to increase the acceptance of new nuclear weapons and "limited" nuclear warfare? A preparation for war on North Korea? (Related: Deconstructing the North Korean 'Threat' and Identifying America's Strategic Alternatives
Grieved , Jan 14, 2018 2:30:45 PM | 20What was behind the false missile attack alarm in Hawaii yesterday. Poynter has some context:
One of the big stories in the Honolulu Star-Advertiser Saturday morning was that military "brass" updated island officials on how the military would respond to a nuclear attack from North Korea . Military authorities warned there was a "real" threat.At 8:07 a.m. Saturday, Hawaiian residents saw a terrifying alert message on their phones.
It took 38 minutes to correct the "mistake". A missile from North Korea would take 32-35 minutes from launch to impact in Hawaii.
But of interest is the newspaper report hyping the "threat" followed by the false alarm. Coincidence? And the " leaking " of the Draft Nuclear Posture Review this week, in which the military demands hundreds of new "small" nuclear weapons to fight North Korea and Russia, is also just a coincidence? Or is all of this part of a public relation campaign designed to increase the acceptance of new nuclear weapons and "limited" nuclear warfare? A preparation for war on North Korea? (Related: Deconstructing the North Korean 'Threat' and Identifying America's Strategic Alternatives (pdf))
div
Scott Creighton has been working up collateral to his theory that the Hawaii false alert was part of a test to sell the Aegis radar system to Japan. Aegis controls the alert system in Hawaii. The sales contract is $2 billion. Japanese and Pentagon officials were in the area last Thursday as part of an ongoing demonstration of the system. This is his written post (he has a later post in a 20-minute video for those who prefer):nhs , Jan 14, 2018 12:03:49 PM | 4So, while it could be a false flag test of some kind, and while it could be tied to the talks between the two Koreas, I can see it could just as easily be corrupt MIC business as usual. It seems unlikely this alert was sent in error. But could it have been sent so the Japanese could see the warning system in action? And US officials reason, well, it's only Korea and Hawaii's closest, so we have a plausible scenario and neither area has any clout to complain? And that's as far as their thinking needed to go, because at that point it all looks perfectly explainable?
CIA had an agent at a newspaper in every world capital at least since 1977Don Bacon , Jan 14, 2018 12:11:47 PM | 5
Re: Hawaii and nukes.Don Bacon , Jan 14, 2018 12:28:15 PM | 6
This behavior is to be expected when generals are placed in charge of foreign affairs because generals are:
> ignorant of anything besides warfare.
> taught to believe that they are always right and their detractors are always wrong.
>of the belief that only wars, properly conduced with maximum force, solve problems.A couple of President Harry Truman quotes: "It's the fellows who go to West Point and are trained to think they're gods in uniform that I plan to take apart". . ."I didn't fire him [General MacArthur] because he was a dumb son of a bitch, although he was, but that's not against the law for generals. If it was, half to three quarters of them would be in jail."
The Pentagon apparently will investigate the "leaked amateur non-professional" video of the truck driver assault, not the assault itself, and the people connected with the video will be punished, not the shooter. Memories of Chelsea Manning and the video of the helicopter-shooting of the Iraqi Journalists, resulting in Manning's court-martial and imprisonment.Military investigating shooting in newly leaked Afghan combat videonottheonly1 , Jan 14, 2018 6:23:13 PM | 36U.S. commanders have launched an investigation into video footage that appears to show an American service member firing into the cab of a civilian truck as the two vehicles pass on a road in Afghanistan, an action that could have violated the military's rules of engagement and may hamper the alliance with the Afghan government.
The shooting briefly appears during a gritty montage of combat footage allegedly recorded by U.S. troops battling the Islamic State's Afghan affiliate. An anonymous user recently uploaded the video to YouTube under the title "Happy Few Ordnance Symphony," then quickly removed it.
"The amateur video posted on a public website gives us serious concern," the U.S. Central Command told POLITICO in a statement. "The video in question is not official, not authorized and does not represent the professionalism of the service members of U.S. Central Command.
"We are conducting an investigation into this video, and will take appropriate actions as a result of this investigation," it added. . . hereRegarding Hawai'i Missiles Attack:fast freddy , Jan 14, 2018 6:57:51 PM | 38The best treat today is to listen to all
those that experienced yesterday's 'nuclear
attack'.Many of us did not receive a missile attack
message at all. This was not due to lack of
cell phone reception. Their phones worked,
but they were not alerted. They also use
the same provider.
Then, alert messages were different. Some
said that the ballistic missile threat
would expire at 6pm. Right.Here are my own experiences. You be the
judge:Driving towards Pahoa and reaching the
High School intersection, I saw cops
coming from the Kalapana direction with
lights and sirens on. They stopped at
every pulled over vehicle to talk to
the driver.
Then they turned into Pahoa road and
I also pulled to the side of the road,
thinking whom they are after this time.I had just turned down the radio, where
HPR had started the news. That was at
8:01 AM.The cop told me (both of his windows were
rolled down):
"The guy in North Korea has fired three
missiles at us. You should go home and
stay with your family."
He drove off to Paul's gas station to
talk to other drivers. His co-cop did
the same at the propane place.My first thought was "That's bullshit."
Cops driving around talking to folks
individually while the ICBM's are
homing in. It would take those things
20 minutes to hit their target.Fuck that shit, I am going to have
breakfast as intended. Should that
be true, I had at least a last break fast.At the store the news had already created
panic among those who are easily manipulated.
The hysteria was quite impressive and my
reassuring them that things are okay went
in the one ear and out the other.Mind you that I know these people for years
and I am well known for being level headed.I get my breakfast and sit outside. A few
other guys are rolling in. Then, at 8:07 AM,
the emergency alert appears on our phones.
Those who knew, were all filled in by the
cops BEFORE the alert.The alert caused the store to close. I did
my best to calm people down. Explaining to
them that they should listen to their body,
instead to anything the government says.
George Carlin's made that clear a long time
ago.But people are now so disconnected from the
'Here and Now' have been so propagandized
and brainwashed, that they are incapable
to keep cool and THINK.IF that would have been the real McCoy,
we would have had twenty minutes left
from the time the cops 'informed' people.Then, when it became apparent that it was
bullshit, the cops drove around and appeared
to be taking license plates of those who did
not panic, but have breakfast instead.Around 8:30 AM, Tulsi Gabbard's tweets had
made it around enough for people to calm
down somewhat.The alert cancellation came at 8:45 AM.
Here are some questions.
Who will be the first to become aware of a
ballistic missile taking off?Whom would they inform about that?
Why were cops driving around and telling
people personally about the impending
attack?Flight time is approximately 20 minutes,
which means that there were only ten minutes
left from the emergency alert counted from
when I was told.Likely less than ten minutes from 8:07 AM down
to impact.The excuses and explanations that followed
made it even more clear that this was an
intentionally triggered false alarm.That in turn is the dictionary definition
of a TERROR ATTACK. To create fear, to
terrorize the population. This was not
Kim Jong UN terrorizing Hawai'i, this
was the US regime creating a false flag
Emergency Alert to terrorize the Hawai'ian
people.Who would be the first to be informed about
an actually and factually happening attack?The so called "Commander in Chief"?
Or Bill Maher?
Hopefully, of the flood of people having
inundated the islands - especially the
Big Island - most will go back where they
came from. Ask anybody that lives here, or
was born here
"WHY?".Can they stage another 9/11 and get away with it?CarlD , Jan 14, 2018 7:16:05 PM | 43Yes, they can. Manifest Destiny, WW1, WW2, State of Israel, Coup in Iran, Korean War, JFK. Gulf OF Tonkin, Viet Nam, Oil Shortages, Oil Wars, Persian Gulf War, 911 and so on....
Tulsi GAbbard's declarations after the false alarm point to the fact that she is one of the few
the very few U.S. representatives witha spine and a real understanding of the Korean issue.She wants talks without preconditions and give and take to reach the point where Kim
no longer feels he needs nuclear clout.
|
|
|
Jan 16, 2018 | www.moonofalabama.org
@somebody 60
> Regarding North Korean US military targets, the Guardian failed to include what might its primary target. Camp Humphreys which is 57 miles from the DMZ, in DPRK 300mm rocket range, and currently houses 12,000 Americans and is growing. So DPRK can't be attacked unless those Americans are evacuated first, and that won't happen. The host country would no permit it, and go crazy if they did. It would be mass mayhem.
> In fact the whole concept of forward basing actually puts a damper on any Pentagon aggression. Another example is the 40,000 Americans at various bases in the western Persian Gulf, well within Iran rocket and missile range. That means no attack against Iran.
> Finally, these bases are financially supported by host countries. In South Korea the current Camp Humphreys $10 billion expansion is reportedly being funded by ROK.Posted by: Don Bacon | Jan 15, 2018 10:08:20 AM | 76
|
|
|
Dec 22, 2017 | www.unz.com
My recent analysis of the potential consequences of a US attack on the DPRK has elicited a wide range of reactions. There is one type of reaction which I find particularly interesting and most important and I would like to focus on it today: the ones which entirely dismissed my whole argument. The following is a selection of some of the most telling reactions of this kind:
Example 1:
North Korea's air defenses are so weak that we had to notify them we were flying B1 bombers near their airspace–they didn't even know our aircraft were coming. This reminds me of the "fearsome" Republican Guard that Saddam had in the Persian Gulf. Turns out we had total air superiority and just bombed the crap out of them and they surrendered in droves.
We have already seen what happens when an army has huge amounts of outdated Soviet weaponry versus the most technologically advanced force in the world. It's a slaughter. Also, there has to be weaponry up the USA's sleeve that would be used in the event of an attack. Don't forget our cyber warfare abilities that would undoubtedly be implemented as well. This writer seems to always hype Russia's capabilities and denigrate the US's capabilities. Sure, Russia has the capacity to nuke the US into smithereens, and vice versa. But if its a head to head shooting war, the US and NATO would dominate. FACT.
Example 2:
Commander's intent:
Decapitate the top leadership and remove retaliatory capability.
Execution:
Phase one:
Massive missile/bombing campaign (including carpet) of top leadership locations, tactical missile locations and DMZ artillery belt. Destruction of surface fleet and air force.
Phase two:
Advance into DMZ artillery belt up to a range of 240 mm cannon. Not further (local tactical considerations taken into account of course).
Phase three: "break the enemy's will to fight" and destroy the "regime support infrastructure"
Phase four: Regime change.
There you go .
Example 3:
I guess an American attack on North Korea would consist of preemptive strategic nuking to destroy the entire country before it can do anything. Since North Korea itself contributes essentially nothing to the world economy, no one would lose money.
These examples perfectly illustrate the kind of mindset induced by what Professor John Marciano called "Empire as a way of life" [1] which is characterized by a set of basic characteristics:
First foremost, simple, very simple one-sentence "arguments" . Gone are the days when argument were built in some logical sequence, when facts were established, then evaluated for their accuracy and relevance, then analyzed and then conclusions presented. Where in the past one argument per page or paragraph constituted the norm, we now have tweet-like 140 character statements which are more akin to shouted slogans than to arguments (no wonder that tweeting is something a bird does – hence the expression "bird brain"). You will see that kind of person writing what initially appears to be a paragraph, but when you look closer you realize that the paragraph is really little more than a sequence of independent statements and not really an argument of any type. A quasi-religious belief in one's superiority which is accepted as axiomatic .
Nothing new here: the Communists considered themselves as the superior for class reasons, the Nazis by reason of racial superiority, the US Americans just "because" – no explanation offered (I am not sure that this constitutes of form of progress). In the US case, that superiority is cultural, political, financial and, sometimes but not always, racial. This superiority is also technological, hence the " there has to be " or the " would undoubtedly " in the example #1 above. This is pure faith and not something which can be challenged by fact or logic. Contempt for all others . This really flows from #2 above. Example 3 basically declares all of North Korea (including its people) as worthless. This is where all the expressions like "sand niggers" "hadjis" and other "gooks" come from: the dehumanization of the "others" as a preparation for their for mass slaughter. Notice how in the example #2 the DPRK leaders are assumed to be totally impotent, dull and, above all, passive.
The notion that they might do something unexpected is never even considered (a classical recipe for military disaster, but more about that later). Contempt for rules, norms and laws . This notion is well expressed by the famous US 19th century slogan of " my country, right or wrong " but goes far beyond that as it also includes the belief that the USA has God-given (or equivalent) right to ignore international law, the public opinion of the rest of the planet or even the values underlying the documents which founded the USA. In fact, in the logic of such imperial drone the belief in US superiority actually serves as a premise to the conclusion that the USA has a "mission" or a "responsibility" to rule the world. This is "might makes right" elevated to the rank of dogma and, therefore, never challenged. A very high reliance on doublethink . Doublethink defined by Wikipedia as " the act of simultaneously accepting two mutually contradictory beliefs as correct, often in distinct social contexts ".
A perfect illustration of that is the famous quote " it became necessary to destroy the town to save it ". Most US Americans are aware of the fact that US policies have resulted in them being hated worldwide, even amongst putatively allied or "protected" countries such as South Korea, Israel, Germany or Japan. Yet at the very same time, they continue to think that the USA should "defend" "allies", even if the latter can't wait for Uncle Sam's soldiers to pack and leave. Doublethink is also what makes it possible for ideological drones to be aware of the fact that the US has become a subservient Israeli colony while, at the same time, arguing for the support and financing of Israel.
A glorification of ignorance which is transformed into a sign of manliness and honesty. This is powerfully illustrated in the famous song " Where were you when the world stopped turning " whoso lyrics include the following words " I watch CNN, but I'm not sure I can tell you, the difference in Iraq and Iran, but I know Jesus and I talk to God " (notice how the title of the song suggests that New York is the center of the world, when when get hit, the world stops turning; also, no connection is made between watching CNN and not being able to tell two completely different countries apart). If this were limited to singers, then it would not be a problem, but this applies to the vast majority of US politicians, decision-makers and elected officials, hence Putin's remark that " It's difficult to talk with people who confuse Austria and Australia ".
As a result, there is no more discernible US diplomacy left: all the State Department does is deliver threats, ultimatums and condemnations. Meaningful *negotiations* have basically been removed form the US foreign policy toolkit.
A totally uncritical acceptance of ideologically correct narratives even when they are self-evidently nonsensical to an even superficial critical analysis. An great example of this kind of self-evidently stupid stories is all the nonsense about the Russians trying to meddle in US elections or the latest hysteria about relatively small-size military exercises in Russia .
The acceptance of the official 9/11 narrative is a perfect example of that. Something repeated by the "respectable" Ziomedia is accepted as dogma, no matter how self-evidently stupid. A profound belief that everything is measured in dollars . From this flow a number of corollary beliefs such as "US weapons are most expensive, they are therefore superior" or "everybody has his price" [aka "whom we can't kill we will simply buy"]. In my experience folks like these are absolutely unable to even imagine that some people might not motivated by greed or other egoistic interests: ideological drones project their own primitive motives unto everybody else with total confidence.
That belief is also the standard cop out in any conversation of morality, ethnics, or even the notions of right and wrong. An anti-religious view par excellence .
Notice the total absence of any more complex consideration which might require some degree of knowledge or expertise: the imperial mindset is not only ignoramus-compatible, it is ignoramus based . This is what Orwell was referring to in his famous book 1984 with the slogan "Ignorance is Strength". However, it goes way beyond simple ignorance of facts and includes the ability to "think in slogans" (example #2 is a prefect example of this).
There are, of course, many more psychological characteristics for the perfect "ideological drone", but the ones above already paint a pretty decent picture of the kind of person I am sure we all have seen many times over. What is crucial to understand about them is that even though they are far from being a majority, they compensate for that with a tremendous motivational drive. It might be due to a need to repeatedly reassert their certitudes or a way to cope with some deep-seated cognitive dissonance, but in my experience folks like that have energy levels that many sane people would envy. This is absolutely crucial to how the Empire, and any other oppressive regime, works: by repressing those who can understand a complex argument by means of those who cannot. Let me explain:
Unless there are mechanisms set in to prevent that, in a debate/dispute between an educated and intelligent person and an ideological drone the latter will always prevail because of the immense advantage the latter has over the former. Indeed, while the educated and intelligent person will be able to immediately identify numerous factual and logical gaps in his opponent's arguments, he will always need far more "space" to debunk the nonsense spewed by the drone than the drone who will simply dismiss every argument with one or several slogans. This is why I personally never debate or even talk with such people: it is utterly pointless.
As a result, a fact-based and logical argument now gets the same consideration and treatment as a collection of nonsensical slogans (political correctness mercilessly enforces that principle: you can't call an idiot and idiot any more). Falling education standards have resulted in a dramatic degradation of the public debate: to be well-educated, well-read, well-traveled, to speak several languages and feel comfortable in different cultures used to be considered a prerequisite to expressing an opinion, now they are all treated as superfluous and even useless characteristics. Actual, formal, expertise in a topic is now becoming extremely rare. A most interesting kind of illustration of this point can be found in this truly amazing video posted by Peter Schiff:
One could be tempted to conclude that this kind of 'debating' is a Black issue. It is not. The three quotes given at the beginning of this article are a good reminder of this (unless, of course, they were all written by Blacks, which we have no reason to believe).
Twitter might have done to minds what MTV has done to rock music: laid total waste to it.
Consequences:
There are a number of important consequences from the presence of such ideological drones in any society. The first one is that any ideology-based regime will always and easily find numerous spontaneous supporters who willingly collaborate with it. Combined with a completely subservient media, such drones form the rontline force of any ideological debate. For instance, a journalist can always be certain to easily find a done to interview, just as a politician can count on them to support him during a public speech or debate. The truth is that, unfortunately, we live in a society that places much more emphasis on the right to have an opinion than on the actual ability to form one .
By the way, the intellectually challenged always find a natural ally in the coward and the "follower" (as opposed to "leader types") because it is always much easier and safer to follow the herd and support the regime in power than to oppose it. You will always see "stupid drones" backed by "coward drones". As for the politicians , they naturally cater to all types of drones since they always provide a much bigger "bang for the buck" than those inclined to critical thinking whose loyalty to whatever "cause" is always dubious.
The drone-type of mindset also comes with some major weaknesses including a very high degree of predictability, an inability to learn from past mistakes, an inability to imagine somebody operating with a completely different set of motives and many others. One of the most interesting ones for those who actively resist the AngloZionist Empire is that the ideological drone has very little staying power because as soon as the real world, in all its beauty and complexity, comes crashing through the door of the drone's delusional and narrow imagination his cocky arrogance is almost instantaneously replaced by a total sense of panic and despair. I have had the chance to speak Russian officers who were present during the initial interrogation of US POWs in Iraq and they were absolutely amazed at how terrified and broken the US POWs immediately became (even though they were not mistreated in any way). It was as if they had no sense of risk at all, until it was too late and they were captured, at which point they inner strength instantly gave way abject terror. This is one of the reasons that the Empire cannot afford a protracted war: not because of casualty aversion as some suggest, but to keep the imperial delusions/illusions unchallenged by reality . As long as the defeat can be hidden or explained away, the Empire can fight on, but as soon as it becomes impossible to obfuscate the disaster the Empire has to simply declare victory and leave.
Thus we have a paradox here: the US military is superbly skilled at killing people in large numbers, but but not at winning wars . And yet, because this latter fact is easily dismissed on grounds #2 #5 and #7 above (all of them, really), failing to actually win wars does not really affect the US determination to initiate new wars, even potentially very dangerous ones. I would even argue that each defeat even strengthens the Empire's desire to show it power by hoping to finally identify one victim small enough to be convincingly defeated. The perfect example of that was Ronald Reagan's decision to invade Grenada right after the US Marines barracks bombing in Beirut. The fact that the invasion of Grenada was one of the worst military operations in world history did not prevent the US government from handing out more medals for it than the total number of people involved – such is the power of the drone-mindset!
We have another paradox here: history shows that if the US gets entangled in a military conflict it is most likely to end up defeated (if "not winning" is accepted as a euphemism for "losing"). And yet, the United States are also extremely hard to deter. This is not just a case of " Fools rush in where angels fear to tread " but the direct result of a form of conditioning which begins in grade schools. From the point of view of an empire, repeated but successfully concealed defeats are much preferable to the kind of mental paralysis induced in drone populations, at least temporarily, by well-publicized defeats . Likewise, when the loss of face is seen as a calamity much worse than body bags, lessons from the past are learned by academics and specialists, but not by the nation as a whole (there are numerous US academics and officers who have always known all of what I describe above, in fact – they were the ones who first taught me about it!).
If this was only limited to low-IQ drones this would not be as dangerous, but the problem is that words have their own power and that politicians and ideological drones jointly form a self-feeding positive feedback loop when the former lie to the latter only to then be bound by what they said which, in turn, brings them to join the ideological drones in a self-enclosed pseudo-reality of their own.
What all this means for North Korea and the rest of us
I hate to admit it, but I have to concede that there is a good argument to be made that all the over-the-top grandstanding and threatening by the North Koreans does make sense, at least to some degree. While for an educated and intelligent person threatening the continental United States with nuclear strikes might appear as the epitome of irresponsibility, this might well be the only way to warn the ideological drone types of the potential consequences of a US attack on the DPRK. Think of it: if you had to deter somebody with the set of beliefs outlined in #1 through #8 above, would you rather explain that a war on the Korean Peninsula would immediately involve the entire region or simple say "them crazy gook guys might just nuke the shit out of you!"? I think that the North Koreans might be forgiven for thinking that an ideological drone can only be deterred by primitive and vastly exaggerated threats.
Still, my strictly personal conclusion is that ideological drones are pretty much "argument proof" and that they cannot be swayed neither by primitive nor by sophisticated arguments. This is why I personally never directly engage them. But this is hardly an option for a country desperate to avoid a devastating war (the North Koreans have no illusions on that account as they, unlike most US Americans, remember the previous war in Korea).
But here is the worst aspect of it all: this is not only a North Korean problem
The US policies towards Russia, China and Iran all have the potential of resulting in a disaster of major magnitude. The world is dealing with situation in which a completely delusional regime is threatening everybody with various degrees of confrontation. This is like being in the same room with a monkey playing with a hand grenade. Except for that hand grenade is nuclear.
This situation places a special burden of responsibility on all other nations, especially those currently in Uncle Sam's cross-hairs, to act with restraint and utmost restraint. That is not fair, but life rarely is. It is all very well and easy to declare that force must be met by force and that the Empire interprets restraint as weakness until you realize that any miscalculation can result in the death of millions of people. I am therefore very happy that the DPRK is the only country which chose to resort to a policy of hyperbolic threats while Iran, Russia and China acted, and are still acting, with the utmost restraint.
In practical terms, there is no way for the rest of the planet to disarm the monkey. The only option is therefore to incapacitate the monkey itself or, alternatively, to create the conditions in which the monkey will be too busy with something else to pay attention to his grenade. An internal political crisis triggered by an external military defeat remains, I believe, the most likely and desirable scenario (see here if that topic is of interest to you). Still, the future is impossible to predict and, as the Quran says, " they plan, and Allah plans. And Allah is the best of planners ". All we can do is try to mitigate the impact of the ideological drones on our society as much as we can, primarily by *not* engaging them and limiting our interaction with those still capable of critical thought. It is by excluding ideological drones from the debate about the future of our world that we can create a better environment for those truly seeking solutions to our current predicament.
-- -- -
1. If you have not listened to his lectures on this topic, which I highly recommend, you can find them here:
- Empire as a Way of Life, Part 1 | mp3 | doc
- Empire as a Way of Life, Part 2 | mp3 | doc
- Empire as a Way of Life, Part 3 | mp3 | doc
- Empire as a Way of Life, Part 4 | mp3 | doc
Paul b , December 22, 2017 at 12:28 pm GMT
If the U.S. attacks North Korea or Iran we will become a pariah among nations (especially once the pictures start pouring in). We will be loathed. Countries may very well decide that we are not worthy of having the world's reserve currency. In that case the dollar will collapse as will our economy.Third world nationalist , December 22, 2017 at 12:36 pm GMTNorth Korea is a nationalistic country that traces their race back to antiquity. America on the other hand is a degenerated country that is ruled over by Jews. The flag waving American s may call the Koreans gooks but if we apply the American racial ideology on themselves, the Americans are the the 56percent Untermensch. While the north Koreans are superior for having rejected modern degeneracy.Andrei Martyanov , Website December 22, 2017 at 2:08 pm GMTSean , December 22, 2017 at 2:48 pm GMTthat the Empire interprets restraint as weakness
A key point, which signifies a serious cultural degeneration from values of chivalry and honoring the opposite side to a very Asiatic MO which absolutely rules current US establishment. This, and, of course, complete detachment from the realities of the warfare.
It is all talk, because China makes them invulnerable to sanctions and NK has nukes. The US will have to go to China to deal with NK and China will want to continue economically raping the US in exchange. That is why China gave NK an H bomb and ICBM tech ( it's known to have gave those same things to Pakistan). The real action will be in the Middle East. The Saudi are counting on the US giving them CO2 fracking in the future, and Iran being toppled soon. William S. Lind says Iran will be hit by Trump and Israel will use the ensuing chaos to expel the West Bank Palestinians (back to the country whose passports they travel on).VICB3 , December 22, 2017 at 4:49 pm GMTpyrrhus , December 22, 2017 at 5:03 pm GMTMaybe it's just me, but it seems that NK is just another tyranny in a long list of tyrannies throughout millennia, and like all of them it will just implode on its own. Therefore, the best thing you can do is simply to ignore it (thus denying the tyrant an external threat to rally the populace) and wait for the NK people to say enough is enough.
Don't think that would ever happen? Reference 'How Tyrannies Implode' by Richard Fernandez: https://pjmedia.com/richardfernandez/2016/02/27/how-tyrannies-implode/?print=true&singlepage=true
There's no doubt in my mind that Kim will end up like Nikolae Ceaușescu in Romania, put up against a wall by his own military and shot on TV. All anyone has to do is be patient and not drink the Rah-Rah Kool-Aid.*
Just a thought.
VicB3
*Was talking with a 82nd Major at the Starbucks, and mentioned NK, Ceausecu, sitting tight, etc. (Mentioned we might help things along by blanketing the whole country with netbooks, wi-fi, and even small arms.) Got the careerist ladder- climber standard response of how advanced our weapons are, the people in charge know what they're doing, blah blah blah. Wouldn't even consider an alternative view (and didn't know or understand half of what I was talking about). It was the same response I got from an Air Force Colonel before the U.S. went into Afghanistan and Iraq and I told him the whole thing was/would be insanely stupid.
His party-line team-player response was when I knew for certain that any action in NK would/will fail spectacularly for the U.S., possibly even resulting in and economic collapse and civil war/revolution on this end.
Wish I didn't think that, but I do.
Excellent post. But the US public education "system", while awful, is not the main reason that America is increasingly packed with drones and idiots. IQ is decreasing rapidly, as revealed in the College Board's data on SAT scores over the last 60 years .In addition, Dr. James Thompson has a Dec.15 post on Unz that shows a shocking decline in the ability of UK children to understand basic principles of physics, which are usually acquired on a developmental curve. Mike Judge's movie 'Idiocracy' appears to have been set unrealistically far in the future ..anonymous , Disclaimer December 22, 2017 at 6:10 pm GMT
In short, the current situation can and will get a lot worse in America. On the other hand, America's armed forces will be deteriorating apace, so they are becoming less dangerous to the rest of the world.The good thing about democracy is that anyone can express an opinion. The bad thing about democracy is that anyone can express an opinion. I have to laugh at all the internet commandos and wannabe Napoleons that roost on the internet giving us their advice. It's easy to cherrypick opinions that range from uninformed to downright stupid and bizarre. Those people don't actually run anything though, fortunately. Keep in mind that half the population is mentally average or below average and that average is quite mediocre. Throw in a few degrees above mediocre and you've got a majority, a majority that can and is regularly bamboozled. The majority of the population is just there to pay taxes and provide cannon fodder, that's all, like a farmer's herd of cows provides for his support. Ideological drones are desired in this case. It's my suspicion that the educational system is geared towards producing such a product as well as all other aspects of popular culture also induce stupefying effects. Insofar as American policy goes, look at what it actually does rather than what it says, the latter being a form of show biz playing to a domestic audience. I just skip the more obnoxious commenters since they're just annoying and add nothing but confusion to any discussion.Randal , December 22, 2017 at 6:41 pm GMT@VICB3neutral , December 22, 2017 at 7:24 pm GMTbut it seems that NK is just another tyranny in a long list of tyrannies throughout millennia, and like all of them it will just implode on its own
.
There's no doubt in my mind that Kim will end up like Nikolae Ceaușescu in Romania, put up against a wall by his own military and shot on TV.All things come to an end eventually, and I agree with you that the best course of action for the US over NK would be to leave it alone (and stop poking it), but this idea that "tyrannies always collapse" seems pretty unsupported by reality.
Off the top of my head all of the following autocrats died more or less peacefully in office and handed their "tyranny" on intact to a successor, just in the past few decades: Mao, Castro, Franco, Stalin, Assad senior, two successive Kims (so much for the assumption that the latest Kim will necessarily end up like Ceausescu). In the past, if a tyrant and his tyranny lasted long enough and arranged a good succession, it often came to be remembered as a golden age, as with the Roman, Augustus.
I suspect it might be a matter of you having a rather selective idea of what counts as a tyranny (I wouldn't count Franco in that list, myself, but establishment opinion is against me there, I think). You might be selectively remembering only the tyrannies that came to a bad end.
@pyrrhusneutral , December 22, 2017 at 7:35 pm GMTso they are becoming less dangerous to the rest of the world
I agree with the logic that as Americans become dumber the ability to have a powerful military also degrades, however an increasingly declining America also makes it more dangerous. As ever more ideologues rule the corridors of power and the generally stupid population that will consent to everything they are told, America will start involving itself in ever more reckless conflicts. This means they despite being a near idiocracy, the nuclear weapons and military bases all over world make America an ever greater threat for the world.
Dana Thompson , December 22, 2017 at 9:37 pm GMTThe good thing about democracy is that anyone can express an opinion.
Not sure if this is a joke or not. In case you are serious, you clearly have not been following the news, from USA to Germany all these so called democracies have been undertaking massive censorship operations. From jailing people to shutting down online conversations to ordering news to not report on things that threaten their power.
A bizarre posting utterly detached from reality. Don't you understand that if a blustering lunatic presses a megaton-pistol against our collective foreheads and threatens to pull the trigger, it represents a very disquieting situation? And if we contemplate actions that would cause a million utterly harmless and innocent Koreans to be incinerated, to prevent a million of our own brains from being blown out, aren't we allowed to do so without being accused of being vile bigots that think yellow gook lives are worthless? Aren't we entitled to any instinct of self preservation at all?peterAUS , December 22, 2017 at 10:37 pm GMT
What the Korean situation obviously entails is a high-stakes experiment in human psychology. All that attention-seeking little freak probably wants is to be treated with respect, and like somebody important. Trump started out in a sensible way, by treating Kim courteously, but for that he was pilloried by the insanely-partisan opposition within his own party – McCain I'm mainly thinking of. That's the true obstacle to a sane resolution of the problem. I say if the twerp would feel good if we gave him a tickertape parade down Fifth Avenue and a day pass to Disneyland, we should do so – it's small enough a concession in view of what's at stake. But if rabid congress-critters obstruct propitiation, then intimidation and even preemptive megadeath may be all that's left.@Dana ThompsonVICB3 , December 23, 2017 at 12:07 am GMTAgree.
I suspect the true conversation about the topic will start when all that becomes really serious. I mean more serious than posting the latest selfie on a Facebook. Hangs around that warhead miniaturization/hardening timetable, IMHO. Maybe too late then.
@RandalSantoculto , December 23, 2017 at 12:27 am GMTJust be patient.
Also, one man's tyranny is another mans return to stability. For better or worse, Mao got rid of the Warlords. Franco got rid of the Communists and kept Spain out of WWII. The Assads are Baath Party and both secular and modernizers.
Stalin? Depends on who you talk to, but the Russians do like a strong hand.
Kim? His people only have to look West to China and Russia, or def. to the South, to know that things could be much better. And more and more he can't control the flow of information. That, and the rank and file of his army have roundworms. And guns.
At some point, the light comes on. And that same rank and file with guns tells itself "You know, we could be doing better."
And then it's "Live on TV Time!"
Hope this helps.
Just a thought.
VicB3
Double think is not just a question of ignorance or self contradiction because often it's important to make people embrace COMPLEXITY instead CONFUSION believing the late it's basically the firstErebus , December 23, 2017 at 12:59 am GMTMETWO#
@peterAUSSaker and his legion of fanboys here didn't "attack" the text but the writer.
In the first place, there's nothing in the text to "attack". It's a laundry list of disconnected slogans and so is not a different point of view at all. Released from the confines of the author's gamer world, it evaporates into nothing. I pointed this out to you at some length elsewhere.
In the second, it appears you missed the point of the article. Hint: it's stated in the title. The article's about the mindsets of the authors of such "texts", and not about the texts themselves.
It appears that I am sort of a "dissident" here.
You flatter yourself. To be a dissident requires, at the very least, comprehension of the argument one is disagreeing with. Your "texts" are the equivalent of shouting slogans and waving placards. It may work for a street protest, but is totally out of place on a webzine discussion forum. Hence your screeds here do not constitute real dissension, but trolling.
Simple, really.
|
|
|
Oct 25, 2017 | www.unz.com
Greg Bacon , Website October 24, 2017 at 8:54 am GMT
If our missile defense systems are so hot, why haven't the interceptors, stationed in Alaska, Japan, S. Korea and on US Navy ships in the area, shot down any of Kim's missiles that go flying over Japan?We're being sold a bill of goods, or BS for short. Those missile defense systems make for fat Pentagon contracts, but will do no more to protect Americans than the old 'Duck and Cover' propaganda we were taught back in the 1950′s and 1960′s. Just duck and cover under your school desk, then after the nukes pops off, get back to living.
With all the colleges and university's the USA has, how can Americans be so stupid?
Smoler , October 24, 2017 at 1:29 pm GMT
To me, the biggest threat that a North Korean attack could pose would be EMP. All they'd have to do is get a nuclear warhead into the atmosphere somewhere above or off the west coast of the US. Setting off that would destroy much of the electronics upon which our 'Communications Age' relies upon with an EMP wave.Chris Mallory , October 24, 2017 at 7:49 pm GMTAnd that seems hard, or at least harder to stop. It does not require accuracy on the part of the North Korean missile(s). And it only requires that one such warhead get through the missile defenses. With a bit of subterfuge, it could possibly be disquised as yet another missile test, one that would obviously not be aimed at the US mainland, but falling short, before it explodes high in the atmosphere over the Pacific Ocean, but close enough that the EMP wave has a direct path to much of the US. I suspect that many military electronics are hardened against this, as the effect has been known for quite some time. But the consumer electronics upon which our society relies would not be. Picture for instance every cell-phone/smart-phone going dead. And that's just one effect.
And it seems to be a big ask to ask missile defense to stop that. Especially when in controlled test after controlled test, when the 'defenders' know exactly what missiles will be launched, when they will be launched, and all the information about their trajectory, the missile defense still seems to be a 'hit-or-miss' proposition.
Which is why we should be negotiating. Although, the main problem with that is why the North Koreans would negotiate considering the US didn't keep its word in the 2005 agreement and is currently in the process of teaching Iran that the word of the US isn't worth the toilet paper an agreement is written upon.
@Smolerheadrick , October 24, 2017 at 10:55 pm GMTTo me, the biggest threat that a North Korean attack could pose would be EMP. All they'd have to do is get a nuclear warhead into the atmosphere somewhere above or off the west coast of the US.
Actually it is harder than that. They would have to have a warhead large enough to produce the EMP pulse strong enough to damage the electronics. Then they have to hit the right spot to target the area they want to damage. Too high and the EMP pulse won't be strong enough too low and it won't have the range needed to do the damage.
Plus any equipment not under load will probably be unaffected by the EMP. The EMP threat is greatly overblown.
If we nuked NK, I think we would become a world pariah. I am not sure though. NK says what they want is to be accepted as a nuclear power but not have to actually fight a nuclear war to achieve that. I don't know who to believe about that. It seems that the US is more belligerent than SK so maybe we should get in line behind and not ahead of SK about this. Jeeze, what a mess.Chris Mallory , October 24, 2017 at 10:58 pm GMT@RadicalCenteranonymous , Disclaimer October 25, 2017 at 12:05 am GMTIf the US government hits Pyongyang with even "small" tactical nuclear weapons, how will we avoid irradiating South Korea and China, which are very nearby?
Depending on how long the radioactive debris stays aloft, how do we keep from irradiating Japan? If you look at a prevailing winds map, the winds blow west to east across the Korean peninsula and encircle Japan.
Grandpa Charlie , October 25, 2017 at 12:22 am GMTAmericans consequently do not know war except as something that happens elsewhere and to foreigners,
That's pretty much it in a nutshell, isn't it? Americans usually don't give a hoot about dead furriners, they all look alike anyway. Notice that in all this sharpening of tension and debate regarding the DPRK no American has brought up the issue of what do the people of the ROK think about the prospect of hostilities over there. They're on the front line and would bear the cost of any outbreak of war yet no American cares about that even though they're supposed to be our close ally. Our 'ally' apparently would just be collateral damage of little interest to anyone on these shores. It's worrying because now it appears that the DPRK is emerging as another nuclear power and wants to develop the capability to hit the US; it's no longer a one-way street. The US never asked anyone for permission to build it's nuclear weapons and it's ability to act as a gatekeeper is eroding before it's eyes, hence the hysterical rhetoric. DPRK is becoming a member of the world's nuclear club regardless of who likes it so deal with it. There's always Venezuela to invade. Or Niger. Oh wait, we're already there.
@Chris Mallorynsa , October 25, 2017 at 1:49 am GMT"
So you would have no issue with the North Koreans, China, Russia or Outer Bumfreakistan running military exercises with Mexico just south of the Rio Grande?" Chris Mallory, to Grandpa
Chris, you manage to pack quite a few false equivalencies into your 25 words! Here's an example: Mexico is a much larger country than South Korea -- anywhere in South Korea could be taken as "just south of the Rio Grande". The area of Mexico is about 20 times that of South Korea! Plus, if you think about it, the only realistic exercises would have to be at the DMZ or at some kind of mock-up of the DMZ and where would you like UN/USA/ROK to construct that mock-up?
But of course, Chris, you don't think about anything at all you don't have to, being absolutely certain of your righteousness and the evil of all those who oppose your stupid POV. Very "liberal" of you!
Not the slightest chance of a war with the Koreans ..nuke or otherwise. The reason is as plain as the hook nose on your face ..nothing in it for the jooies who run Jerusalem on the Potomac. Iran is the target. We here in Ft. Meade get paid to know these things .Cloak And Dagger , October 25, 2017 at 2:03 am GMT@renfroBeckow , October 25, 2017 at 2:04 am GMTThere is a lot of hot air about South Korea being willing to destroy North Korea. I have spent a fair amount of time in Seoul over the years, and one thing that people may not realize is that many South Koreans have families and relatives in North Korea. They are not about to bomb them.
@peterAUSN Korea simply wants to be left alone. Sending a message of 'will and capability' is not how they think. They are sending a message of 'if you corner me, I will hurt you, even if we both die'. They are also not going to start anything. If they are pre-emptively attacked, what happens next is anyone's guess. But it could be catastrophic.
My point is that apart from the likely catastrophe, if we survive, there would also be a long-term negative consequence for Washington in terms of very bad vibes for generations in that part of the world. Actually, probably all over the world. That is a risk even more unhinged warmongers in Washington might not want to take. But, hey if their rationality is as low as you think, they just might. They might as well nuke Soul for all the emotional anger that would release among the Koreans.
Beckow , October 24, 2017 at 3:02 pm GMT
@peterAUSThere is also South Korea. Try to imagine the fallout among Koreans (and Japanese, Chinese, other Asians) if their cousins are nuked. In the short run it might even work -- if it would be an extremely targeted attack. But there is also longer run and for decades US would not be able to live this down. Generations of Koreans would grow up bitter that it was deemed ok to nuke people like them. War propaganda tends to wear off and only angry emotional memories remain.
And the Europeans, they would be apoplectic, probably the end of their American infatuation.
So the downside is potentially enormous. My guess is that fat Kim and his crew just want to be left alone. And they are scared. What's the point is stirring up a wasp nest? Now just imagine Chinese reaction if somebody drops a nuke on their border. It wouldn't be pretty.
Greg the American , October 24, 2017 at 5:24 pm GMT
Am I the only one having trouble seeing through the propaganda to understand the situation in North Korea? If they are wacko bird and horrible bad guys, then Trump may be right and Tillerson is wasting his time.On the other hand, my suspicion is that this is our creation, we're still fighting a decades old proxy war for some reason, and all we really need to do is get our boot off their throat. If this is the case, and it costs us Seattle, then we need to call the American experiment done.
Let's pretend the author is wrong, star wars works (reagan sits up in his grave and gives a fist pump) and we successfully kill a couple million North Koreans. Problem solved, right? Aside from the sin of it (hard to put aside), I think the aftermath will call in a lot of accounts Americans will be ashamed to pay.
Or maybe not, all these wars are started by the lies of the powerful.
Beckow , October 24, 2017 at 8:28 pm GMT
@peterAUS"Kim regime does not appear reasonable"
Appearances are created for you, I am not sure these 'appearances' reflect reality in N Korea. They might, but we are also being manipulated. Since I am not familiar with N Korea, my sanity check is to compare 'media appearances' of things I know well to actual reality. And there one can see huge media created gaps.
I agree that US government is capable of seeing the longterm impact on Koreans as 'nothing'. That's a problem, some core sanity principles have been discarded in Washington. My point is that any nuclear usage would have huge long-term consequences, it could start unraveling the magical spell that 'America' has had for about 100 years on the rest of mankind. But they still might do it. Remember that these actions are never clear-cut -- there would be endless doubts about whether N Korea was actually going to -- or was capable -- of attacking Hawaii. There is no way you can win that in the long run. Koreans are after all a very-tightly related and very ethnically aware nation. And the difference between North and South Koreans is largely political -- they are the same people.
renfro , October 24, 2017 at 9:02 pm GMT
" Far better to take the North Korean threat seriously and admit that a west coast city like Seattle could well become the target of a successful nuclear weapon attack.>>>>>>L.K , October 24, 2017 at 9:12 pm GMTIsn't that what Trump and Co. and the Walking Dead Neocons have been doing all along fear mongering? I think so.
The myth of missile defense aside I don't know that I even buy that this N Korea hysteria is even about their nukes.
Reading reports in international papers it may be more about the fact that Russia has been actively investing in North Korea to secure a key strategic economic outlet to the Pacific Ocean. And on top of that Russia is acting as the political and business intermediary between China. Japan and the loud mouth in N Korea in this 3 sided squabble.So all this crap about N Korea actually lobbing a nuke on the US reminds me of the WMD propaganda to justify invading Iraq.
It may be and probably is more about the US foiling Russian expansion of influence and commerce in that part of Asia.@peterAUShypewaders , October 24, 2017 at 9:44 pm GMTAs usual, you are completely full of shit but then, anyone with, er, half a brain, can see you are merely a virulent little war mongering Internet troll, always asking for some more war, from the comfort of whatever little insect hole you type your garbage. It reminds me of what another poster wrote around here: 'Amerikastan, Amerikastan, Wants to fight Russia and China, Iran and North Korea, Can't even beat, The Taliban*.' * that is a militia, btw.
International shipping provides convenient delivery to the world's ports. Of WMDs. Who are we really kidding?L.K , October 24, 2017 at 9:51 pm GMTWhy North Korea Needs Nukes -- And How To End ThatJoe Stalin , October 25, 2017 at 3:13 am GMTNow consider what the U.S. media don't tell you about Korea:
BEIJING, March 8 (Xinhua) -- China proposed "double suspension" to defuse the looming crisis on the Korean Peninsula, Chinese Foreign Minister Wang Yi said Wednesday. "As a first step, the Democratic People's Republic of Korea (DPRK) may suspend its nuclear and missile activities in exchange for the suspension of large-scale U.S.-Republic of Korea (ROK) military exercises, " FM Wang, 'the lips', undoubtedly transmitted an authorized message from North Korea: "The offer is (still) on the table and China supports it."
North Korea has made the very same offer in January 2015. The Obama administration rejected it. North Korea repeated the offer in April 2016 and the Obama administration rejected it again. This March the Chinese government conveyed and supported the long-standing North Korean offer. The U.S. government, now under the Trump administration, immediately rejected it again. The offer, made and rejected three years in a row, is sensible. Its rejection only led to a bigger nuclear arsenal and to more missiles with longer reach that will eventually be able to reach the United States.
North Korea is understandably nervous each and every time the U.S. and South Korea launch their very large yearly maneuvers and openly train for invading North Korea and for killing its government and people. The maneuvers have large negative impacts on North Korea's economy.
North Korea justifies its nuclear program as the economically optimal way to respond to these maneuvers.[...]
Each time the U.S. and South Korea launch their very large maneuvers, the North Korean conscription army (1.2 million strong) has to go into a high state of defense readiness. Large maneuvers are a classic starting point for military attacks. The U.S.-South Korean maneuvers are (intentionally) held during the planting (April/May) or harvesting (August) season for rice when North Korea needs each and every hand in its few arable areas .
To understand why North Korea fears U.S. aggressiveness consider the utter devastation caused mostly by the U.S. during the Korea War:
Read it all at
@Cloak And DaggerBeckow , October 25, 2017 at 5:38 am GMTYou raise an interesting point. During the UN retreat under PRC attack in the Korean War, US merchant marine were requested, not ordered, to evacuate North Korean civilians to safety from Hungnam. They evacuated 90,000+ North Korean civilians to South Korea. Those NKs have supposedly contributed 1 million citizens to South Korea. "The evacuation included 14,000 refugees who were transported on one ship, the SS Meredith Victory -- the largest evacuation from land by a single ship."
@peterAUSErebus , October 25, 2017 at 6:58 am GMTYou are right that leaders don't like to risk a surprise attack. So they have a tendency to over-insure (most people in quiet, settled circumstances over-insure, because, well, what else is there to do?). This might be one of those cases where the circumstances lead us to a disaster. I hope not.
I don't "virtue signal". Virtues , like charity, only make sense in a narrow sense, in one's private life. But we need this planet for selfish reasons. Neo-cons are just the latest reincarnation of nutty, out-of-control busybodies obsessed with their own ideas and power. People like that have a cul-de-sac way of thinking. They tend to overdo it at the end and push things too far, go for that ultimate victory. Their thinking lacks boundaries. That makes them very dangerous. We are gain at one of those really dangerous moments in mankind's history, we could absent-mindedly cause a catastrophe. In a way a smaller catastrophe (like N Korea) could help us avoid a much bigger one.
@Grandpa CharlieKenH , October 25, 2017 at 12:53 pm GMTActually, lots has been going on between the Russian-Chinese tag team and the two Koreas. Westerners wouldn't necessarily have heard much about it, but developments are afoot.
Largely unreported by Western corporate media, what happened in Vladivostok is really ground-breaking. Moscow and Seoul agreed on a trilateral trade platform, crucially involving Pyongyang, to ultimately invest in connectivity between the whole Korean peninsula and the Russian Far East. The rest is at http://www.atimes.com/article/russia-china-plan-north-korea-stability-connectivity/
According to reports, the N. Koreans didn't participate in the meeting, but "aren't against" the idea. Railways, ports, roads, and IT is how one draws the hermit kingdom out from its defensive shell. The US will have a hard time with this idea, so Moon will be under a lot of pressure to abandon these thoughts. Without the N. Korean bugaboo, the US has one less reason to be there, and they need all the reasons they can get. The Japanese have been eyeing this as well. They will not want to be left out.
Do Putin or Lavrov ever sleep?
Carroll Price , October 25, 2017 at 2:24 pm GMTThe tests themselves are carefully scripted to guarantee success.
And no doubt use that "success" to keep taxpayer money flowing for anti-ICBM defense systems.
Even if the success rate is an honest 50% that means five ICBM's will still reach their targets if say, Kim Jong Un fired ten at the west coast. Sacremento, LA and San Fransicko would go up in mushroom clouds. Governor Moonbeam would be no more, so there's a silver lining to everything.
@Cloak And DaggerIf the US could keep their hooked nose out of it, South and North Korea would have resolved their differences long ago.
|
|
|
Oct 25, 2017 | www.unz.com
Horace J , October 21, 2017 at 8:52 pm GMT
@Grandpa CharlieOrigins of the Korean war are quite complex. There is no simple answer. You may wan to consult the article at this link:
http://original.antiwar.com/justin/2013/07/28/who-really-started-the-korean-war/
And consult the links within. A rich and fascinating history awaits. See this for why the North Korean invasion, though alarming in D.C. was considered a god-send by many in Washington:
|
|
|
Oct 24, 2017 | marknesop.wordpress.com
Patient Observer , October 22, 2017 at 8:18 am
Speaking of Pompeo:http://theduran.com/mike-pompeos-latest-rant-shows-cia-far-unreasonable-dprk/
In a recent statement, Pompeo talked brazenly about assassinating Kim Jong-un. The CIA director stated,
"With respect to if Kim Jong-un should vanish, given the history of the CIA, I'm just not going to talk about it.
Someone might think there was a coincidence. 'You know, there was an accident.' It's just not fruitful".Pompeo then ominously stated that the CIA is "going to become a much more vicious agency".
Reasons for the efforts to regime-change NK may include preventing the eventual integration of NK's economy with China and Russia. Once such an integration is achieved SK would have little choice but to join in and be part of the Eurasian one belt-one road economy. Japan would be left twisting in the wind unless it could overcome its US masters and also set aside its racial prejudices. As for Australia, who cares (no disrespect to Jen)?
|
|
|
Oct 04, 2017 | www.usnews.com
The idea that North Korea's nuclear capacity is a threat to the U.S., in particular because Kim might be crazy enough to attack us, was dismissed in a recent New York Times report :
The fear is not that Mr. Kim would launch a pre-emptive attack on the West Coast; that would be suicidal, and if the 33-year-old leader has demonstrated anything in his five years in office, he is all about survival. But if Mr. Kim has the potential ability to strike back, it would shape every decision Mr. Trump and his successors will make about defending America's allies in the region.In other words, if North Korea could retaliate against a U.S. attack, Washington would have less power in Asia. It seems that when we dig beneath the surface of "national security" arguments for terribly dangerous or violent foreign policies, it is more often power, rather than the security or well-being of Americans, that underlies them. Otherwise, the negotiation of peaceful solutions would be the first priority. But as recently as June, the Trump administration dismissed an offer from North Korea and China to negotiate a deal in which North Korea would freeze its missile and nuclear testing in return for the U.S. freezing its "big, large-scale military exercises" in the Korean peninsula. The same imperial priorities that prevent a negotiated solution with North Korea appear to be a major reason for U.S. participation in the war and atrocities in Yemen. In this case it is part of Washington's strategic alliance with the Saudi dictatorship, which has recently been subjected to increasing criticism for its support for terrorist groups, including ISIS. Fortunately, members of Congress are pushing back against the unconstitutional, unauthorized participation in the Saudi-led war in Yemen.
|
|
|
Oct 03, 2017 | www.unz.com
Barsamian: What are the strategic issues where Korea is concerned? Can anything be done to defuse the growing conflict?
Chomsky: Korea has been a festering problem since the end of World War II, when the hopes of Koreans for unification of the peninsula were blocked by the intervention of the great powers, the United States bearing primary responsibility.
The North Korean dictatorship may well win the prize for brutality and repression, but it is seeking and to some extent carrying out economic development, despite the overwhelming burden of a huge military system. That system includes, of course, a growing arsenal of nuclear weapons and missiles, which pose a threat to the region and, in the longer term, to countries beyond -- but its function is to be a deterrent, one that the North Korean regime is unlikely to abandon as long as it remains under threat of destruction.
Today, we are instructed that the great challenge faced by the world is how to compel North Korea to freeze these nuclear and missile programs. Perhaps we should resort to more sanctions, cyberwar, intimidation; to the deployment of the Terminal High Altitude Area Defense (THAAD) anti-missile system, which China regards as a serious threat to its own interests; perhaps even to direct attack on North Korea -- which, it is understood, would elicit retaliation by massed artillery, devastating Seoul and much of South Korea even without the use of nuclear weapons.
But there is another option, one that seems to be ignored: we could simply accept North Korea's offer to do what we are demanding. China and North Korea have already proposed that North Korea freeze its nuclear and missile programs. The proposal, though, was rejected at once by Washington, just as it had been two years earlier, because it includes a quid pro quo: it calls on the United States to halt its threatening military exercises on North Korea's borders, including simulated nuclear-bombing attacks by B-52s.
The Chinese-North Korean proposal is hardly unreasonable. North Koreans remember well that their country was literally flattened by U.S. bombing , and many may recall how U.S. forces bombed major dams when there were no other targets left. There were gleeful reports in American military publications about the exciting spectacle of a huge flood of water wiping out the rice crops on which "the Asian" depends for survival. They are very much worth reading, a useful part of historical memory.
The offer to freeze North Korea's nuclear and missile programs in return for an end to highly provocative actions on North Korea's border could be the basis for more far-reaching negotiations, which could radically reduce the nuclear threat and perhaps even bring the North Korea crisis to an end. Contrary to much inflamed commentary, there are good reasons to think such negotiations might succeed. Yet even though the North Korean programs are constantly described as perhaps the greatest threat we face, the Chinese-North Korean proposal is unacceptable to Washington, and is rejected by U.S. commentators with impressive unanimity. This is another entry in the shameful and depressing record of near-reflexive preference for force when peaceful options may well be available.
The 2017 South Korean elections may offer a ray of hope. Newly elected President Moon Jae-in seems intent on reversing the harsh confrontationist policies of his predecessor. He has called for exploring diplomatic options and taking steps toward reconciliation, which is surely an improvement over the angry fist-waving that might lead to real disaster.
|
|
|
Sep 05, 2017 | www.alternet.org
Over the past month, President Trump's incendiary threats to rain " fire and fury " on North Korea in response to its ballistic missile program set off a chain of military escalations that climaxed this week with Pyongyang's sixth test of a nuclear device , a hydrogen bomb three to five times more powerful than the American bombs that destroyed Hiroshima and Nagasaki.
As the crisis unfolded, the Rand Corporation, a military-intelligence think tank founded during the Cold War, relentlessly promoted the views of Bruce W. Bennett, a defense researcher it calls "one of the leading experts on the world's most reclusive country." Two or three times a day, Rand's media shop tweets out links to Bennett's writings on Kim Jong-un, the 33-year-old who rules the Democratic Peoples' Republic of Korea (DPRK), its formal and preferred name.
While Trump has vowed to use sanctions, war threats and diplomacy to stop Kim from developing a ballistic missile that could fire nuclear weapons at the United States!exactly what Kim claimed to do on Sunday!Bennett believes that the only target worth considering is North Korea's " Supreme Leader " himself.
Bennett's basic theme is that North Korea is teetering on collapse and internal unrest because the military and technocratic elite who run the country have given up on Kim and his dynastic family. It's a theory that's been around for decades , but has picked up steam in reaction to Kim's recent purges, including possibly his own brother and a string of high-level defections that includes Thae Yong-ho , the erudite former North Korea ambassador to London.
In glossy books and pamphlets ("Preparing North Korean Elites for Unification") and in appearances from CNN to Fox to Teen Vogue , Bennett lays out his plan for overthrowing the North Korean government by saturating the country with leaflets and propaganda and providing assurances to potential plotters in the North that they would have a place within a new, unified Korea!but only under South Korean and U.S. control.
The U.S., he warned in a recent speech on Capitol Hill that I attended, must deliver Kim a simple message: "We know the only thing you care about is your regime's survival. Either denuclearize or we will take actions politically to destabilize your regime." His talk was a basic primer for this "uprising" from within, which is exactly what the Bush administration sought in Iraq when it invaded in 2003.
The plan, Bennett said, might begin with the U.S. Air Force dropping leaflets on North Korean missile bases that invite North Korean soldiers to defect. "If there were one or two, that would be a political loss of face." K-Pop, the South Korean musical genre that's popular around the world, could be another weapon: "It's acidic as far the regime is concerned." And commercials about South Korean life planted in DVDs smuggled into the North "would be terrible for Kim Jong-un."
The purpose of the operation, he said, is to convince the people of the DPRK that their "paranoid" leader is not a "god," and to plant the idea that his country is unstable: "If that's in his mind, it will affect his behavior." In short, a psy-op.
As I listened to his spiel, I was reminded of Bennett's advisory role in the 2014 Seth Rogen comedy The Interview , about two Hollywood stoners hired by the CIA to kill Kim. It depicted, in graphic detail, Kim's head being blown apart by a guided missile fired by fed-up North Korean "elites" who had come over to the U.S. side after their conversations with the fake American journalists, played by Rogen and his sidekick James Franco.
The film was produced by Japan's Sony Pictures, but finalized only after receiving critical advice and assistance from the Obama State Department, the Rand Corporation, and according to a 2014 interview Rogen gave to the New York Times, the CIA ("We made relationships with certain people who work in the government as consultants, who I'm convinced are in the CIA") But it was all under the tutelage of Bruce Bennett, who was brought into the project by Sony Entertainment CEO Michael Lynton, a prominent member of Rand's board of directors and a close confidante of President Obama.
Why Bennett? His official biography states that he has worked for the Office of the Secretary of Defense, U.S. Forces in South Korea and Japan, the U.S. Pacific Command as well as the South Korean and Japanese militaries. According an email he wrote to Sony's Lynton in 2014, he got his start in Asia as a Mormon missionary to Japan and began working on Korea in 1989 "at the request of the Pentagon." By 2014, he said, he had made over 100 trips to South Korea to advise the U.S. Army and senior South Korean military personnel "on how to deter North Korea." Even though he has never been to the DPRK, he bases his knowledge of the country on his "extensive interviews with senior North Korean defectors."
The movie's plot closely follows Bennett's vision for regime change from within, and is illustrated in two key scenes.
"We're aware of a small faction in the existing leadership that already wants him gone," the CIA agent overseeing the assassination plot tells her American recruits early on. "They want change and they're too scared to act alone. And they need you two to go in there and remove Kim and embolden them to revolt." Later, "Sook," the sexy assistant to Kim who joins the regime change plot, pleads with Rogen: "How do you prove to the 24 million people of North Korea that their god is a murderer and a liar? The people need to be shown that he's not a god."
The film allegedly sparked North Korea to hack Sony and leak thousands of internal Sony emails. North Korea also warned the Obama administration not to allow the film to be released, branding it "an act of terrorism." So, when Bennett invited questions at his congressional briefing, I asked him: what was his involvement in The Interview , and did he think it was effective?
At first, Bennett was elusive, saying, "I did not work on the movie." When I reminded him that he had been listed as an adviser, he changed course. "I heard about it for the first time when I was sent a copy of the DVD by the president of Sony Pictures, who was asking, do we need to be worried about this?" he explained, inspiring a ripple of laughter throughout the room. Bennett continued: "So I had a tail-end role in trying to help them appreciate what they might be worried about."
But there's a lot more to the story. Now that Kim is dominating the news once again, it's time to revisit this film and how it became a weapon in the long-running American war against North Korea.
Obama's hard line on DPRK
As Americans come to grips with Trump's confrontational policies with North Korea, it's easy to forget that U.S. relations with North Korea reached a nadir under Barack Obama. Here's why: Bennett's regime change proposals were, and are, the culmination of policies hatched by Obama's left-liberal administration to weaken Kim's hold on power and hasten what they considered North Korea's inevitable collapse. Obviously they failed, yet elements of the plan still abound.
Let's start with some basic background. The hostile U.S. relationship with the DPRK dates back to the Korean War, when U.S. bombers turned the country into cinders in a destructive campaign of carpet-bombing that killed millions of people. In 1953, an armistice ended the fighting, leaving the country divided and in a perpetual state of war. A peace treaty was never signed. Sometime in the late 1980s, with the border still tense and the U.S. showing no signs of withdrawing its military forces from the South, the DPRK decided to embark on a nuclear program to defend itself from wars of regime change and guarantee its sovereignty.
To head off that development, in 1994 President Bill Clinton negotiated an agreement with North Korea's founding leader, Kim Il-sung, that sought to allay his government's fears by ending America's hostile policies. Under the "Agreed Framework," the DPRK shut down its one test reactor -- its only source for plutonium -- in return for U.S. shipments of oil for its power grid and two new light-water reactors to be built by an international consortium. Most importantly, both sides agreed to end mutual hostility by fully normalizing their economic and political relations.
The agreement, which froze North Korea's nuclear program for 12 years, held for several years. But in 2002, the Bush administration accused the DPRK -- falsely it turned out -- of building a secret uranium program as a second route to a bomb and tore up the framework. In response, North Korea, which was by now led by Kim Jong-il, Kim Jong-un's father, restarted its nuclear program, and by 2006 had exploded its first nuclear device.
Surprisingly, Bush reopened negotiations only three weeks later, and by 2007, under the rubric of the Six Party Talks, the DPRK agreed again to freeze its program. That accord was still pending when Obama was elected in 2009. He had run for president pledging to talk to Iran and North Korea, but quickly changed course on Korea.
According to Leon Sigal, a former State Department official who has met with North Korea many times in unofficial talks, Obama and his top adviser on Asia, Jeff Bader, decided in 2009 to side with the new, conservative president of South Korea, Lee Myung Bak, who had campaigned against engagement and demanded stronger pressure tactics against the DPRK. Soon, the idea of direct talks and regular was abandoned. Officially, the doctrine for replacing direct engagement with pressure tactics was known as "strategic patience." Behind it was a mistaken assumption!the same one made by Bennett today!that North Korea was headed for collapse, making even the chance of an agreement a futile exercise.
It's difficult to overstate how reactionary Obama's policies became. In contrast to Bush, and even Trump, Obama flatly rejected the idea of negotiating with the North without a prior commitment to denuclearization. He also expressed no interest in the DPRK's offer to sign a peace agreement. More disturbingly, he was the first president in history to refer to the Korean War, which has been universally recognized as a bloody stalemate, as a "victory." In doing so, Obama revived a right-wing trope that was first used in the 1950s and resurrected during the Bush years by David Frum and other neocons. So from the onset, Obama caused America's policy toward Korea to take a sharp right turn.
The tensions were exacerbated by the covert cyber war Obama launched against North Korea to damage and slow its missile program. During the Obama years, North Korea tested three more nuclear bombs, and despite the cyber war, rapidly expanded its missile abilities. As the situation deteriorated, Obama embarked on a series of military exercises with South Korea that increased in size and tempo over the course of his administration. They included unprecedented overflights by B-52 and stealth B1-B bombers as well as training in " decapitation strikes " designed to take out Kim and his leadership. All of this led straight to the crisis Trump inherited and has only made worse.
But while Trump critics rightly chafe over his reckless allusions to a nuclear attack on Korea, it's often forgotten that Obama himself made similar statements, couched in his trademark cool. "We could, obviously, destroy North Korea with our arsenals," Obama told CBS News in April 2016. A few months later, Daniel Russel, the president's senior diplomat on Asia who had earlier viewed The Interview at Sony's request, actually threatened North Korea's destruction. If Kim gets "an enhanced capacity to conduct a nuclear attack," Russel told defense reporters, he would "immediately die."
At the time, these threats hardly caused a ripple in the media, and sparked few complaints from the liberals who now criticize Trump for pushing the U.S. to war or the progressive reporters who criticized Bush for his invasion of Iraq.
Seth Rogen 'melted head' assassination scene
Although the idea for The Interview had been around for a while, the real inspiration, director Seth Rogen told the Los Angeles Times, was some "idle kidding around" he did with his friends after the assassination of Osama bin Laden in 2011. He and Sony were also encouraged by the wild success of the 2004 hit movie Team America , which ridiculed Kim Jong-il's big glasses and bouffant hair-do. But what sparked Sony's decision to go ahead with its $35 million investment was the crisis that shook the Korean Peninsula when the DPRK tested its third nuclear device in February 2013.
The nuclear test vaulted Kim Jong-un into the headlines for the first time, giving Sony the moment it had been seeking. In a "strategic marketing and research" paper later leaked by hackers, the studio told promoters to push the theme of "the dictator's bizarre behavior!he's a young, inexperienced guy with self-esteem and 'daddy' issues." The film used every racist image and trope that Rogen could dream up, from the sing-songy caricatures of Asian speech that were a film staple in the 1940s and '50s, to the concept that Koreans are either robotic slaves (like Kim's security guards) or sex-starved submissives who crave American men (like Sook, the "elite" aide to Kim who falls for the Rogen character).
In the end of the film, the Hollywood rebels triumph after badgering Kim with tough questions about his ability to feed his own people, an allusion to the terrible famine that occurred in the late-1990s. Kim goes crazy, forcing "a man once revered among mortals to cry and shit in his pants," the Rogen character explains. After the stoner character screams, "he's no god, he's a butthole," Kim is struck on his helicopter by the fatal missile shot by Sook's rebels, and his head explodes in a fireball. The rebels' job now "is to make sure power is transferred to the right hands," the Americans explain.
It was that ending that caused most of the controversy, both at the studio and when the film was later pre-screened to select officials of the Obama administration. When the first takes were shown in June 2014, some of Sony's Japanese executives were disturbed by both the violence and the racism. By this time, North Korea (which relentlessly monitors U.S. media) had got wind of the film and its theme of assassinating its head of state. So the studio asked Rogen to tone it down by removing one scene in which moviegoers watched Kim's face slowly melt and slide off his head. This sent Rogen on a tirade.
"We feel the story of censorship and trying to appease North Korea WILL in fact hurt the film critically, and thus financially," he wrote to Amy Pascal , Sony Pictures' top executive at the time. "The head melting shot described vividly in all these articles is universally received as awesome by the articles writing about them, and when these critics see a shot that is decidedly LESS awesome, regardless of what story we put out there, the truth will be apparent: it's a compromised product." (The head-melting scene was removed, but Rogen's Hollywood version of selective morality was revealing nonetheless).
By this point, North Korea's Ministry of Foreign Affairs was denouncing the film as tantamount to "an act of war," and threatening "a decisive and merciless countermeasure" if the Obama administration allowed it to be shown. That was apparently the result Rogen was looking for.
"There was a lot of high-fiving," he told the Los Angeles Times. Even if it caused a war?
"Hopefully," Rogen said, "people will say, 'You know what? It was worth it. It was a good movie!'"
It was then that Sony turned to the government for help, through Rand and its Korea expert, Bruce Bennett.
With top Obama contacts, Sony and Rand collaborate on coup narrative
The Rand Corporation first became famous in 1971, when Daniel Ellsberg, a Rand analyst, leaked the Pentagon Papers that exposed the secret history of the Vietnam War. The incredible tale of official lies that unfolded in pages of the New York Times and other papers helped end the war four years later and triggered the beginning of the end of Richard Nixon. After shaking off that incident, Rand emerged as one of the premiere research centers for the Pentagon and U.S. intelligence.
As a result of 9/11 and the U.S. invasion of Iraq, Rand returned full force to refining the practice of counterinsurgency , or COIN, the "soft power" side of empire-building that got its start in Vietnam and aims at winning "hearts and minds" of countries that the United States invades or subverts. Bennett's policy proposals to divide members of the North Korean "elite" from their government with offers of political support and financial assistance come right out of the COIN playbook .
The link between Rand and Sony was made shortly after the first public viewing of the film by Rand CEO Michael Rich, a lifelong employee of the think tank. Under his leadership, Rand developed close ties with U.S. intelligence. In November 2014, for example, Rich presided over a "rare dialogue" with the National Security Agency that took place at Sony's headquarters in Century City and included then NSA director Michael Rogers as well as Michael Leiter, the former director of the CIA's National Counterterrorism Center.
In June 2014, after the first clips of the movie where shown, Rich emailed Bennett, informing him he had recommended that Rand "trustee Michael Lynton, CEO of Sony Entertainment, get in touch with you for some quick assistance." Lynton, too, had high-level connections. As the hacked Sony emails collected by Wikileaks would later reveal , he had attended dinners at Martha's Vineyard with President Obama, and as a Rand board member, had contacts throughout government. From June on, Bennett, through Lynton, became a critical adviser to the film and acted as a liaison between the studio and the Obama administration.
The makers of The Interview were especially interested in advice on crafting the ending of the film. The scene of Kim's head exploding pleased Bennett, as he wrote in one of his emails. "I have been clear that the assassination of Kim Jong-Un is the most likely path to a collapse of the North Korean government," he wrote .
Bennett continued: 'Thus while toning down the ending may reduce the North Korean response, I believe that a story that talks about the removal of the Kim family regime and the creation of a new government by the North Korean people (well, at least the elites) will start some real thinking in South Korea and, I believe, in the North once the DVD leaks into the North (which it almost certainly will). So from a personal perspective, I would personally prefer to leave the ending alone."
Bennett firmly believed the film could spark the U.S.-led coup he had dreamed about for so long. "There are many ways that United States and even Sony Pictures could affect North Korean internal politics," he wrote on the Rand website. "Slipping DVDs of at least parts of The Interview into the North, including a narration describing what their 'god' Kim is really like is one way." (In fact, a version of this stunt was attempted right after the film came out by two of the more fanatical regime-changers in Washington, the neocon writer Jamie Kirchik and right-wing human rights hustler Thor Halvorssen .)
To make sure the film was on the right track, Sony arranged to show the ending to officials at the State Department. Lynton emailed Daniel Russel, who was the assistant Secretary of State for East Asia, that the studio was "concerned for the safety of Americans and American and North Korean relations." He and other U.S. officials gave their blessing to the film's violent ending. After word of Russel's involvement leaked out, the State Department denied any role, only to be contradicted by Russel himself. In a 2016 speech in Los Angeles, he said , "I'm the U.S. government official who told Sony there was no problem 'greenlighting' the movie The Interview ."
Despite the official go-ahead, Sony agreed at first to only release The Interview on DVD. Then, when Sony temporarily pulled the film in December 2014, Obama became its champion, declaring that "we cannot have a society in which some dictator someplace can start imposing censorship here in the United States." That led to the remarkable sight of Hollywood actors and directors from the liberal left, led by the likes of George Clooney and Michael Moore, defending the film as an act of free speech and urging Americans to defy Kim's "censorship" and go see it in a theater.
By this time, Sony had been hacked by a group that called itself the " Guardians of Peace ." The FBI later claimed this group was secretly working for North Korea. The Obama administration agreed, and said its top intelligence officials had concluded that North Korea was "centrally involved." This finding was questioned by many cyber-security experts (especially Gregory Elich's critique in Counterpunch and Kim Zetter's analysis in Wired). They concluded that the FBI's "evidence" found in servers in Thailand, Singapore and elsewhere was thin and speculative, and found signs that the real hackers (who had an uncanny insider knowledge of Hollywood) could still be at large and might have been former Sony employees.
But the U.S. government had no doubts at all. In January 2015, Obama called the DPRK's alleged hack an "act of war" and used it as an excuse to launch one of the most aggressive American actions on behalf of a private corporation in U.S. history. His executive order imposed sanctions against three North Korean agencies and nearly a dozen "critical North Korean operatives" in retaliation for the hack. The Treasury Department said the sanctions were in direct response to North Korea's "numerous provocations, particularly the recent cyber-attack targeting Sony Pictures Entertainment." The action marked a major escalation, returning "the U.S. to a posture of open hostility with its oldest remaining Cold War adversary," the Wall Street Journal noted .
Shortly after these actions were taken, the New York Times published a revelation that raised serious questions about the hack, reporting that the NSA had broken into the DPRK's computer systems as early as 2010 and "penetrated directly into the North with the help of South Korea and other American allies." If that was true, the NSA might have watched the alleged hackers and allowed them to do their work. Here's what the Times concluded:
"The extensive American penetration of the North Korean system raises questions about why the United States was not able to alert Sony as the attacks took shape last fall, even though the North had warned, as early as June, that the release of the movie would be 'an act of war.'"
By this time, however, the film had done its damage by convincing Kim's government that the Obama administration did indeed want its destruction. More missile and nuclear tests followed, and by the end of the Obama administration relations were far worse than they were when Bush left office in 2009. In other words, the film had the opposite of its intended effect, prompting a clampdown by Kim and suppressing whatever internal dissent existed.
Today, Kim Jong-un remains firmly in control of North Korea, and the Trump administration -- despite Trump's tweets on Sunday equating engagement with "appeasement " -- appears to be slowly moving toward negotiations of some kind with his government. Bruce Bennett continues to fantasize about bringing the leader down. Kim, he argued in a recent post , craves his weapons not for self-defense but because "nukes are one way to show his subjects he's a god." Kim is "a weak leader consumed by paranoia," he wrote in a separate piece.
At the same time, there is abundant evidence that the combination regime-change/cyber war project adopted by the Obama administration is still in force. A few weeks ago, CIA Director Mike Pompeo told a crowd at the Aspen Forum that he's been ordered to find ways to "separate" Kim from his "missiles and nuclear weapons" -- a "strong hint," the New York Times reported , "that the United States was considering seeking a regime change in North Korea." And on August 29, in a departing interview with Fox News, ousted White House adviser Sebastian Gorka let it slip that the cyber attacks on North Korea probably continue. "On the more covert side of things, you have seen a lot of missile tests fail," he said . "Most tests actually fail. Sometimes there may be reasons beyond just incompetence by North Korea."
The Democrats haven't let up, either. Last month, Connecticut Senator Richard Blumenthal told NBC News that the Obama administration should have responded more aggressively to North Korea's alleged hack of Sony in 2014. And there was an intriguing exchange recently between one of Obama's top national security officials and South Korea's new president, Moon Jae-in . On August 4, Moon spoke out against Korean right-wingers who send anti-DPRK propaganda over the border in large balloons!one of the tactics frequently suggested by Bennett and carried out by neocons Kirchick and Halvorssen. These actions, he warned , unnecessarily aggravate the North, and particularly during times of severe tension, "could prompt accidental clashes."
That sparked an angry tweet from Samantha Power, the Obama administration's former U.N. ambassador and perhaps the most famous proponent of "humanitarian intervention" against enemy states like North Korea. "So mistaken," Power tweeted in response to Moon. "Information is what Kim Jong-un fears most."
|
|
|
Sep 24, 2017 | www.theguardian.com
... ... ...Dealing with Kim is not the same as dealing with a fanatic like Osama bin Laden or an apparatchik like Khrushchev. He is impervious to realpolitik, and the lives of perhaps tens of millions of people are at stake – by privation, if not war.
Trump's threat of fire and fury is the worst response imaginable to a religious extremist who believes he alone can save humanity – and that the US and her allies are all that stand in the way of Korea fulfilling its own destiny.
The Korean War ended with an armistice, or stand-off, but never a peace treaty, and the US is, in essence, still fighting the Korean War. That is the crux of the problem.Babis_K , 24 Sep 2017 12:05The solution lies in a peace treaty that demilitarizes the whole Korean peninsula and this treaty must include China, since China was the main adversary to the US during a war that never really ended after more than 60 years.
No one (Trump or Kim) is so insane that will dare to escalate this verbal war into a real war that can easily turn into a nuclear war.Tom1982 , 24 Sep 2017 10:28If Kim fires first he knows that he, his regime and a great part of his people will be annihilated by the American fire and fury.
If the US strike first they can't endure the consequences of a nuclear counter- attack by N. Korea with millions of dead in the ally countries of S. Korea and Japan but even in the US territory from 60 nukes Kim processes today.
I see this verbal dispute as a repetition of cold war Cuba tension some 55 years ago but in a less diplomatic and more hoodlum language.
Diplomats from the US and N. Korea should sit at the same table and find a way to relax this tension.
Interesting the author puts so much emphasis on Juche in his assessment of North Korean political deliberations.AshesToAshes -> Blenheim , 24 Sep 2017 10:28B. R. Myers wrote an influential book on North Korea that made the case that Juche is a non-philosophy designed solely for the purpose of bamboozling foreigners, and that the motivations of the DPRK leadership are based around racial nationalism.
It is realpolitik sharpened to a knife edge. The USA acts as nuclear hegemon, because it is in their own interests to do so. The USSR would like to have done so, and China would still if it could. We benefit from the status quo.AshesToAshes -> TragicomedyBeholder , 24 Sep 2017 10:21North Korea having nuclear weapons is odious to the USA as hegemon, so it will not be allowed to happen. Morality is irrelevant. The only question is who has the will and the power to enforce that will.
Unfortunately if he so desperately wants war, the price will be immeasurable.jdanforth -> Andrei Lankov , 24 Sep 2017 09:37Imagine h actually fires a handful of ICBMs at the continental USA. It really doesn't matter much at that point whether US missile defence takes them down before impact or not. Either way, the US would then counterstrike with a force not dissimilar to the hammer of God.
Trump might decide that the best way to stop Seoul getting pulverised by DPRK artillery is to carpet the area north of the DMZ with small tactical nuclear strikes, and then unleash dozens, perhaps hundreds of strategic warheads on Pyongyang and every single other target of any value. It would be over in a morning, but NK would be utterly incinerated.
Yeah, Vietnam, Cuba and China have done some privatizations, so what you say about North Korea sounds correct to me, but the core of heavy industry there and in all of these countries is still state-owned.WallyWillage -> FobRoared , 24 Sep 2017 09:18The only way for any of them to once again be ruled by a capitalist class would be a counterrevolutionary collapse like the one that happened in the USSR in 1991-92. Such an event would be unmistakeable, cataclysmic, and most likely catastrophic, for the inhabitants of the country in question, just as it was in the USSR. It cannot happen as some sort of gradual evolution in the policies of the governing bureaucracy, although the privatizations and corruption that you mention do make it a more likely outcome than before. A US invasion and military regime would be a way to restore capitalist rule to North Korea, though it could easily backfire, and anyway, I don't think the imperialists could conquer North Korea without first exterminating its entire population, which I guess is what Trump is threatening.
It's interesting that you say that the North Korean fishing industry started getting privatized right around the time of the Soviet collapse. That´s also when China started charging university fees, and when Cuba entered its "Periodo Especial."
They could buy a dozen nuclear weapons and delivery systems before breakfast if they wanted one - and would happily use it on Iran not Israel (who have plenty too - including submarine based ones).Adam Yusaf -> Engelbach , 24 Sep 2017 08:53Saudis were the majority of the mujahadeen and AQ funders and leaders and the pilots of the 9/11 attackers.
They also have a major US base. Prob with nukes if not all the biggest and deadliest weapons.
A redkneck hillbilly,his thought process doesent stretch that farrhytrn -> Phil Atkinson , 24 Sep 2017 08:47And one would add the Americans and then the person put in place to run South Korea, Syngman Rhee, depended on Japanese collaborators, not a few of whom had already been involved in war crimes before the end of WWII.rhytrn -> Phil Atkinson , 24 Sep 2017 08:33I would also add that who started the Korean War is open to some debate. There is some evidence that the North invaded in response to an incursion started from the South. Both sides were attacking each other across the parallel before the 'War' started and there's documentation that the South was keen to invade the North. The Korean leadership on both sides saw the division as unacceptable and themselves as the legitimate government of the entire country.
Or Xi Jinping whose grandfather fought against the Japanese. The Chinese have in the past been very critical of Shinzo Abe's visiting a memorial to people they consider war criminals.Steven J. Barber -> theAthensdog , 24 Sep 2017 08:26I think you have hit on something I've been thinking about. I believe Trump is deliberately stirring the pot in an attempt to goad Kim Jong Un into doing things that actually rile the Chinese.VirginMary , 24 Sep 2017 07:31If you have noticed the Chinese have only recently began to get serious about reigning in North Korea by enforcing sanctions.
North Korea's increased provocations, a reaction to US and her allies have seriously angered China. Also the threats of economic retaliation on Chinese entities doing business with North Korea have caused the Chinese to weigh the cost of doing business with the Norks vs the cost of sanctions.
It seems recently the Chinese have been considering the DPRK as more of a detriment.
I do not believe that KJU could be convinced to change is behaviour. Is practically a God so what else can be given? Nothing can compare.Dominguini -> Blenheim , 24 Sep 2017 07:04I believe there will be war in the Korean peninsular. If we are lucky it will be a sudden military intervention from China (and perhaps Russia) into North Korea to replace KJU and a few other people. The objective is to maintain the existence of North Korea as a country and largely a status quo and NOT a country under the influence of US.
If we are not lucky it will be a messy war US first will battle North Korea and win then US forces will get involved in a messy and prolonged confrontation on the ground with "local" NK troops: troop supported by Russian and Chinese volunteers (special forces). It will ultimately result again in a stalemate but a few millions of people will be dead
"Since the end of WW", the US has only ever been about America first".Ladegast -> Alex Ira , 24 Sep 2017 06:12Absolutely. You would never catch the Russians, or the Chinese, or the French, putting THEIR country first, would you?
... and by the way, who said the world "needs to respond to the threats"? That's exactly the kind of one-dimensional thinking that led mankind into the First World War.Conanbarbarian -> SchakarMevsky , 24 Sep 2017 06:08The more attention the Fat Kid gets, the more noise he makes. Just let him have his silly rockets and ignore him. What do we care about North Korea? They do not even have oil. Just forget about that country and let it rot away. This has worked for the last 64 years, and so far North Korea has not harmed one American soldier.
During the Cold War, the Soviet arsenal posed a far greater danger than North Korea does now. Nevertheless, no US president was so stupid to try and solve the crisis by pressing the USSR into giving up its missiles. Everybody knew we could just lean back and wait for the Soviet Empire to collapse by itself. And that's what happened.
But Trump doesn't know jacksh*t about history, and he certainly has no patience.
"Its central doctrine, the supremacy of man, is based directly on the founding belief of the Cheondogyo sect: in nae Cheon – 'man is God'. Hmmm. Sounds like Marxism-Leninism to me. You don't get this kind of crap in anything ancient."---erm, Jesus the man is held by Christians to be God.Conanbarbarian -> Hermann Steinpilz , 24 Sep 2017 06:06The correct comparison is surely Japan up to the end of the 2nd World War and even up to today for some Japanese, and its cult of Emporer-God.Ladegast -> Alex Ira , 24 Sep 2017 05:47Avoiding nuclear war by provoking it makes little sense.Ladegast -> studio1reggae , 24 Sep 2017 05:35"History crap" is exactly what this idiot in the White House is "thinking". Everyone knows Trump doesn't read books and has no understanding of history. That's why he is incapable of solving international problems.
All he can do is insult people and bully them into obedience.
This might work with some provincial politician from Hillbilly Creek, Oklahoma. But it certainly does not get you anywhere when you are dealing with some Asian dictator and mass-murderer.
You have to know your enemies thoughts - this has been known since the days of Sun Tzu.
You certainly have a point. Anyone who thinks that we in the West are not susceptible to propaganda is the best proof that we are. However, flawed as it may be, I still prefer the Western Way of Life to anything else. There is a reason why the East German government had to build the Berlin Wall to keep its own citizens from running off to the West. There is a reason why there are no Americans applying for Russian or Chinese citizenship, but hundreds of Russians and Chinese standing in line in front of US embassies for a Green Card.studio1reggae , 24 Sep 2017 04:07There is a reason why Syrian refugees turn their hopes to Europe and not to Saudi Arabia or Russia.
Interesting article Mr Brabazonxoffox -> SchakarMevsky , 24 Sep 2017 03:03You talk about the indoctrination of the Korean people and how it is perpetuated. You approach this from a more introspective level than many others.
How about the indoctrination of say people in the USA. Children are taught to sing the National anthem. This is sung at sports and other events in almost mandatory fashion. You see the Star Spangled banner in homes, public buildings almost everywhere.
Hollywood and the American media feed the public a constant and pervasive diet of movies, television shows and propaganda about America's might, values and glory. Books,literature, clothing, toys you name it highlight and accentuate this. Try spending a week watching CNN, Fox news MSNBC, BBC et al.
America presidents and the West loves to holler on about the "Free World". What is this bull-shit about the Free world. Oh yes it has to be run by them. The American and them has to lead and run it of course.
The pentagon/NATO loves to talk about defending the west values, ideology and human rights. So here in the West and America propaganda and indoctrination abounds. It has been this ways for hundreds of years now.
The roman emperors were considered gods to be venerated by the people. The god-like status of the North Korean leaders does not look that different.Andrei Lankov -> jdanforth , 24 Sep 2017 01:13Funny. You could not choose worse examples. Fishing in North Korea is roughly 90% privately owned, and this has been the case since the early 1990s. Mines, if you mean coal mines, are indeed largely state-owned, but tonchu (rich private investors, operating with tacit or open permit of the party-state) control a noticeable part of the industry. The agriculture, which was remarkably good in generating famines when it was indeed done by the state, has been privatized after '6-28 instructions', in 2012-2014, and is now run more or less along the Chinese lines.Will Will , 24 Sep 2017 01:05Very interesting article, Mr Brabazon. But my suspicion is that you might be confusing the regime's religious-nationalist claim to legitimacy with the actual thinking processes of the regime's leader himself. Specifically, is Kim Jong-un really 'a religious extremist' in person - something that would suggest he is not entirely rational - and possibly even quite unhinged?Kevskos -> ThanksNeolibZombies , 24 Sep 2017 00:08All signs suggest he is rather in fact an extremely rational, calculating, cold-hearted manipulator. He has a well-documented history of ramping up diplomatic/military hostilities and then pivoting at the last moment to extract advantage or concessions (sanctions relief, aid, import/export access, etc). So to say then that he's 'impervious to realpolitik' seems quite odd indeed. He appears to be very good at cynical real-political gamesmanship. He just doesn't appear to define NK's national interest as the pursuit of power for its own sake (as in the European realpolitik tradition), but for the sake of the survival of his dynastic regime. Similarly, the NK foreign minister reportedly said just recently that NK's nuclear ambition is 'to balance' the US. The idea of a balance of power stands at the heart of realpolitik thought.
Kim Jong-un appears driven less by non-rational religious conviction than by a very rational quest to achieve mutual deterrence with the US by developing nuclear ICBMs. Juche may help explain why he can't/won't/doesn't need to accept any bribe to abandon this quest, but more likely its main role is to maintain domestic political control in the face of widespread privation and fear.
Yes we had an agreement with North Korea that President Carter had negotiated for Clinton that Bush II trashed and NK started building nukes. Felt for some reason they could not trust the US since we had invaded Iraq for trying to make nukes when they were not. Felt they needed nukes as the only way to protect themselves from US invasion.spiral batholith -> sejong , 24 Sep 2017 00:04While US politics, society, and global respect obviously decline at the hands of this idiotic potus...US military spending and force has increased exponentially since 2011. It does not bode well for anyone on the Korean peninsula that these two pinheads keep hurling childish insults that could eventually turn into catastrophic military decisions. Trump and Kim will go down in history as the morons that fought a war over battered little fucktard egos...and that cost a lot of innocent people their lives. We have to evolve...this is the same damn game cavemen played except instead of throwing rocks we're throwing globally fatal neutron bombs. Sad.Phil Atkinson -> clshannon , 23 Sep 2017 23:47Try this on for size:Phil Atkinson -> Ian Maitland , 23 Sep 2017 23:44You must believe every single word printed in the media.Phil Atkinson -> iRtRb7suiJLtkfuPvJFa , 23 Sep 2017 23:37"...and his firing of missiles over our ally..."
The way this is portrayed in the media is akin to deadly missiles flying over Japan at head height, or at least inside Japanese air space. The facts, of course, are different.
Because of Japan's proximity to the Korean peninsular, test missiles have to be fired from sea level, straight into space (100kms above sea level) to avoid Japanese air space. The missiles' trajectories ensure Japanese air space is not encroached upon and while this practice is less than neighbourly, it's not illegal. The Japanese, given their historical animosity towards Korea, make such propaganda of these test firings as they can and the western media laps it up.
Michael Brabazon's a historian, not a statesman. We need statesmen, not politicians to fix this mess, ideally a group comprising representatives from both Koreas, China, Russia and the US. NOT Japan. Lock them all in a room and don't let them out until the Korean question is resolved.Phil Atkinson -> Mark Williams , 23 Sep 2017 23:29"The war ended 70 years ago for everyone else..."Igloo -> id0102 , 23 Sep 2017 23:27No it didn't and many people ignore this when commenting on various North Korean responses. Let's be clear - a state of war still exists between North Korea and its allies and South Korea and its allies. All that was signed in 1953 was an armistice - a cease-fire. It was not a peace treaty.
North Korea correctly(?) feels that the US may breech the cease fire and is arming itself accordingly. While the US and South Korea keep playing war games near the DMZ, that view won't change.
I know, I know, the guy dropping the bombs is always in the wrong.monicamac -> Videogamesatemycat , 23 Sep 2017 23:19
Do you accept that the Korean war began because a large force came over the 38th parallel from the north and among other things, occupied Seoul? And that hundreds of thousands of Chinese troops joined in on the NK side? Not to mention Russian fighter pilots? There is always a context when bombs are dropping.
It's not just the North Koreans who have existential fears- the South Koreans do as well, and their worst nightmare would be living under a Kim regime.I doubt it to be honest.jdanforth -> BrianMonaghan , 23 Sep 2017 23:18Capitalism is defined in any dictionary as private ownership of the means of production. North Korea has overthrown it. That is why the country got bombed in the 1950s, and that is why America's capitalist government has been threatening it ever since with more bombing.monicamac -> dack72 , 23 Sep 2017 23:13Who owns the fishing industry, agriculture and the coal mines in North Korea? The state! These industries can't be bought by US "investors" because no individual owns them, so the only solution is to try to erase North Korea from the map again. This plan, if it is a plan, is raving madness, of course, but capitalism is not a rational system.
Go USA, go the Trump man who knows nothing - he is just a fool and those who follow him have got blinkers on - thinking make America great again - WTF?? Mate this is not the wild west anymore nor the movies where you go in with your guns blazing and you always win - you need some sophistication and some brains to know how to handle these issues. Trump the man and Trump the President are duds!!awilson5280 , 23 Sep 2017 23:11If Obama behaved as Trump has been doing - he would have been shouted down as the black man behaving badly.
Trump needs to be shouted down as the white man who is behaving extremely badly - get rid of him through empeachment and get someone who knows that they are doing!!!
Thank you for this article, Mr. Brabazon. I now understand North Korea and the dynamic on the Korean peninsula better. Your point that Trump doesn't know what he's messing with is well-taken, but that is something that is true with regards to nearly any topic you could name.Phil Atkinson -> Mark Williams , 23 Sep 2017 23:04The fact that North Korea has a national indoctrination program of an ideology that has no grounding in a modern reality - and that cares nothing for the international order that attempts to keep us all from killing each other - gives valuable perspective. However, it does not change the fact that North Korea is going to continue to act in ways that threaten other countries, and that (especially due to its ideology and its disconnection from any real allies) it miscalculate and find itself erased from the map, likely taking a lot of South Koreans with it.
This has the potential to be a really bad situation: the best result is reform from within, second best result is implosion of the regime. Everything else looks to involve significant loss of life.
"...launched a surprise invasion of South Korea."Phil Atkinson -> rhytrn , 23 Sep 2017 22:30Surprise?
From 1948 until the invasion, north and south Koreans were facing-off across the DMZ and there were a significant number of violent incursions by both sides - mostly initiated by South Koreans, who were itching for a fight. (That's according to the US general in charge of South Korean forces at the time). The north's invasion was no surprise and the only reason it occurred in June 1950 was because the north had a division of troops fighting with the Chinese communists. Those troops didn't return to North Korea until early 1950
This is also a good read and covers the period 1910 on:Phil Atkinson -> kasprowy , 23 Sep 2017 22:28https://www.lrb.co.uk/v39/n10/bruce-cumings/a-murderous-history-of-korea
This goes into a little more detail in some aspects:
http://www.abc.net.au/radionational/programs/rearvision/north-korea/3352778
"But he thinks he is descended from gods? So which is it?"Phil Atkinson -> luckysue , 23 Sep 2017 22:24Neither. The people are taught that Kim is a godlike figure. I doubt Kim believes that himself - he's western educated.
" It may be too late, but have we tried this?"Phil Atkinson -> rhytrn , 23 Sep 2017 22:21No.
North Korea has put peace proposals to the UN/US which included offers to cease their nuclear ambitions, or at least put them on hold. Both the US and South Korea have rejected the offers out of hand.
It's hard to imagine Shinzo Abe and Kim Jong-un at the same conference table - the two grandchildren of two of the original protagonists during the Japanese occupation of Korea 1910-45. Some people have long memories.Phil Atkinson -> rhytrn , 23 Sep 2017 22:16The Korean situation is different, in that it was one national entity until 1945, when Japan ceded Korea to the US as part of the surrender terms. At the time, then (Soviet) Russians, who were nominally our allies, had moved into northern Korea as part of their push against the Japanese. This concerned the US, who wanted Korea to remain in their control, so John J. McCloy instructed Dean Rusk to divide Korea in two and Rusk drew a line through the 38th parallel. The Soviets administered the north and the US the south until 1948.Phil Atkinson -> Sasha Rieger , 23 Sep 2017 21:53You can imagine how Kim Il-sung felt about this - he'd spent the previous 13 years actively fighting the Japanese invaders in order to reclaim his country and was one of the few surviving guerrilla leaders. The Japanese had murdered his wife and had ruthlessly suppressed any dissent. Now all of that was for nothing - all that happened was that other invaders had moved in and split the country. It was the direct cause of North Korea invading the south in 1950.
"...this article merely makes the point that the current Kim cannot be reasoned with ..."id0102 -> garpalgumnut , 23 Sep 2017 21:52That's drawing a bit of a long bow. Kim may be many things, but stupid doesn't appear to be one of them. The same can't be said for Trump. North Korea recently submitted a plan to the UN/US with a proposal that the north puts a hold on its nuclear weapons development. In return, North Korea asked for (a) a formal treaty ending the Korean War, with non-aggression guarantees from both sides, (b) South Korea and the US to cease military exercises close to the DMZ and (c) a timetable for the reduction of US troops in South Korea. This plan was backed by both Russia and China. The US and South Korea refused the offer point-blank.
Now who is being unreasonable?
Kim played the anti-US card simply for a political grip on power, and keeps that grip very tight after the recent displays of nuclear weapons. He's probably even more popular now, in spite of the famine and poverty.Phil Atkinson -> AndrewWatkins , 23 Sep 2017 21:46An excellent point, very likely totally missed by the US administration (such as it is). It's impossible to fight an enemy unless you understand them.Phil Atkinson -> Telvannah , 23 Sep 2017 21:43The jury returned a unanimous verdict that Trump has the attention span of a loaf of wet bread.Phil Atkinson -> PJL1234 , 23 Sep 2017 21:42"...the article reinforces the need to take action before North Korea loses all sense of rational and morale judgement."BrianMonaghan , 23 Sep 2017 21:42The only problem there is that we're 64 years too late - any resolution should have been in 1953, even if it had meant open war with China. Now, 3, 4 or 5 generations later, the North Koreans are not going to change their beliefs or mindset. We've missed the boat, unfortunately for all concerned.
Excuse me but the CIA and ihe intelligence services of the world ate all well informed about Juche. Since when does the US regard the DPRK as Marxist in any sense? If an analogy is required, the DPRK, with its emperor worship and nonsense about the divinity of its people, is closer to 1930's Japan than it is to communism. It's a nationalistic monarchy, for goodness sake.honeycomb42 -> Michael_GPF , 23 Sep 2017 21:10The US led the attack. The US is the superpower. And Clinton had a personal hatred for Gadhafi. It was a US drone that tracked him and directed the terrorists to his location where he was raped with a bayonet and shot.id0102 -> Igloo , 23 Sep 2017 21:103 million Koreans dead was not a repel, it was a massacre. Note that North Korea did not have an air force so so speak. Within a year the US and UK ran out of military targets, and bombed civilians mercilessly.ThanksNeolibZombies -> stuart255 , 23 Sep 2017 21:09khoffman -> Engelbach , 23 Sep 2017 21:07"If you want peace, prepare for war" is about the most ancient wisdom there is and over thousands of years it has proven to be pretty sound advice.
I'm not sure how helpful this is in a nuclear age. We live perilously close to nuclear annihilation, there are obvious incentives for states to obtain nuclear weapons, and preparation for war does not seem to be the answer to this problem.
You don't understand what gualtiero is saying. It's very logical. As NK develops ICBM with nuclear warheads they neutralize the US nuclear option. In 10-20 years, NK could have enough nuclear armed ICBMs to overwhelmThanksNeolibZombies -> dack72 , 23 Sep 2017 20:49Engelbach -> AlexFishy , 23 Sep 2017 20:14In other words he is a nut and the people supressed so we just pussy foot around him and he has the world just where he wants them - living on edge- just like we do with the terrorism of the world now from our fanatics.
Are you describing Trump here or Kim Jong-un?
There doesn't seem to be a good alternative to diplomacy and negotiation here.
In any case, strategically it seems a good idea to understand where people are coming from.Also you should ask how on gods earth did such a nut get to have this ability- perhaps another Obama disaster .
Didn't the North Korean nuclear tests begin under George W Bush?
There haven't been recent attempts at negotiation and diplomacy with North Korea by the United States.The US walked away from negotiations in 2002, after six years of talks, because NK refused to give in on some unreasonable pre-conditions.
Kim is a dictator who uses fear and hatred of an outside enemy to solidify his hold on his people. He's not suicidal. Destruction of North Korea would be fatal to his goal of spreading his ideology to the world.
Knee jerk reactions to obvious evil are neither a revelation nor a basis for a practical solution to the tensions.
|
|
|
Sep 24, 2017 | www.unz.com
However, for an American President in the United Nations his speech was unbecoming and shockingly brutal. The people of the world listened to his United Nations General Assembly speech, and experienced a touch of nostalgia for the late Mr Adolf Hitler, a kind and mild man of subtle messages in comparison to the fiery US President.
The German Chancellor allegedly killed six million civilians, and this sublime sacrifice (do not ask me to what deity, this is just a translation of the Greek 'holocaust') is considered the worst crime in the bloody history of mankind. Mr Trump publicly and loudly promised to incinerate five or six times that amount. While the German never boasted of that crime, the American already boasts of his still undone crime. His desire to "totally destroy North Korea", to wipe out an entire nation of 25 million, and in addition to cause the death of millions of Koreans in the South of the peninsula as well, secures him a unique place among the villains.
Kim, the brazen King of the North, dismissed Trump as a 'barking dog' who, people say, never bites, and this is surely a comforting thought, but not as comforting as a muzzle for the beast. This barking dog is obviously dangerous and should be restrained, or put out of its misery. The hound has been hounded by his domestic enemies, and thus he became possessed by a demon, for just a few months ago Trump was a peace-loving creature who wanted to attend to the US infrastructure, who refused to bow to AIPAC and was friendly to Putin. It's Mrs Clinton who was the warmonger. But invocation magic worked on him.
... ... ...
Every statesman on the planet knows you can't cross the US. America is powerful, vindictive and vicious, and you must obey or else. They will destroy you and/or your country sooner or later for your disobedience. If they can't invade, they will bomb, if they can't bomb, they will starve first – and then bomb, and only afterwards, invade. One should be crazy to resist. But the little Korean resisted. He is definitely crazy. But we humans adore such crazy rebels against supreme authority, be it Che Guevara or Luke Skywalker. Or McMurphy.
Yes, by his suicidal courage, Kim reminds me of 'Mac', Randle McMurphy, the protagonist of Ken Kesey's novel and Milos Forman's movie One Flew Over the Cuckoo's Nest. Probably you remember his hopeless stand and a futile, doomed fight against the almighty Nurse Ratched. She rules supreme over the inmates. Against her will, there is no appeal. The inmates tremble before her. But she can't break Mac. She is forced to burn his brain, to kill him by other means, and this evil deed releases the inmates. Until then, they supported and obeyed the Nurse like the nations of the world obeyed the Judeo-American power. Incineration of Mac's brain puts paid to her dominion. In revulsion, the placid inmates leave the ward, chose freedom and leave her behind, broken. This is human nature. There is no way for the US to prevail in its fight against Kim the Bold. They can kill him and thirty million of other Koreans, but they can't prevail.
... ... ...
The Russians were dismayed with Trump's plans to reform the UN and eliminate or undermine their right of veto. They noticed an uncanny similarity of Trump's call for the UN reform 2017 with Adolf Hitler's call to reform the League of the Nations in 1937. They aren't likely to agree to any attempt to cancel their veto. They will not leave the UN, either. They tried to walk out once, and it did not work out well.
In January 1950, the Russians were dismayed by America's steadfast refusal to transfer the seat in the UN Security Council to the new Chinese Government of Chairman Mao. They insisted the seat should be occupied by Kuomintang-ruled Taiwan. The Russians boycotted the Security Council to their peril: the Security Council (sine Russians) voted to invoke military action by the United Nations for the first time in the organization's history. The Russians could have blocked the action in the Security Council, since they had absolute veto power, but no Russian delegate was present.
In just a short time, a multinational U.N. force under American leadership arrived in South Korea and the grueling three-year Korean War was underway. The Russians immediately returned to the Security Council but they never could reverse the decision, and until today the US troops in Korea use the UN banner.
The Russians remember that, and they will never repeat the mistake. Even if Trump takes his allies out, the Russians and the Chinese will remain and they will keep the Security Council running, if necessary, without the Americans.
The Americans want to have the UN without the Russians. Trump-proposed declaration of intent to revamp the UN has been endorsed by many small states, but the great ones declined to join. In a brazen act, countries that were hesitant or unwilling to sign the declaration – which include Russia, China, Brazil and South Africa – were not invited to the launch. An organization without them, will not be the United Nations, perhaps NATO 2.0.
The Russian feelings towards the US hardened a lot in the aftermath of the General Assembly. The Russians helped the Syrian government army cross Euphrates and seize the east bank, despite American demands to stay away on the other side of the great river. For the first time ever, they threatened the Americans present in Syria with using their supreme fire power if their troops will be jeopardized like they were a few days ago, when the Islamists led by American instructors made an attempt to snatch a group of Russian policemen.
Mike Johnson > , September 23, 2017 at 6:28 am GMT
animalogic > , September 23, 2017 at 9:41 am GMTExcellent article! One thing I remember about a few months ago was Trump showing up at the AIPAC conference kissing some serious ass, so you must be referring to before that when he threw little hints at being an independent player but even back then didn't he have Sheldon in his corner??
Parbes > , September 23, 2017 at 9:56 am GMT" The people of the world listened to his United Nations General Assembly speech, and experienced a touch of nostalgia for the late Mr Adolf Hitler, a kind and mild man of subtle messages in comparison to the fiery US President".
The above gave me a genuine LOL moment though nothing else did.
It's no wonder Paul Craig Roberts is now referring to the US as the "fourth Reich". Makes one almost nostalgic for the days of GWB: he was merely stomping on weaker nations – not directly poking a sharp stick at a bear AND a dragon at the same time
The US gave birth to itself from revolution: nothing less will likely save it save all of us .The U.S. government and ruling elites are nothing but a collection of evil criminals that constitute the greatest threat to the planet. They should be punished accordingly, preferably by their own people – but that would require today's American population to be something other than a mixture of braindead ignorant sheeple, chauvinist jingoist patriotards, and narcissistic degenerate hedonists.
In other words – the vast majority of Americans deserve whatever happens and will happen to them.
|
|
|
Sep 23, 2017 | www.moonofalabama.org
Amanita Amanita | Sep 23, 2017 7:49:12 PM | 36
North Korea: The poorest advanced economy in the World.nonsense factory | Sep 23, 2017 8:12:14 PM | 37@Kalen 12,Kalen | Sep 23, 2017 8:33:00 PM | 38
I think b is correct when he says: The U.S. military is too afraid to use its $300 billion missile defense boondoggle because that would prove that it is one gigantic scam.It's not just that advanced countermeasures can defeat the system, it's that even a single ballistic missile without any tricks would be hard to shoot down at best. See this for example, from a writer who generally promotes U.S. military technology, noting there's a very high probability they'd have missed if they tried to shoot down a North Korean test. . .
https://arstechnica.com. . . -us-have-shot-it-down/Missing a shot at a missile just passing over Japan could have far-reaching political implications, as it would suggest that anti-ballistic missile systems are incapable of protecting people in South Korea, Japan, or Guam.For more evidence that the system is completely over-hyped, see this:
The US has tested the interceptor system 19 times since 1999, succeeding about half the time. The most recent test, three years ago, marked another success, but three prior attempts fizzled. That kind of success rate is troubling, given the meticulously managed conditions. "These tests are scripted for success," says Philip Coyle, senior fellow at the Center for Arms Control and Non-Proliferation and former head of the Pentagon's test and evaluation office. "What's been surprising to me as that they have failed as often as they have in spite of that."Those failures are all with single standard ballistic missiles, without any add-ons, lined up under optimal conditions and optimal trajectories, with advance warning - and they still fail a lot of the time. That sure looks like a massive scam/cash cow.@37Grieved | Sep 23, 2017 8:54:04 PM | 39
NK also would use decoys if they decide to retaliate, low efficiency of interception you pointed out will be even worse than half hits in controlled tests, may be one in ten or less in operational circumstances.In other words Anti Missile Systems are useless against ICBMs except for narrow circumstances of none nuke ICBMs.
@36 Amanita AmanitaPerimetr | Sep 23, 2017 9:27:21 PM | 40Thanks for that link. Do you read that website? It was new to me: "38 North...a program of the US-Korea Institute at the Johns Hopkins School of Advanced International Studies in Washington, DC." Seems at first glance like a useful clearinghouse for policy discussion, with views from all sides.
Very interesting view into North Korea, a developing country by all definitions, and yet an advanced one in terms of ability to produce capital goods, and all from sheer self-grown application. Interesting information on its agriculture and socialist system. The information seems credible.
The view points to the conclusion that extreme sanctions on NK - similar to the oil embargo on Japan that pushed it to attack the US first at Pearl Harbor - could push NK to attack the US, knowing that it couldn't "win", but doing so preemptively before it ran out of fuel to resist attack from the US.
I've seen other analysis that shows NK would have sufficient fuel regardless. And we have to factor China and Russia into this equation too. But the speaker was an economist not a geo-political analyst. It seemed like an even-handed discussion.
In other words, Finland and Sweden have both become de facto members of NATO, creating a new 833 mile long "northern front" for NATO on the Russian border.Perimetr | Sep 23, 2017 9:30:48 PM | 41
Apparently my links to the Swedish and Finish MOUs signed with NATO were deleted. WTF? These links to the text of the agreements are hard to find. I would think that some of the readers might wish to read them?RC | Sep 23, 2017 9:34:18 PM | 42These MOUs state:
· The HN [Host Nation, Sweden and Finland] will provide support within its fullest capacity, subject to availability and within the practical limitations of the circumstances that then exist, to the forces deployed on NATO-led military activities.
· NATO Military Activities: Military actions including exercises, training, operational experimentation and similar activities, or the carrying out of a strategic, tactical, service, training, or administrative military mission performed by forces; the process of carrying on combat, including attack, movement, supply and manoeuvres needed to gain the objectives of any battle or campaign.
· The provisions of this MOU apply in peace, emergencies, crisis and conflict or periods of international tension as may be jointly determined by the appropriate HN [Host Nation, Sweden and Finland] and NATO authorities.
· Host Nation Support (HNS). The civil and military assistance rendered in peace, emergencies, crisis and conflict by a Host Nation to allied forces and organisations, which are located on, operating in or transiting through the Host Nation's territory, territorial waters or airspace.
· NATO military activities supported by this MOU may require multinational support air operations by fixed wing aircraft and helicopters, and in the case of ports, by merchant and military support vessels. The HN [Sweden and Finland] acknowledges that movement of such aircraft, helicopters, ships and their crews in and through HN [Swedish and Finnish] territorial areas, will take place under a general clearance for the duration of the NATO military activity.It is discouraging to spend time putting together a detailed post with links and then have it immediately vanish. Would you prefer unsubstantiated opinions?
Ironic that Reagan's "star wars" missile defense scam, successful maybe in scaring the Soviet's into bankruptcy in the 80's, is now accepted as military fact by the monkeys on Capital Hill.daffyDuct | Sep 23, 2017 9:41:28 PM | 43Amanita #34 and #36Stunning articles.
The reference to 1941 I believe is in another article
# Getting Tough on North Korea: Iran and Other Mirages
http://www.38north.org/2017/09/jdethomas090117
"In July 1941, in response to the Japanese invasion of Indochina, President Roosevelt took a series of steps that look very much like the sanctions advocated by those who want to get tough on the DPRK. He froze Japanese assets and required that Japan obtain specific export licenses to obtain any US goods!including oil upon which the Japanese economy and military was dependent. Subsequently, the US government denied Japan the right to use the US dollar to purchase goods, thus making it impossible to obtain oil even if licenses were granted. Those who made the decision to take this step were confident Japan would not go to war over the sanctions, since both US and Japanese leaders knew it would be a suicidal act for Japan to do so. The Japanese military chose to gamble on an attack on the US fleet and a simultaneous invasion of South East Asian oil fields. Four years of total war in the Pacific ensued. The Japanese decision was indeed suicidal, but it cost a great deal in American blood and treasure to confirm it."
|
|
|
Sep 19, 2017 | www.msn.com
Trump's address to the United Nations on Tuesday should erase any doubts that he is threatening a completely unprecedented military strike against North Korea. This seems to be Trump even more fully embracing the so-called Madman Theory, in which he makes himself so unpredictable that other world leaders fear setting him off.
But that approach isn't without its downsides. Former general David Petraeus described it thusly a few days back :
"There is some merit to this. You can argue perhaps there is some merit to it in international relations, although it obviously can go too far. My concern there with the so-called 'madman theory -- that actually (Richard) Nixon put forward through Kissinger where he had Kissinger tell the Soviets, 'You know, Nixon's under a lot of pressure right now and, you know, he drinks at night sometimes, so you guys ought to be real careful. Don't push this into a crisis.' There may, again, be some merit into the madman theory until you get in a crisis. But you do not want the other side thinking you are irrational in a crisis. You do not want the other side thinking that you might be sufficiently irrational to conduct a first strike or to do something, you know, so-called 'unthinkable.'"Polls show the American people are not confident in Trump's ability to handle the North Korea situation, with 61 percent saying they are "uneasy" Trump's words Tuesday likely won't calm many fears, but he's clearly gambling on North Korea backing down in the face of big talk.
|
|
|
Aug 27, 2017 | www.unz.com
President Trump's ability to trigger a nuclear war is "pretty damn scary" said former US intelligence director James Clapper this week. Remember when Trump vowed to "bomb the shit" out of his enemies?
I don't have much respect for Clapper, who brazenly lied to Congress and is a ringleader of the deep government's efforts to overthrow Trump. But this time, Clapper is 100 percent right. He's scared and I am too.
This week, Trump proclaimed he would continue the pointless, stalemated US colonial war in Afghanistan and might ask India to help there – a sure-fire way to bring nuclear-armed India and Pakistan into a terrifying confrontation.
Meanwhile, Trump has backed himself into a corner over North Korea. His threats and bombast have not made the North's leader Kim Jong-un stop threatening to launch nuclear-armed missiles at the US island of Guam, Hawaii, Japan and South Korea. That is, if the US and South Korea keep up their highly provocative annual military war games on North Korea's borders that each year invoke North Korea's fury.
The Pentagon insists these war games are just a routine military exercise. But that's not the view in Pyongyang, and, as a long-time Korea military analyst, not mine.
North Korea, which faces the 500,000-man South Korean Army (ROK) most of which is just down the main highway, has good reason to be nervous. I've been with the 1st ROK Division up on and under the Demilitarized Zone. The South Koreans are heavily armed with top line equipment and tough as nails. They are backed by massive US/South Korean air and naval power.
North Koreans are well aware that Egypt deceived Israel in the 1973 war by using frequent military exercises to mask its plans to storm the Suez Canal. It worked. Israel was caught flat footed by the surprise Egyptian attack on the canal.
By refusing a peace to end the 1950-53 Korean War, and by continuing economic and political warfare against North Korea, the US has only itself to blame for North Korea developing nuclear weapons and missiles to deliver them. Kim Jong-un saw what happened to Libya's Khadaffi (thanks to Hillary Clinton) and Iraq's Saddam Hussein.
Trump is now in a serious fix over North Korea. Jong-un has called Trump's bluff and sneered at the Donald's fire and brimstone threats. So Trump's choices are to back away from the Korean crisis he created or else attack North Korea. But the North's weapons and leadership are very well dispersed and deeply dug into the mountains. A US conventional attack on the North is estimated to cost 250,000 American casualties.
The US can certainly knock out some of Kim's medium and longer-ranged missiles in a major blitz, but it can't be certain that a few nuclear tipped N. Korean missiles won't survive to strike Japan, South Korea, Hawaii, Okinawa or Guam – and maybe even Los Angeles and San Francisco. It is unlikely that South Korea and the US can decapitate North Korea's leadership by using conventional weapons – starting with Kim Jong-un.
Unless, of course, Trump, who managed to avoid Vietnam era military service because of a bump on his foot, decides to go nuclear. This would mean hitting North Korea with a score or more nuclear weapons, large and small, before the North could riposte. North Korea would be totally destroyed, and its 25 million people left dying, maimed or starving. Japan, the world's third largest economy, would also be shattered.
nsa > , August 26, 2017 at 5:15 am GMT
Claus Eric Hamle > , August 26, 2017 at 10:02 am GMTZero chance of an attack on Korea for one simple reason .there is nothing in it for the jooies . Why would the clever conniving jooies waste their most useful idiot's assets on a stupid pointless war in far away Asia, when those same assets could be used to destroy more of the ME?
Full Screen Fool > , August 26, 2017 at 8:32 pm GMTActually, the US is worse than the Nazis. Torture that not even the Nazis could do. They were nice people compared to the US. Our dear ally, The Great Satan. Birth defects are worse in Fallujah than they were in Hiroshima because of Uranium weapons. In Panama City they killed about 6000 unarmed civilians when they kidnapped the president. In Ukraine they spent 5 billion dollars to organize the coup. It would be a better world without the US. Doesn´t a nuclear attack on N.K. produce Nuclear Winter so you can´t grow anything in United Bluff ?
Take some penicillin for your case of the clap. The generals will again persuade Trump to accept the status quo plus a 15% increase in troops, equipment, and/or live drills, prompting all but anti-war voices to proclaim progress.
|
|
|
Aug 24, 2017 | www.moonofalabama.org
Canthama | Aug 23, 2017 5:31:30 PM | 58
There is no naive China, Russia or whatever, all Nations understand that the US regime is not reliable nor trustworthy, the game most of the Nations continue to play is the game to buy time, any war with the US regime can be hard at the moment, but not in few years time. China knows is and will play the patience game til the end, Russia does the same, expect for few "no go" like Syria and the south China sea islands.Alexander Grimsmo | Aug 23, 2017 7:01:10 PM | 59
After Irans experience with US "lifting of sanctions", should anyone ever trust USA at all?karlof1 | Aug 23, 2017 7:27:31 PM | 60Canthama @56--les7 | Aug 23, 2017 8:58:38 PM | 61Nice to see you commenting here! Agreed that China and Russia understand but still seek dialog since that's the essence of "the patience game." But I wonder about those running Brazil; we don't discuss that much at SyrPers. Then there's India's Modi and the cadre of Hindu Neoliberals who seem to want to have their own game instead of teaming with China and Russia for a Win/Win partnership rather than the dying Zero-Sumism of the Neoliberalcons. And thanks again for all the effort you devote to SyrPers; it's quite remarkable!
does anyone remember this?ASD | Aug 23, 2017 10:56:57 PM | 62Canthama,michaelj72 | Aug 23, 2017 11:12:26 PM | 63
I will second Karlof1's sentiment. I think a lot of people go to SyrPer for your comments/updates on the Syrian Conflict. You seem to have the best info around on that topic.@50 karlof1good article, as nearly always, from Escobar. thanks for that link
here are bits of it. and I noticed it too, as soon as China come out in a big way and said that it would defend/intervene in favor of North Korea if the US attacked first, the rhetorical level in the US when way down. This is a serious situation, and China is serious too...Escobar is good, & so often reports and thinks outside the box meaning outside the Beltway myopic thinking...
http://www.atimes.com/article/korea-afghanistan-never-ending-war-trap/....But this is extremely serious. A China-North Korea mutual defense treaty has been in effect since 1961. Under this framework, Beijing's response to Trump's "fire and fury" was a thing of beauty. If Pyongyang attacks, China is neutral. But if the US launches a McMaster-style pre-emptive attack, China intervenes – militarily – on behalf of Pyongyang.
As a clincher, Beijing even made it clear that its preference is for the current status quo to remain. Checkmate.
Hunger Games apart, the rhetorical war in the Korean Peninsula did decrease a substantial notch after China made its position clear....
.....The bulk of Washington's "aid" to Kabul throughout these past 16 years has been on the bombing, not the economy, front. Government corruption is cataclysmic. Warlords rule. The Taliban thrive because they offer local protection. Much to Pashtun ire, most of the army is Tajik. Tajik politicians are mostly close to India while most Pashtun favor Pakistan.....
|
|
|
Aug 20, 2017 | turcopolier.typepad.com
Pacifica Advocate -> BillWade... Reply , 17 August 2017 at 10:04 AM
Very, very, very far, in fact.b said in reply to jonst... , 17 August 2017 at 04:28 AMIf the US attacks North Korea, that's the end of the US-centric Pacific Commonwealth. Japan, Singapore, Indonesia, and the Philippines will all strongly realign following the inevitable destruction of South Korea--most towards a more China-friendly relationship--and the rest of South East Asia will follow suit. Taiwan will become increasingly isolated, and that will put huge pressure on it to cut off its client status with the US and move towards normalization of relations with China.
In the US, Wal Mart, Target, and all the other big superstores of that ilk (Hobby Lobby...) will just waft away into vapor as their suppliers gradually disappear (and certainly, they'll take a huge economic hit during the quarter or half-year that the conflict ensues).
Laugh all you want, but you really are ignoring some harsh facts about the current US economy, what it's based on, and what conflict with North Korea will entail should the US be foolish enough to continue along that track.
Since when is "the world's" notice relevant in political issues?Richardstevenhack said in reply to turcopolier ... , 16 August 2017 at 10:11 PMBesides - the media slowly, slowly starts to wake up. CNN: North Korea gives US a clear choice: Restraint or missile launches
http://edition.cnn.com/2017/08/16/opinions/north-korea-us-guam-choice-adam-mount/index.htmlYes, I'm aware. But that doesn't change the likelihood that
- Kim never intended to launch those missiles, but merely make the threat in another attempt to pressure the US to negotiate (in which case, of course, he failed - big surprise that) and
- Even if he did actually intend to launch such a missile test, his generals likely suggested it would be TOO provocative.
In any event, my main point is that nothing has changed.
Alexander Mercouris did a piece today at The Duran suggesting that both sides have backed off. I submitted a comment disagreeing.
NK will likely continue to launch missiles until the US agrees to negotiate. And Trump is unlikely to agree to negotiate until he's painted himself into a corner where he will have to launch SOME sort of military action against NK - which is likely to trigger full-scale war.
Bottom line: It is premature to suggest that the US is winning this game.
|
|
|
Aug 18, 2017 | www.msn.com
... [in] an Aug. 16 interview he initiated with a writer with whom he had never spoken, with the progressive publication The American Prospect. In it, Mr. Bannon mockingly played down the American military threat to North Korea as nonsensical: "Until somebody solves the part of the equation that shows me that ten million people in Seoul don't die in the first 30 minutes from conventional weapons, I don't know what you're talking about, there's no military solution here, they got us."
He also bad-mouthed his colleagues in the Trump administration, vowed to oust a female diplomat at the State Department and mocked officials as "wetting themselves" over the consequences of radically changing trade policy.
|
|
|
Aug 15, 2017 | turcopolier.typepad.com
Guam rejoices!
"North Korean leader Kim Jong Un reviewed his military's plans to rain "an enveloping fire" around the U.S. territory of Guam -- but opted not to fire missiles at this time, according to state media. Despite the stand-down, some Guamanians were alarmed after two radio stations aired an erroneous emergency alert Tuesday.
Kim visited the Korean People's Army as the self-imposed mid-August deadline for a missile demonstration approached, the Korean Central News Agency reports. But after hearing the plan and considering it, Kim opted not to give the order to launch missiles, but instead "would watch a little more the foolish and stupid conduct of the Yankees," the report says." NPR
---------------
It was not an IO. It was real and Trump/Mattis won. The fat kid blinked. pl
Posted at 10:02 AM in Korea Permalink
Reblog (0) Comments
BillWade , 15 August 2017 at 10:26 AM
I never thought Kim's Ace in the Hole was his nukes but more his DMZ forces/artillery.b , 15 August 2017 at 10:27 AM
Perhaps one of his generals told him it would be wise to keep it around for more than 72 hours.I vehemently disagree with you.turcopolier , 15 August 2017 at 11:14 AMThe announcement of the possible plan to launch towards Guam was conditional. It demanded that the U.S. stop B1-B flights out of Guam over South Korea near the North Korean border.
Since the announcement was made no B1-B flights near NoKo took place. Thus the temporary suspension of the plan. This suspension includes the explicit warning that it can or will be changed into action should the U.S. return to such action.
/quote/
He said that the U.S. imperialists caught the noose around their necks due to their reckless military confrontation racket, adding that he would watch a little more the foolish and stupid conduct of the Yankees spending a hard time of every minute of their miserable lot.
...
In order to defuse the tensions and prevent the dangerous military conflict on the Korean peninsula, it is necessary for the U.S. to make a proper option first and show it through action, as it committed provocations after introducing huge nuclear strategic equipment into the vicinity of the peninsula , he said, adding that the U.S. should stop at once arrogant provocations against the DPRK and unilateral demands and not provoke it any longer./endquote/
https://kcnawatch.co/newstream/1502749950-753062439/kim-jong-un-inspects-kpa-strategic-force-command/bRed Cloud , 15 August 2017 at 11:21 AM(irony alert) I know, I know, evil America against the world. pl
Trump threatened "fire and fury" if North Korea continued with threats. NK promptly threatened to incinerate Guam.turcopolier , 15 August 2017 at 11:26 AMWhat was Trump's response? "Uh..... what I meant was......"
Trump blinked first. Fact
Red CloudNorbert M Salamon , 15 August 2017 at 11:45 AMOh BS. North Korea threatened the US and has decided to think about it. pl
With great respect Colonel:BillWade -> b ... , 15 August 2017 at 11:45 AMThe USA has threatened North Korea for years, and caused untold economic damage via sanctions.
The war of words increased, and then decreased, NOBODY BLINKED, all players decided that hey do not want to get China upset by being the first idiot to act in a war like manner.
Laughing here. how many minutes away do you think our tactical air forces at Kunsan and Osan are away from doing enough damage to NoKor to make them think twice and think hard?Bsox327 , 15 August 2017 at 11:55 AMRed cloud i agree with you and below is a quote by Pat Buchanan showing that the U.S does not seem too interested in dealing with the very real consequences of attacking N.K.FourthAndLong , 15 August 2017 at 12:10 PM'assuming this crisis is resolved, what does the future of U.S.-North Korean relations look like?
consider the past.
In 1968, North Korea hijacked the USS Pueblo on the high seas and interned its crew. LBJ did nothing. In April 1969, North Korea shot down an EC-121, 100 miles of its coast, killing the crew. Nixon did nothing.
Under Jimmy Carter, North Koreans axe-murdered U.S. soldiers at Panmunjom. We defiantly cut down a nearby tree.
Among the atrocities the North has perpetrated are plots to assassinate President Park Chung-hee in the 1960s and '70s, the Rangoon bombing that wiped out much of the cabinet of Chun Doo-hwan in 1983, and the bombing of Korean Air Flight 858, killing all on board in 1987.
And Kim Jong Un has murdered his uncle and brother.
If the past is prologue, and it has proven to be, the future holds this. A renewal of ICBM tests until a missile is perfected. Occasional atrocities creating crises between the U.S. and North Korea. America being repeatedly dragged to the brink of a war we do not want'
The North Koreans are at the very least as intransigent and possibly way more as Fidel Castro was in his confrontations with the U.S
Colonel,DJK , 15 August 2017 at 01:02 PMThe article at the link below, titled "The Secret of North Korea's ICBM success", is a worthy read IMO. OUtlines many pitfalls and unknowns, including unforeseen perils of sanction regimes. Suitable for a lay audience:
More readily accessible, however mildly inflammatory, is this piece from The NY Times which links to the iss piece:
https://mobile.nytimes.com/2017/08/14/world/asia/north-korea-missiles-ukraine-factory.html?
FWIW, the Yuzhmash company has posted on its website emphatic disagreement with some of the latter articles' inferences.
My own takeaway is that it all underlines the monumental stupidity of our post 1991 Russia policy. George Keenan and more recently Jack Matlock have gone on record very strenuously in this regard.
The author of the iss piece, Michael Elleman, concludes that room for diplomacy remains but is diminishing rapidly.
Maybe the fat boy blinked and Trump/Mattis won or maybe there was hidden deal, or the hint of a deal. I'm reminded of the events of 1962 when it was said that Kruschev blinked and Kennedy/Rusk won. The fact that there was a deal to remove US missiles from Turkey didn't emerge for several years.Richardstevenhack , 15 August 2017 at 03:01 PM
I suspect both interpretations are probably true: 1) Kim may have interpreted the recent suspension of B-1 flights in light of the ongoing back-channel diplomacy as a win for his side, and 2) his generals probably convinced him it was not a smart idea to launch missiles very close to a US base, if for no other reason than his unguided missiles might actually HIT the base, starting the war he really doesn't want.b , 15 August 2017 at 03:09 PMIn any event, nothing has otherwise changed. The expectation is that NK will continue to test their missiles until the US is prepared to open bilateral negotiations or at least negotiations including Russia and China, who have proposed them.
Since the US is steadfast against talking to NK, I continue to expect war by the end of the year, since NK missile launches will likely not stop.
The only diplomatic solution to the crisis is known to everyone, except apparently Trump. Whether Kim can be persuaded to accept it will be remain unknown until the US actually agrees to talk about it.
@Pat - this does not have to do with good or bad America. It has to do with negotiations and with under standing the signaling of the opponents side.turcopolier , 15 August 2017 at 04:09 PMTake the bluster away from the North Korean statements and read what is left as conditions and consequences.
Here Cheryl Rofer took the original announcement of the Guam test apart. https://nucleardiner.wordpress.com/2017/08/11/north-korea-reaches-out/
/quote/I contend that the North Korean statement issued in response to Donald Trump's "fire and fury" threat contains an invitation to negotiations. As is often the case, that invitation is not stated as such. Diplomacy guards such invitations so that nobody loses face when they don't work.
...(textual analysis)...In simpler words, stop threatening us with bombers from Guam and we won't attack Guam.
Quid pro quo.
It reeks of blackmail, but that is how North Korea negotiates. If we want negotiations, rather than war, it would be smart to respond to the offer to negotiate. That doesn't necessarily mean ending the B1B overflights, although my adventurous side says, hey, why not?
/endquote/Since August 9 six B1-B are at Guam but have not flown towards North Korea.
Thus the suspension of the North Korean "test".
To see this as a NoKo capitulation to Trump's bluster is the wrong take. It will likely prevent you to correctly judge the next steps in the negotiation process.
bturcopolier , 15 August 2017 at 04:12 PMOur air flights over S Korea did not threaten anyone unless North Korea wished to force us to give up our alliance with South Korea. We have not given up anything. The fat boy has given up his threat to try to hit Guam. Where is a statement that the US and South Korea will not hold Combined exercises this month? pl
richardstevenhackturcopolier , 15 August 2017 at 04:27 PMGuam is not just a US "Base." The inhabitants of the island are US citizens and the island is sovereign US territory as much as a state is. pl
b and all who think NOKO won the confrontation,Fredw , 15 August 2017 at 04:43 PM
I will believe that is true when the US and South Korea call off their big exercise without conditions. On the other hand if negotiations begin for re-unifications of Korea without pre-conditions then everyone won. plOr maybe not. The message North Korea sent to the world seems pretty clear, but there seems to be some notion that they may be too delusional to realize that. Sure enough. Personalities matter.turcopolier , 15 August 2017 at 04:46 PMMany longstanding observers of the North Korean regime expressed concern that the US could misinterpret the message that it sent on Monday when Kim said he would "watch a little more" how the US acted in the region before deciding whether to go ahead with a plan to launch missiles over Japan aimed at the seas around the US territory of Guam.
In some of the US media, that statement was portrayed as a withdrawal of the Guam plan in the face of threats of overwhelming retaliatory force from Donald Trump and US defence secretary James Mattis.
That would be the wrong way to read the signs, said Vipin Narang, an associate professor at the Massachusetts Institute of Technology specialising in nuclear strategy.
"I think people are not reading the statement," Narang said. "This is literally restating the threat and leaving space for some quid pro quo and space for negotiation.
"But the threat remains. It's not like he took the threat off the table. If the US does anything that he sees as provocative, he has reviewed the plan and now stands poised to execute it," Narang added.
fredwkao_hsien_chih -> Fredw... , 15 August 2017 at 05:11 PMIMO if NoKo fires into the sea around Guam NoKo will cease to exist. The Russians and Chinese would not lift a finger to save NoKo. pl
Fredw,eakens -> turcopolier ... , 15 August 2017 at 05:17 PMI don't think anything ever actually "ends" for good until and unless one of the parties to the "negotiations" disappears completely, and even then, it may not actually end.
The immediate crisis does seem to have ended, though. There is a limit to which even NoKo's can ratchet up the pressure. Once you get to the Pearl Harbor stage, which dropping missiles around Guam would have been, there is no more "negotiations." NoKo's still have much by means of threatening assets and they will try to use them, no doubt, but now everyone knows where the limit is, and that is a good thing. I don't oppose giving them some concessions, for the right price, but not carte blanche to demand more whenever they feel like it and threaten to throw a crazy tantrum if they don't get their way.
I also believe this is exactly right. Many on here have indicated that they have been a rational actor in the face of US belligerence. If one believes that, then it should be accepted that suicide is not an option for them, particularly against an enemy which will undoubtedly suicide even if North Korea were able to get a couple hits in.AriusArmenian , 15 August 2017 at 05:19 PMHopefully this is in fact the crescendo from which the parties can begin to deescalate the situation, and try finding an alternate path to resolving this conflict. NoKo has a lot to offer by giving up the nuclear threat they have been able to put together, and if they are a rational actor like many claim, they will take advantage of the situation and use it to negotiate a good deal.
If you think that Kim blinked then the US should blink more often instead of rushing into wars and creating chaos as was done in Ukraine, Libya, Iraq, and Syria.Seamus Padraig , 15 August 2017 at 05:37 PMI also expect more from you than calling Kim a fat kid.
Pyong Yang and Washington have been playing these games for decades. Only the liberal MSM seriously entertained the idea that this was going to erupt into a full-blown war, because ... Trump. Neither side has any interest in a war, and legend to contrary, both Trump and the Norks are rational actors, as are the Chinese.BillWade , 15 August 2017 at 06:05 PMI imagine it goes something like this: We hold our exercises with our allies on a schedule that is convenient for us. In all the years we've been holding these exercises we have never attacked NK, the reason we haven't attacked is not because they are ready for us, it's because we choose not to, their rice planting season is or is not a concern to us. Their decision to how best use their military is or is not a concern to us. However, when they threaten us we do listen. We may make a show of force in response or we may not. We may not know all their nuclear capabilities or we may know every last detail, their decisions are theirs but they might consider erring on the side of caution. They have decided now on caution.BillWade , 15 August 2017 at 06:22 PMBSox mentions all the times NoKor has provoked us. That we haven't responded with overwhelming force during those times is a sign of our strength. Perhaps one of those events is when we decided it was now more convenient for us to hold exercises at a less convenient time for NoKor, who knows - I don't.
Kim might launch another missile, that's his decision. We might make him toast before he does that, or while he does it, or after he does it, or not at all. I don't know, B doesn't know, but most importantly, Kim doesn't know.
B, don't you recognize that rice farming is for rice farmers and not GIs, you make us look bad with that propaganda.Generalfeldmarschall von Hindenburg , 15 August 2017 at 06:26 PMThere are clearly discussions going on in the background. The US would never admit to negotiating with North Korea, but most of the reason for their petulance is constant muscle flexing by the Americans and South Koreans. They probably ought to just relax. I doubt the US and South Korea would ever launch an attack. There's nothing to be gained from it on any level.TonyL , 15 August 2017 at 08:26 PMIMHO, both Trump and Kim blinked. Perhaps Kim has been waiting for any gesture that allow him to stop the planned missile launch. Perhaps Trump has realized it is foolish and unnecessary to proceed with the B1-B missions (the US-South Korean military exercise is still a more important show of force).SAC Brat , 15 August 2017 at 08:47 PMThey both came out of this potential crisis as loosers. And Trump certainly had gotten us close to the brink of WW3/nuclear war with his exchanges of childish rhetorics with Kim.
Anyone have Sergey Lavrov's travel or phone logs? He was in SE Asia last week.A. Pols , 15 August 2017 at 08:51 PMMaybe the whole Guam thing was just a head fake and the NOKOs were just engaging in a bit of trolling. After all, if you threaten to do something you have no actual intention of doing, then pretend to back down, what is that other than a prank? More and more we live in a world of hoaxes.Yeah, Right -> BillWade... , 15 August 2017 at 11:16 PMBut what do you all think the latest information about the transfer by Ukrainian interests of RD250 engines to NOKO? The story has the appearance of plausibility and, if true, sure is cause for some awkwardness...
BillWade,Yeah, Right -> turcopolier ... , 16 August 2017 at 05:02 AM
The old James Bond dictum springs to mind: once is an accident, twice is happenstance, and three times is.... war.To decide if those exercises is deliberately timed to be harmful to North Korean rice production we would need to know:
a) How long is the NK rice harvest season?
b) What reasons make it uniquely advantageous for the USA/SK to conduct exercises during that same period, year in and year out.I don't doubt that nobody wants to get out of bed in the harsh Korean winter to much up the hill and down again. Sure. But I doubt that the North Koreans have given a guarantee that they'll only attack during the summer months, and it'll all be over by Xmas.
That strikes me as the main difficulty with claiming happenstance i.e. of necessity the North Koreans can't change when the rice needs to be harvested, but the USA/SK should be varying the timing of their military exercises.
After all, what if the GIs only find out after the shooting starts that their guns don't work in the cold?
No, never heard of it. Though it sounds like something that should be advertised on porn sites.b -> FourthAndLong... , 16 August 2017 at 05:25 AMBut the point I made still holds true: military exercises on the Korean peninsular shouldn't just be held in the same month year in, year out. Doing so presupposes a gentleman's agreement about when any war is going to be fought.
And I assume everyone here accepts that such a gentleman's agreement has not been struck with the North Koreans?
Elleman speculated wrongly. And the NYT (Sanger) used that to engage in the usual anti-Russian propaganda.b -> turcopolier ... , 16 August 2017 at 05:45 AMThe North Korean missile motor has one combustion chamber the regular R-250 has two. The outer appearance has similarities with R-250 but is not identical.
North Korea has the capability to develop and manufacture these themselves. Like everyone else they copied parts of existing designs.
Three new piece today seem to confirm what several experts (countering Elleman) said yesterday:http://mobile.reuters.com/article/amp/idUSKCN1AV2CK
North Korea likely can make missile engines without imports: U.S.https://www.wsj.com/articles/u-s-believes-north-korea-produces-its-own-rocket-engines-1502849211?mod=e2twa
U.S. Believes North Korea Produces Its Own Rocket Engineshttp://thediplomat.com/2017/08/north-koreas-new-high-performance-missile-engines-likely-werent-made-in-russia-or-ukraine/
North Korea's New High-Performance Missile Engines Likely Weren't Made in Russia or Ukraine
The U.S. uses B1-B flights to "threaten" North Korea and "in response" to North Korean testing. These flights are marketed as special "show of force". They are not routine.b -> BillWade... , 16 August 2017 at 06:04 AMIt did so last September:
http://www.militarytimes.com/news/pentagon-congress/2016/09/22/b1-b-flew-close-to-north-korean-border-u-s-says/
/quote/
The United States often sends powerful warplanes to South Korea in times of heightened animosity between the Koreas, but it is still unusual for such aircraft to fly near the rivals' border, the world's most heavily fortified.
...
U.S. Pacific Command said on its website Wednesday that the flight was the closest a B-1 has ever flown to the border.
/endquote/It did so recently:
https://www.stripes.com/news/pacific/us-sends-b-1b-bombers-in-show-of-force-after-north-korean-icbm-test-1.477208#.WZQTZrjVpnQ
US sends B-1B bombers in show of force after North Korean ICBM testThe North Korean army mostly feeds itself. Many military facilities have fields nearby and the soldiers are engaged in agriculture as well as other types of production (Songun policy).Old Microbiologist , 16 August 2017 at 08:24 AMAdditionally the (very short) planting and harvesting seasons demand a peak of labor force - the military units are ordered to help their local communities in these. Readiness requirements during South Korean/U.S. maneuvers collide with these needs.
That is the argument North Korea officially makes to justify its nuclear program. It is intended to replace the too costly conventional deterrence and free up labor force.
You may disagree with that argument but you will have to admit that it is coherent and somewhat reasonable.
Some good points here: http://theweek.com/articles/570764/time-military-leave-south-koreaGreco -> Norbert M Salamon... , 16 August 2017 at 09:06 AMThe US-led sanctions aside, this is a country that employs millions into slave labor and practices total political control over its society. Is this a place where anyone would want to trade goods? Sanctions or no sanctions, I wouldn't want anything out of this God forsaken hellhole.Fred -> Yeah, Right... , 16 August 2017 at 09:24 AMAnd if nobody blinked, then why is Kim now suggesting he won't strike near or at a US territory like he said he had planned? Clearly he has thought things over and has balked. And I don't see where the US has blinked. Trump responded threat for threat, backing down from none, while at the same time he has shown a ready eagerness for a peaceful solution to ending North Korea's nuclear ambitious.
This is a positive development. And Kim will be more careful to avoid making similar threats he can't back up going forward.
Yeah, Right,Greco -> b ... , 16 August 2017 at 09:44 AMHow many decades has North Korea had to diversify its industrial base so that it can build its own tractors and thus free up all that manpower from harvesting rice every year when they know, just know, that the evil South and those American allies are going to rush across the DMZ?
I respectfully disagree with their position and on the matter of whether they're indeed reasonable.Jackrabbit , 16 August 2017 at 09:49 AMWe don't know if Kim is a nihilist. He's under enormous pressure to maintain control. He may see things as all or nothing for him and that he won't care if he takes millions of others down with him.
And even if assuming he's acting on totally reasonable mertis now, who's to say how reasonable he will be in the future if we allow him to become more emboldened. Ten years from now he may very well fall out of power and someone more dangerous may assume his place.
This is a problem that has been allowed to fester to a point that may soon be no longer acceptable. If North Korea gets a pass now, they and others will become emboldened and act in a manner that is even more egregious and reckless.
I find their position unacceptable. I find their system of governance reprehensible. And we ultimately endanger ourselves if we fail to meet the challenge of confronting them on the strongest of terms.
Could more have been done to discourage where we stand now? Perhaps, but we're here now and we need to force North Korea's weaker hand and get them to back down. This administration has a shown willingness to do that and I think they will succeed in getting North Korea to abandon their plans for a nuclear deterrent while ensuring a tentative, if not lasting peace. That is assuming Kim Jung-Un is a rational and reasonable actor as some may have done well to argue.
Didn't China force them both to blink? My reading of the China statement was that China would defend NK if NK was attacked - with the implication that it would NOT help NK if NK were the aggressor.Jackrabbit -> Jackrabbit ... , 16 August 2017 at 10:51 AMChina's position makes each side wary of being deemed to be the aggressor.ISL , 16 August 2017 at 11:33 AMDear Colonel,dilbert dogbert , 16 August 2017 at 11:49 AMA third possibility (of which I have no evidence) is that NoKo looked at their test data and realized there is a technical flaw that requires fixing to avoid a high probability of an embarrassing prang. I would not assess this as low probability, but definitely not zero.
Too bad he blinked. Those missiles would have made good and cheap target practice. I assume we have the national technical means to recover the stages of the missiles and find out where the technology came from.dilbert dogbert -> Greco... , 16 August 2017 at 12:05 PM"I find their position unacceptable. I find their system of governance reprehensible. And we ultimately endanger ourselves if we fail to meet the challenge of confronting them on the strongest of terms."Bandolero -> turcopolier ... , 16 August 2017 at 12:11 PMThis was advocated during the Cold War. Fortunately we chose "Containment" and a nuclear exchange with the USSR was avoided. I remember JFK, Khrushchev and Cuba and it was a close thing. I don't want to relive that experience in my declining years.
turcopolierSmoothieX12 , 16 August 2017 at 02:39 PMI think it's win-win: both Trump and Kim won.
Trump can credibly claim that his "tough talk" was effective in deterring Kim from launching missiles close to Guam. And Kim can credibly claim that he established the DPRK as a new nuclear weapon power.
Fat Thing blinked--that much is clear. He may have been "helped" in blinking by China and Russia, who is second to China in NoKo policies--that is how China goes, Russia follows on this issue. Nobody involved needs any trouble in the neighborhood. With or without American rhetoric it has to be remembered that it was Kim Il Sung who unleashed the war in 1950. Three times he pressed Stalin for support, two times he was refused, on the third Stalin surrendered. We all know the rest. Has to be stated, though, that there were no nice people on both (South and North) sides then--mostly SOBs in political top.Freudenschade , 16 August 2017 at 02:45 PMCol.,Kooshy , 16 August 2017 at 03:03 PMThe US and the two Koreas have long been in a Mutual Assured Destruction love triangle. The US just got pulled a little more into the center of the bed, that's all.
Looks like the real behind the seen negotiations that cooled both sides, was rightfully between China and US. Doing Stuff in South China Sea, ends of having proxies thirteen our stuff. I think what Henry Kissinger said about Iran is better fit and applied on US, He said "US (Iran) needs to decide if it wants to be a nation or a cause" sounds like a lot of people in the world are not accepting the post 9/11 formatted US. Like Henry said they see us as a cause and not a nation,b -> Greco... , 16 August 2017 at 03:29 PMU.S., China Sign Military Agreement To Improve On Communication
http://217.218.67.231/Detail/2017/08/15/531909/China US Fang Dunford agreement direct communication
The same arguments were made over China and the Soviet Union.b , 16 August 2017 at 03:38 PM
Deterrence policy won with regard to the Soviet Union and to China. It will also be the policy towards North Korea.Besides - it is too late now to preempt North Korea. It is a full fledged nuclear weapon state. Get over it.
Those who think that B-1B were not the issue at hand over which the recent (secret) negotiations were made should read the NBC piece below which was published on August 9.BillWade , 16 August 2017 at 04:26 PMThe B1-B flights were clearly test runs for a preemptive strike and/or decapitation strike. No wonder North Korea disliked and countered them.
http://www.nbcnews.com/news/north-korea/b-1-bombers-key-u-s-plan-strike-north-korean-n791221
B-1 Bombers Key to a U.S. Plan to Strike North Korean Missile Sites
/quote/
The Pentagon has prepared a specific plan for a preemptive strike on North Korea's missile sites should President Trump order such an attack.Two senior military officials -- and two senior retired officers -- told NBC News that key to the plan would be a B-1B heavy bomber attack originating from Andersen Air Force Base in Guam.
Pairs of B-1s have conducted 11 practice runs of a similar mission since the end of May, the last taking place on Monday. The training has accelerated since May, according to officials.
...
/endquote/North Korea knew this and wanted to end it. Thus the Guam "test" threat and the negotiation offer discussed above. The U.S. agreed to stop the B-1B flights and North Korea put the "test" on hold.
No side lost face. No side won or lost. After building confidence over this issue both are now ready to discuss the less urgent stuff.
"Kim Jong Un of North Korea made a very wise and well reasoned decision," Trump wrote on Twitter.jonst -> b ... , 16 August 2017 at 04:31 PM"The alternative would have been both catastrophic and unacceptable!"
Joint US-SK exercises in 5 days.
and you figure the audience, 'the world', is going to notice these nuances you allege?
|
|
|
Aug 14, 2017 | www.moonofalabama.org
... .. ...
The claim that the U.S. intelligence agencies are exaggeration North Korean capabilities is likely false. But it is also reasonable. The Trump administration, the Pentagon and weapon salesmen will of course use the occasion to further their aims.
One missile defense marketing pundit claimed today that the North Korean missile engines used in the recent tests were bought from factories in Ukraine or Russia. The usual propagandist at the New York Times picked up on that to further their anti-Russian theme:
Mr. Elleman was unable to rule out the possibility that a large Russian missile enterprise, Energomash, which has strong ties to the Ukrainian complex, had a role in the transfer of the RD-250 engine technology to North Korea. He said leftover RD-250 engines might also be stored in Russian warehouses.But the engines in question are of different size and thrust than the alleged R-250 engines and the claimed time-frame does not fit at all. The Ukrainian government denied any transfer of missiles or designs. The story was debunked with in hours by two prominent experts . But implicating Russia, however farfetched, is always good if one wants to sell more weapons.
One Pentagon hobby horse is the THAAD medium range missile defense systems that will now be stationed in South Korea. This even as it is incapable to defend South Korea from short range North Korean missiles. It is obviously targeted at China.
The Reagan wannabe currently ruling in the White House may soon revive Reagan's Strategic Defense Initiative , aka "Star Wars", which was first launched in 1984. SDI was the expensive but unrealistic dream of lasers in space and other such gimmicks. Within the SDI the U.S. military threw out hundreds of billions for a Global Ballistic Missile Defense which supposedly would defend the continental U.S. from any incoming intercontinental missile. The program was buried in the early 1990s. One son of Star Wars survived. It is the National Missile Defense with 40 interceptors in Alaska and California. It has never worked well and likely never will. If NMD would function as promised there would be no reason to fear any North Korean ICBMs. Missile defense is largely a fraud to transfers billions of dollars from U.S. taxpayers to various weapon producing conglomerates.
I expect that the North Korean "threat" will soon be used to launch "SDI - The Sequel", another attempt to militarize space with billions thrown into futuristic but useless "defense" projects. It will soothe the Pentagon's grief over the success North Korea had despite decades of U.S. attempts to subjugate that state.
Posted by b on August 14, 2017 at 01:51 PM | Permalink
james | Aug 14, 2017 2:19:56 PM | 1
thanks b... regarding mcmasters words - "A regime that engages in unspeakable brutality against its own people?" how does this get supported? what is the evidence for it? it is the same mantra dished up regularly where ever the usa is - which is just about everywhere militarily..Eugene | Aug 14, 2017 2:26:51 PM | 2Now if this were to go viral. . . . . . which of course, it wont be allowed, because of the implications that the worlds only superpower is what some say, or shades of the "U.S. is a paper tiger"?dh | Aug 14, 2017 2:55:04 PM | 3The Pentagon hasn't been able to get it right since W W 2, but it has spent $$$$ like a drunken sailor.
The truly sad fact, is that arms merchants have only one loyalty, that's to its own bottom line. Watching the actions since Trump got elected, reminds one of watching the scrum alongside a fishing boat when they throw buckets of chopped fish in the water, to attract sharks to the surface. It seems his administration may end up being named Murphy instead, as in Murphy's law fame.
"I am confident that the strategic bomber overflights from Guam will soon end."DH | Aug 14, 2017 3:22:13 PM | 4Me too. There really is no other option for Trump. But he will need to come up with a good explanation to save face.
Something is wrong with the North Korea story. According to the NY Times (Zerohedge Aug 14) the rocket engines the DPRK is using on their ICBMs come from a factory in the Ukraine. The Ukraine is a U.S. client state. It seems inconceivable that the CIA would not know to whom this factory sells its engines.dh | Aug 14, 2017 3:34:19 PM | 5Is the U.S. trying to use the DPRK like it has tried to use ISIS in Syria - to create an existential threat to justify a military intervention, and in the end to create another client state to use as a base to project power, only this time in East Asia?
Maybe this is why China warned the U.S. against regime change with respect to the DPRK (Zerohedge August 11).
@4 Upper case DH asks....."Is the U.S. trying to use the DPRK like it has tried to use ISIS in Syria..."dh | Aug 14, 2017 3:46:25 PM | 6I think you give the US too much credit. They have been outsmarted in Syria and they are being outsmarted in East Asia. It's that lateral thinking thing again.
lower case dh
@5 That should be linear thinking darn it.likklemore | Aug 14, 2017 3:50:27 PM | 7McMaster is pure bluster. Soon he will receive some high priority emails from Wal-Mart, Dollar Tree, Apple, Samsung, Canon and other masters et al.PavewayIV | Aug 14, 2017 4:25:31 PM | 8You know those daily essentials and critical components that are made in China, South Korea, Japan, Vietnam, Cambodia. Empty shelves and assembly lines.
Global supply chain disrupted as the entire region is declared a War Zone with maritime insurance suspended. Who will insure the cargo vessels transporting daily essentials to the ROTW?
Sick of the USA war mongering.
Kim is having a good laugh watching Act 1 of The civil war in America, 2017.
Kim is most directly threatened by the annual spring and fall joint US-South Korean military exercises held annually (and have been for decades). The largest by far is the fall exercise, this year's is starting next Monday: Ulchi-Freedom Guardian 2017. Several other NATO countries and pals are involved as well. It usually runs for just under two weeks.james | Aug 14, 2017 4:39:56 PM | 9The exercise is a simulation of a US-ROK war with the DPRK. It's more of a command and control exercise rather than mass troop/armor movements. Various details have been pieced together over the years or described by various military sources. In recent years, the goal is not to simply repel a North Korean attack, but respond by invading North Korea, overthrowing Kim and the DPRK government and securing the country as part of South Korea.
THAT's the part that set Kim off a few years ago, and he's been pissed about it more and more every year. The US is delighted with that fact and is unlikely to just stop holding the exercise because it's provocative. McMaster's recent comments about a 'preventative war' didn't do much to calm Kim down.
Both North and South go on heightened military alert - I image about now - just in case the other one flinches. But the US military has gone overboard the last few days to assure the world that it is not gearing up for a war in North Korea. The White House a one point suggested the USS Carl Vinson aircraft carrier was heading to Korea, but that wasn't the case. The USS Ronald Reagan aircraft carrier is sitting in its home port in Yokosuka, Japan. Strategic bombers, currently B-1Bs, have been stationed on Guam for years as a show of support for regional allies.
In any kind of US war with North Korea, they have to have started it (Pearl Harbor) or appear to have started it (Gulf of Tonkin). OPLAN 5027 takes care of it after that.
the usa time the military drills at north korea's harvest time - right when they need to be working in the fields... coincidence? lol.. i think not..john | Aug 14, 2017 4:44:30 PM | 10recapbrian | Aug 14, 2017 7:01:04 PM | 11'brutal against internal dissidents'Procopius | Aug 14, 2017 8:06:35 PM | 12you mean seditionists
Peter AU 1 | Aug 14, 2017 8:31:18 PM | 13Any unprovoked war against North Korea would thereby escalate into a war with China and no one is seriously interested in that adventure.Well, John Bolton certainly would advocate for it. I don't know about McMaster. He is a known Zionist (as is Mattis), so his judgement may not be too good. He is quite alarming on the subject of Iran. I'm old enough to remember both Douglas MacArthur and Curtis LeMay. People like them but dumber seem to be in decision-making positions in this administration (and earlier).US politicians seem to like phrases like "unspeakable brutality" when talking about a targeted leader or country, yet the US has committed much brutality against the citizens of target countries that it does not speak about.
|
|
|
Aug 11, 2017 | marknesop.wordpress.com
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Korean_reunification#United_States
"The United States officially supports Korean reunification under a democratic government. Mike Mansfield proposed that Korea be neutralized under a great-power agreement, accompanied by the withdrawal of all foreign troops and the discontinuation of security treaties with the great power guarantors of the North and South."
Sounds good, right? Reply
Patient Observer , August 4, 2017 at 9:37 pm
Matt, really? I don't think that you are so naive as to take such proclamations at face value. The US also officially supports freedom and democracy as it installs and supports dictators of every sort.yalensis , August 5, 2017 at 5:57 amThe NK topic seems to have been discussed enough. I learned a lot and thank all those who added facts and logic to the discussion including you.
The United States government also pledged (many times) to Native Americans that they are not out to grab more aboriginal territory. Just trust us! See how that went.The United States also pledged to the Soviet Union (Gorbachov) that they would not expand NATO up to Russia's borders, if only Russia would allow Germany to reunite. Just trust us! See how that went.
Naive Russians learned a lesson: That pindosi speak with forked tongue and always lie. American government are not to be trusted, any more than you can trust the word of a scorpion.
|
|
|
Aug 11, 2017 | www.msn.com
"If the U.S. and South Korea carry out strikes and try to overthrow the North Korean regime, and change the political pattern of the Korean Peninsula, China will prevent them from doing so," reported the Global Times , a daily Chinese newspaper controlled by the Communist Party.
... ... ...
One North Korean government official, meanwhile, accused Trump of "going senile," Fox News reported .
|
|
|
Realist , April 26, 2017 at 8:27 am GMT \nApr 30, 2017 | www.unz.com
Introduction: US Empire building on a world-scale began during and shortly after WWII. Washington intervened directly in the Chinese civil war (providing arms to Chiang Kai Shek's army while the Red Army battled the Japanese), backed France's re-colonization war against the Viet Minh in Indo-China and installed Japanese imperial collaborator-puppet regimes in South Korea, Taiwan and Japan.
While empire building took place with starts and stops, advances and defeats, the strategic goal remained the same: to prevent the establishment of independent communist or secular-nationalist governments and to impose vassal regimes compliant to US interests.
Bloody wars and coups ('regime changes') were the weapons of choice. Defeated European colonial regimes were replaced and incorporated as subordinate US allies.
Where possible, Washington relied on armies of mercenaries trained, equipped and directed by US 'advisors' to advance imperial conquests. Where necessary, usually if the client regime and vassal troops were unable to defeat an armed people's army, the US armed forces intervened directly.
Imperial strategists sought to intervene and brutally conquer the target nation. When they failed to achieve their 'maximum' goal, they dug in with a policy of encirclement to cut the links between revolutionary centers with adjoining movements. Where countries successfully resisted armed conquests, empire builders imposed economic sanctions and blockades to erode the economic basis of popular governments.
Empires, as the Roman sages long recognized, are not built in a day, or weeks and months. Temporary agreements and accords are signed and conveniently broken because imperial designs remain paramount.
Empires would foment internal cleavages among adversaries and coups in neighboring countries. Above all, they construct a worldwide network of military outposts, clandestine operatives and regional alliances on the borders of independent governments to curtail emerging military powers.
Following successful wars, imperial centers dominate production and markets, resources and labor. However, over time challenges would inevitably emerge from dependent and independent regimes. Rivals and competitors gained markets and increased military competence. While some vassal states sacrificed political-military sovereignty for independent economic development, others moved toward political independence.
Early and Late Contradictions of Expanding Imperialism
The dynamics of imperial states and systems contain contradictions that constantly challenge and change the contours of empire.
The US devoted immense resources to retain its military supremacy among vassals, but experienced a sharp decline in its share of world markets, especially with the rapid rise of new economic producers.
Economic competition forced the imperial centers to realign the focus of their economies – 'rent' (finance and speculation) displaced profits from trade and production. Imperial industries relocated abroad in search of cheap labor. Finance, insurance, real estate, communications, military and security industries came to dominate the domestic economy. A vicious cycle was created: with the erosion of its productive base, the Empire further increased its reliance on the military, finance capital and the import of cheap consumer goods.
Just after World War II, Washington tested its military prowess through intervention . Because of the immense popular resistance and the proximity of the USSR, and later PRC, empire building in post-colonial Asia was contained or militarily defeated. US forces temporarily recognized a stalemate in Korea after killing millions. Its defeat in China led to the flight of the 'Nationalists' to the provincial island of Taiwan. The sustained popular resistance and material support from socialist superpowers led to its retreat from Indo-China. In response, it resorted to economic sanctions to strangle the revolutionary governments.
The Growth of the Unipolar Ideology
With the growing power of overseas economic competitors and its increasing reliance on direct military intervention, the US Empire took advantage of the internal disintegration of the USSR and China's embrace of 'state capitalism' in the early 1990's and 1980s..The US expanded throughout the Baltic region, Eastern and Central Europe and the Balkans – with the forced breakup of Yugoslavia. Imperial strategists envisioned 'a unipolar empire' – an imperial state without rivals. The Empire builders were free to invade, occupy and pillage independent states on any continent – even bombing a European capital, Belgrade, with total impunity. Multiple wars were launched against designated 'adversaries', who lacked strong global allies.
Countries in South Asia, the Middle East and North Africa were targeted for destruction. South America was under the control of neo-liberal regimes. The former USSR was pillaged and disarmed by imperial vassals. Russia was ruled by gangster-kleptocrats allied to US stooges. China was envisioned as nothing more than a slave workshop producing cheap mass consumer goods for Americans and generating high profits for US multinational corporations and retailers like Walmart.
Unlike the Roman Empire, the 1990's were not to be the prelude to an unchallenged US empire of long duration. Since the 'unipolarists' were pursuing multiple costly and destructive wars of conquest and they were unable to rely on the growth of satellites with emerging industrial economies for its profits. US global power eroded.
The Demise of Unipolarity: The 21st Century
Ten years into the 21st century, the imperial vision of an unchallenged unipolar empire was crumbling. China's 'primitive' accumulation led to advanced domestic accumulation for the Chinese people and state. China's power expanded overseas through investments, trade and acquisitions. China displaced the US as the leading trading partner in Asia and the largest importer of primary commodities from Latin America and Africa. China became the world's leading manufacturer and exporter of consumer goods to North America and the EU.
The first decade of the 21st century witnessed the overthrow or defeat of US vassal states throughout Latin America (Argentina, Bolivia, Venezuela, Ecuador and Brazil) and the emergence of independent agro-mineral regimes poised to form regional trade pacts. This was a period of growing global demand for their natural resources and commodities- precisely when the US was de-industrializing and in the throes of costly disastrous wars in the Middle East.
In contrast to the growing independence of Latin America, the EU deepened its military participation in the brutal US-led overseas wars by expanding the 'mandate' of NATO. Brussels followed the unipolarist policy of systematically encircling Russia and weakening its independence via harsh sanctions. The EU's outward expansion (financed with increasing domestic austerity) heightened internal cleavages, leading to popular discontent .The UK voted in favor of a referendum to secede from the EU.
The domestic disasters of the US vassal regime in Russia, under Boris Yeltsin during the 1990″s, pushed the voters to elect a nationalist, Vladimir Putin. President Vladimir Putin's government embarked on a program to regain Russian sovereignty and its position as a global power, countering US internal intervention and pushing back against external encirclement by NATO.
Unipolarists continued to launch multiple wars of conquest in the Middle East, North Africa and South Asia, costing trillions of dollars and leading to the loss of global markets and competitiveness. As the armies of the Empire expanded globally, the domestic economy (the 'Republic') contracted .The US became mired in recession and growing poverty. Unipolar politics created a growing multi-polar global economy, while rigidly imposing military priorities.
The Empire Strikes Back: The Nuclear Option
The second decade of the 21st century ushered in the demise of unipolarity to the dismay of many 'experts' and the blind denial by its political architects. The rise of a multi-polar world economy intensified the desperate imperial drive to restore unipolarity by military means, led by militarists incapable of adjusting or assessing their own policies.
Under the regime of the 'first black' US President Obama, elected on promises to 'rein in' the military, imperial policymakers intensified their pursuit of seven, new and continuing wars. To the policymakers and the propagandists in the US-EU corporate media, these were successful imperial wars, accompanied by premature declarations of victories in Somalia, Iraq and Afghanistan. This triumphal delusion of success led the new Administration to launch new wars in Ukraine, Libya, Syria and Yemen.
As the new wave of wars and coups ('regime change') to re-impose unipolarity failed, even greater militarist policies displaced economic strategies for global dominance. The unipolarists-militarists, who direct the permanent state apparatus, continued to sacrifice markets and investments with total immunity from the disastrous consequences of their failures on the domestic economy.
A Brief Revival of Unipolarity in Latin America
Coups and power grabs have overturned independent governments in Argentina, Brazil, Paraguay, Honduras and threatened progressive governments in Bolivia, Venezuela and Ecuador. However, the pro-imperial 'roll-back' in Latin America was neither politically nor economically sustainable and threatens to undermine any restoration of US unipolar dominance of the region.
The US has provided no economic aid or expanded access to markets to reward and support their newly acquired client regimes. Argentina's new vassal, Mauricio Macri, transferred billions of dollars to predatory Wall Street bankers and handed over access to military bases and lucrative resources without receiving any reciprocal inflows of investment capital. Indeed the servile policies of President Macri created greater unemployment and depressed living standards, leading to mass popular discontent. The unipolar empire's 'new boy' in its Buenos Aires fiefdom faces an early demise.
Likewise, widespread corruption, a deep economic depression and unprecedented double digit levels of unemployment in Brazil threaten the illicit vassal regime of Michel Temer with permanent crisis and rising class conflict.
Short-Lived Success in the Middle East
The revanchist unipolarist launch of a new wave of wars in the Middle East and North Africa seemed to succeed briefly with the devastating power of US-NATO aerial and naval bombardment .Then collapsed amidst grotesque destruction and chaos, flooding Europe with millions of refugees.
Powerful surges of resistance to the US invasion of Iraq and Afghanistan hastened the retreat toward a multi-polar world. Islamist insurgents drove the US into fortress garrisons and took control of the countryside and encircled cities in Afghanistan; Iraq, Syria, Yemen, Somalia and Libya drove US backed regimes and mercenaries into flight.
Unipolarists and the Permanent State: Re-Group and Attack
Faced with its failures, unipolarists regrouped and implemented the most dangerous military strategy yet: the build-up of nuclear 'First-Strike' capability targeting China and Russia.
Orchestrated by US State Department political appointees, Ukraine's government was taken over by US vassals leading to the ongoing break-up of that country. Fearful of neo-fascists and Russophobes, the citizens of Crimea voted to rejoin Russia. Ethnic Russian majorities in Ukraine's Donbass region have been at war with Kiev with thousands killed and millions fleeing their homes to take refuge in Russia. The unipolarists in Washington financed and directed the Kiev coup led by kleptocrats, fascists and street mobs, immune as always from the consequences.
Meanwhile the US is increasing its number of combat troops in Afghanistan, Iraq and Syria to buttress its unreliable allies and mercenaries.
What is crucial to understanding the rise and demise of imperial power and the euphoric unipolar declarations of the 1990's (especially during the heyday of President Clinton's bloody reign), is that at no point have military and political advances been sustained by foundational economic building blocks.
The US defeated and subsequently occupied Iraq, but it also systematically destroyed Iraq's civil society and its economy, creating fertile ground for massive ethnic cleansing, waves of refugees and the subsequent Islamist uprising that over ran vast territories. Indeed, deliberate US policies in Iraq and elsewhere created the refugee crisis that is overwhelming Europe.
A similar situation is occurring during the first two decades of this century: Military victories have installed ineffective imperial-backed unpopular leaders. Unipolarists increasingly rely on the most retrograde tribal rabble, Islamist extremists, overseas clients and paid mercenaries. The deliberate US-led assault on the very people capable of leading modern multicultural nations like Iraq, Libya, Syria and Ukraine, is a caricature of the notorious Pol Pot assaults on Cambodia's educated classes. Of course, the US honed its special skills in 'killing the school teachers' when it trained and financed the mujahedin in Afghanistan in the 1980's.
The second weakness, which led to the collapse of the unipolar illusion, has been their inability to rethink their assumptions and re-orient and rebalance their strategic militarist paradigm from the incredible global mess they created
They steadfastly refused to work with and promote the educated economic elites in the conquered countries. To do so would have required maintaining an intact social-economic-security system in the countries they had systematically shredded. It would mean rejecting their paradigm of total war, unconditional surrender and naked, brutal military occupation in order to allow the development of viable economic allies, instead of imposing pliable but grotesquely corrupt vassal regimes.
The deeply entrenched, heavily financed and vast military-intelligence-police apparatus, numbering many millions, has formed a parallel imperial state ruling over the elected and civilian regime within the US.
The so-called 'deep state', in reality, is a ruling state run by unipolarists. It is not some 'faceless entity': It has a class, ideological and economic identity.
Despite the severe cost of losing a series of catastrophic wars and the multi-billion-dollar thefts by kleptocratic vassal regimes, the unipolarists have remained intact, even increasing their efforts to score a conquest or temporary military victory.
Let us say it, openly and clearly: The unipolarists are now engaged in blaming their terrible military and political failures on Russia and China. This is why they seek, directly and indirectly, to weaken Russia and China's 'allies abroad' and at home. Indeed their savage campaign to 'blame the Russians' for President Trump's election reflects their deep hostility to Russia and contempt for the working and lower middle class voters (the 'basket of deplorables') who voted for Trump. This elite's inability to examine its own failures and the political system's inability to remove these disastrous policymakers is a serious threat to the future of the world.
Unipolarists: Fabricating Pretexts for World War
While the unipolarist state suffered predictable military defeats and prolonged wars and reliance on unstable civilian regimes, the ideologues continue to deflect blame onto 'Russia and China as the source of all their military defeats'. The unipolarists' monomania has been transformed into a provocative large-scale offensive nuclear missile build-up in Europe and Asia, increasing the risk of a nuclear war by engaging in a deadly 'game of chicken'.
The veteran nuclear physicists in the Bulletin of the Atomic Scientists published an important description of the unipolarists' war plans. They revealed that the 'current and ongoing US nuclear program has implemented revolutionary new technologies that will vastly increase the targeting capability of the US ballistic missile arsenal. These new technologies increase the overall US killing power of existing US ballistic missile forces threefold'. This is exactly what an objective observer would expect of a nuclear-armed US unipolar state planning to launch a war by disarming China and Russia with a 'surprise' first strike.
The unipolar state has targeted several countries as pretexts for launching a war. The US government installed provocative missile bases in the Baltic countries and Poland. These are regimes chosen for their eagerness to violate Russia's borders or airspace and insanely willing to invite the inevitable military response and chain reaction onto their own populations. Other sites for huge US military bases and NATO expansion include the Balkans, especially the former Yugoslav provinces of Kosovo and Montenegro. These are bankrupt ethno-fascist mafia states and potential tinderboxes for NATO-provoked conflicts leading to a US first strike. This explains why the most rabid US Senate militarists have been pushing for Kosovo and Montenegro's integration into NATO.
Syria is where the unipolarists are creating a pretext for nuclear war. The US state has been sending more 'Special Forces' into highly conflictive areas to support their mercenery allies. This means US troops will operate (illegally) face-to-face with the advancing Syrian army, who are backed by Russian military air support (legally). The US plans to seize ISIS-controlled Raqqa in Northern Syria as its own base of operation with the intention of denying the Syrian government its victory over the jihadi-terrorists. The likelihood of armed 'incidents' between the US and Russia in Syria is growing to the rapturous applause of US unipolarists.
The US has financed and promoted Kurdish fighters as they seize Syrian territory from the jihadi-terrorists, especially in territories along the Turkish border. This is leading to an inevitable conflict between Turkey and the US-backed Kurds.
Another likely site for expanded war is Ukraine. After seizing power in Kiev, the klepto-fascists launched a shooting war and economic blockade against the bilingual ethnic Russian-Ukrainians of the Donbass region. Attacks by the Kiev junta, countless massacres of civilians (including the burning of scores of unarmed Russian-speaking protesters in Odessa) and the sabotage of Russian humanitarian aid shipments could provoke retaliation from Russia and invite a US military intervention via the Black Sea against Crimea.
The mostly likely site for starting World War III is the Korean peninsula. The unipolarists and their allies in the state apparatus have systematically built-up the conditions to trigger a war with China using the pretext of the North Korean defensive weapons program.
The unipolarists' state apparatus has gathered its allies in Congress and the mass media to create public hysteria. Congress and the administration of President Trump have fabricated the North Korean missile program as a 'threat to the United States'. This has allowed the unipolarist state to implement an offensive military strategy to counter this phony 'threat'.
The elite have discarded all previous diplomatic negotiations and agreements with North Korea in order to prepare for war – ultimately directed at China. This is because China is the most dynamic and successful global economic challenger to US world domination. The US has 'suffered' peaceful, but humiliating, economic defeat at the hands of an emerging Asian power. China's economy has grown more than three times faster than the US for the last two decades. And China's infrastructure development bank has attracted scores of regional and European participants after a much promoted US trade agreement in Asia, developed by the Obama Administration, collapsed. Over the past decade, while salaries and wages have stagnated or regressed in the US and EU, they have tripled in China.
China's economic growth is set to surpass the US into the near and distant future if trends continue. This will inevitably lead to China replacing the US s as the world's most dynamic economic power . barring a nuclear attack by the US. It is no wonder China is embarked on a program to modernize its defensive missile systems and border and maritime security.
As the unipolarists prepare for the 'final decision' to attack China, they are systematically installing their most advanced nuclear missile strike capacity in South Korea under the preposterous pretext of countering the regime in Pyongyang. To exacerbate tensions, the US High Command has embarked on cyber-attacks against North Korea's missile program. It has been staging massive military exercises with Seoul, which provoked the North Korean military to 'test' four of its medium range ballistic missiles in the Sea of Japan. Washington has ignored the Chinese government's efforts to calm the situation and persuade the North Koreans to resist US provocations on its borders and even scale down their nuclear weapons program.
The US war propaganda machine claims that Pyongyang's nervous response to Washington's provocative military exercises (dubbed "Foal Eagle') on North Korea's border are both a 'threat' to South Korea and 'evidence of its leaders' insanity.' Ultimately, Washington intends to target China. It installed its (misnamed) Terminal High Altitude Area Defense System (THAAD) in South Korea .An offensive surveillance and attack system designed to target China's major cities and complement the US maritime encirclement of China and Russia. Using North Korea as a pretext, THAAD was installed in South Korea, with the capacity to reach the Chinese heartland in minutes. Its range covers over 3,000 kilometers of China's land mass. THAAD directed missiles are specifically designed to identify and destroy China's defensive missile capacity.
With the THADD installation in South Korea, Russia's Far East is now encircled by the US offensive missiles to complement the build-up in the West.
The unipolar strategists are joined by the increasingly militaristic Japanese government – a most alarming development for the Koreans and Chinese given the history of Japanese brutality in the region. The Japanese Defense Minister has proposed acquiring the capacity for a 'pre-emptive strike', an imperial replay of its invasion and enslavement of Korea and Manchuria. Japan 'points to' North Korea but really aims at China.
South Korea's deeply corrupt and blindly submissive regime immediately accepted the US/THADD system on their territory. Washington found the compliant South Korean 'deep state' willing to sacrifice its crucial economic links with Beijing: China is South Korea's biggest trading partner. In exchange for serving as a platform for future US aggression against China, South Korea has suffered losses in trade, investments and employment. Even if a new South Korea government were to reverse this policy, the US will not move its THAAD installation. China, for its part, has largely cut its economic and investment ties with some of South Korea's biggest conglomerates. Tourism, cultural and academic exchanges, commercial agreements and, most important, most of South Korean industrial exports face shut down.
In the midst of a major political scandal involving the Korean President (who faces impeachment and imprisonment), the US-Japanese military alliance has brutally sucked the hapless South Korean people into an offensive military build-up against China. In the process Seoul threatens its peaceful economic relations with China. The South Koreans are overwhelmingly 'pro-peace', but find themselves on the frontlines of a potential nuclear war.
China's response to Washington's threat is a massive buildup of its own defensive missile capacity. The Chinese now claim to have the capacity to rapidly demolish THAAD bases in South Korea if pushed by the US. China is retooling its factories to compensate for the loss of South Korean industrial imports.
Conclusion
The rise and fall of unipolar America has not displaced the permanent state apparatus as it continues to pursue its deluded strategies.
On the contrary, the unipolarists are accelerating their drive for global military conquest by targeting Russia and China, which they insist are the cause of their losing wars and global economic decline. They live on their delusions of a 'Golden Age' of the 1990's when George Bush, Sr. could devastate Iraq and Bill Clinton could bomb Yugoslavia's cities with impunity.
Gone are the days when the unipolarists could break up the USSR, finance violent breakaway former Soviet regimes in Asia and the Caucuses and run fraudulent elections for its drunken clients in Russia.
The disasters of US policies and its domestic economic decline has given way to rapid and profound changes in power relations over the last two decades, shattering any illusion of a unipolar 'American Century'.
Unipolarity remains the ideology of the permanent state security apparatus and its elites in Washington. They believe that the marriage of militarism abroad and financial control at home will allow them to regain their lost unipolar 'Garden of Eden'. China and Russia are the essential new protagonists of a multipolar world. The dynamics of necessity and their own economic growth has pushed them to successfully nurture alternative, independent states and markets.
This obvious, irreversible reality has driven the unipolarists to the mania of preparing for a global nuclear war! The pretexts are infinite and absurd; the targets are clear and global; the destructive offensive military means are available; but so are the formidable defensive and retaliatory capacities of China and Russia.
The unipolarist state's delusion of 'winning a global nuclear war' presents Americans with the critical challenge to resist or give in to an insanely dangerous empire in decline, which is willing to launch a globally destructive war.
The Alarmist , April 25, 2017 at 11:57 pm GMT \n
nsa , April 26, 2017 at 2:52 am GMT \n"This means US troops will operate (illegally) face-to-face with the advancing Syrian army, who are backed by Russian military air support (legally)."
You don't seem to understand the definitions of legal and illegal in the current context: Anything the US declares legal and subject to its jurisdiction anywhere in the world is legal, otherwise it is still subject to US interpretation on its legality or not. In other words, US troops always operate legally, international law notwithstanding, and US laws have effect everywhere and at all times. Read More
What's this "unipolarist" stuff ..some kind of trendy academic euphemism? A land war in Asia? Even the American public isn't that stupid.There is zero chance of an attack on Korea .for a couple of reasons:
1) nothing in it for the jooies who need to conserve their satrap's military for an attack on Iran,
2) if feasible, would have already happened, and lastly
3) the paper tiger would lose another one.
Think about it .goodbye Seoul, goodbye 30,000 US troops, goodbye all those lucrative samsung-kia-hyundai franchises, kiss off a couple carriers from torpedos, goodbye lots of attack aircraft ..and that's all before the Chinese enter the fray. Right now the biggest problem is how to let jooie butt boy Trumpstein and his ridiculous VFW geezer generals back down without losing face. Face is everything to westerners, you know . Read More
@nsa
Oh yes they are. Their stupidity is boundless.
Anonymous , April 26, 2017 at 8:43 am GMT \nI kind of agree with you, I kind of don't.
No doubt the Zionists want to focus on Syria and Iran because there is a direct benefit to them there, but don't forget their goal. Their goal is total control of the world, and China and Russia stand in their way.
Using N Korea to threaten China and Russia is probably high on their to do list too.
But I do agree with you. There is no way a N Korea war would be easy or fast for America. We would probably lose 30k soldiers and many ships at least. Wr would burn through a ton of money when we are flat broke. And I doubt we can be in a 2 front war right now anyway. So probably Middle East will take the priority.
So the most plausible explanation to me is that Trump re-read one of the chapters he wrote on negotiation and tried to convince China to go to war for us. But the Chinese aren't stupid and they didn't take the bait.
China talked tough to N Korea and suspended their coal exports to make it look like they would
play game, and America sent ships to threaten N Korea. But that was all Trump negotiation tactics.
And Trump would be stupid to go to war and have this define his presidency.
"providing arms to Chiang Kai Shek's army while the Red Army battled the Japanese"
Come off it! The Red Army assiduously avoided fighting the Japanese. Read More
Tulip , April 26, 2017 at 5:15 pm GMT \nChina is not happy with North Korea either. Speculation is that China is planning an invasion with a secret green light from Washington. Even if the US went in, it may be that if China were granted basing rights in the North, or if there was an agreement for a multinational peacekeeping force, with equal US/Chinese troops, there may be a way of providing assurance to China on the national security front while getting rid of a gangster regime that threatens the security of everyone. Robert Magill , April 26, 2017 at 5:30 pm GMT \n
China was envisioned as nothing more than a slave workshop producing cheap mass consumer goods for Americans and generating high profits for US multinational corporations and retailers like Walmart.
Walmart announced this week the planned opening of 40 new stores in China by 2020. This adds to the nearly 500 Walmart stores already operating. Very cleaver of them to sell cheap mass consumer goods made in China to Chinese customers and still generate profit. Where is the disconnect here?
The mostly likely site for starting World War III is the Korean peninsula. The unipolarists and their allies in the state apparatus have systematically built-up the conditions to trigger a war with China using the pretext of the North Korean defensive weapons program.
What happened in New York on 9/11 totally unhinged America for a generation. One small nuke landing anywhere in the US would totally do us in. Russia and China could probably survive a dozen each and soldier on.
http://robertmagill.wordpress.com Read More
neutral , April 26, 2017 at 8:52 pm GMT \nOne small nuke landing anywhere in the US would totally do us in.
What do you mean by this ? Are you talking about most Americans leaving their cities and thus
collapsing the entire economic system. Or are you saying that people will get so unhinged that
it will launch all its missiles (without knowing who is responsible) and thus have more nuclear
strikes hitting it ? Read More
Reply
Agree/Disagree/Etc. More...
This
Commenter Display
All Comments
Washington intervened directly in the Chinese civil war providing arms to Chiang Kai Shek's army while the Red Army battled the Japanese
This is COMPLETELY ass-backwards and there is not enough facepalm for such a statement. The Red Army kept itself well ensconced and recruited desperate peasants while Chiang Kai Check fought against the Japanese with not a lot of support from the US, then got the cold shoulder from Churchill. After that, the Nationalist Chinese were such an utter wreck that Mao could easily clean the floor.
Any student of the Sino-Japanese war should have the basics right.
Start reading: http://www.telegraph.co.uk/culture/books/10182755/Chinas-war-With-Japan-1937-1945-the-struggle-for-survival-by-Rana-Mitter-review.html Read More
Realist , April 26, 2017 at 11:25 pm GMT \n@Robert Magill
The per cent of Americans killed on 9/11 was less than 0.000097. The per cent of Japanese killed in the 2011 Tsunami was 0.0144 with nary a whimper. The Japanese total was 148 times the US total!
The US would never survive a small nuclear attack
Astuteobservor II , April 28, 2017 at 12:19 am GMT \n@El Dato
Start reading: http://www.telegraph.co.uk/culture/books/10182755/Chinas-war-With-Japan-1937-1945-the-struggle-for-survival-by-Rana-Mitter-review.html
from what I have read. the first half of that statement is true, while the 2nd half is wrong. 45-49, ccp got the left overs of manchuria, while the kmt got hardware and training directly from the usa.
Monty Ahwazi , April 29, 2017 at 5:20 am GMT \nDidn't we fight China for many years in a place called Vietnam? How did that war work for us? Of course we are stupid and our conscious memory is hardly good for 4 years. Our distant memory is as good as every election cycle and the Vietnam war happened centuries ago on the US memory calendar! Read More The White Muslim Traditionalist , April 29, 2017 at 11:30 am GMT \n
@The Alarmist
"This means US troops will operate (illegally) face-to-face with the advancing Syrian army, who are backed by Russian military air support (legally)."You don't seem to understand the definitions of legal and illegal in the current context: Anything the US declares legal and subject to its jurisdiction anywhere in the world is legal, otherwise it is still subject to US interpretation on its legality or not. In other words, US troops always operate legally, international law notwithstanding, and US laws have effect everywhere and at all times. What an idiotic statement.
The United States doesn't decide what is right and what is wrong.
200 Words @Monty Ahwazi Didn't we fight China for many years in a place called Vietnam? How did that war work for us? Of course we are stupid and our conscious memory is hardly good for 4 years. Our distant memory is as good as every election cycle and the Vietnam war happened centuries ago on the US memory calendar! Didn't we fight China for many years in a place called Vietnam?
It was a mixed bag. Primarily Vietnam was more a Soviet ally than Chinese. You must remember that during the '60s the Chinese and Soviets were at odds, and Chinese-Vietnamese relations were not good, either. After the Americans retreated (Nixon-Kissinger's "Peace with Honor"), China and Vietnam fought some skirmishes over Vietnam's Cambodian intrigue.
Amazing, when you think about it, how Vietnamese, Japanese, Chinese, and Korean brothers and cousins can't get along. If they could, it would be very difficult for the Anglo-American-Jewish alliance in the region. Think about it. Chinese are as crafty as Jews, they are patient as hell (they think in long terms), they are every bit as tribal as Jews. Plus, unlike Jews, they have demonstrated an ability to create an indigenous (i.e., non parasitic) culture. Finally, Chinese don't feel any guilt over the Jew's Holocaust Six Million shekel religion, so they can't be whipped into a subservient paroxysm over it. Maybe that makes war with them inevitable. Read More
mp , April 29, 2017 at 11:54 am GMT \n@Robert Magill
Walmarts in China are not like the one's in America. I'm convinced the US stores are supported by welfare checks and food stamps. Without those, my guess is that the stores would have closed a long time ago. Also, in China you don't see half the store filled up with overweight diabetics on disability, riding around on motorized scooters, looking like land-locked Barron Harkonnens, etc.
Corvinus , April 29, 2017 at 2:24 pm GMT \n@Wizard of Oz
Exactly. The doomsday prognosticators keep up with the Fake News about the impending end of the world scenarios and they fail to materialize repeatedly.
Ludwig Von , April 29, 2017 at 3:21 pm GMT \nJust my little thought : in fact China is not going to intervene in a conflict between US-SK-Japan versus NK. It will sit back and just wait until they all are exhausted and then collect . Agent76 , April 29, 2017 at 3:35 pm GMT \n
Mar 25, 2016 Is China Ready to Challenge the Dollar?
Introduction to the report: Is China Ready to Challenge the Dollar? Internationalization of the Renminbi and Its Implications for the United States.
Agent76 , April 29, 2017 at 3:37 pm GMT \nApr 12, 2017 China Russia Move For Gold Against Dollar Makes Them A Target By Trump
In this video we talk about all the latest breaking news regarding the financial quite feud between Russia, China and U.S. Its important to note that this move against Donald Trump and the U.S petro dollar being the world reserve currency was made before Trumps aggressive actions against a mutual ally to Russia and China.
denk , April 29, 2017 at 7:29 pm GMT \nUncle sham, 'Pay up or else !'
hhhhhh
Wizard of Oz , April 29, 2017 at 10:20 pm GMT \n@mp Didn't we fight China for many years in a place called Vietnam?
It was a mixed bag. Primarily Vietnam was more a Soviet ally than Chinese. You must remember that during the '60s the Chinese and Soviets were at odds, and Chinese-Vietnamese relations were not good, either. After the Americans retreated (Nixon-Kissinger's "Peace with Honor"), China and Vietnam fought some skirmishes over Vietnam's Cambodian intrigue.
Amazing, when you think about it, how Vietnamese, Japanese, Chinese, and Korean brothers and cousins can't get along. If they could, it would be very difficult for the Anglo-American-Jewish alliance in the region. Think about it. Chinese are as crafty as Jews, they are patient as hell (they think in long terms), they are every bit as tribal as Jews. Plus, unlike Jews, they have demonstrated an ability to create an indigenous (i.e., non parasitic) culture. Finally, Chinese don't feel any guilt over the Jew's Holocaust Six Million shekel religion, so they can't be whipped into a subservient paroxysm over it. Maybe that makes war with them inevitable. OK until you come to "the Chinese are every bit as tribal as Jews," Whatever you might say about some 12 million Jews who; if in Israel, learn to speak a version of their old tribal language makes little sense when applied to 1.3 billion people speaking many mutually incomprehensible languages (or dialects as some prefer if you think Russian and Polish are two dialects) and with a long history of warlordism and the barbarism of the Cultural Revolution less than two generations behind them. Still I guess that it is wise to protect your IP from a Mandarin speaking Chinese employee who only became an Amrrican citizen yesterday .
|
|
|
Jul 16, 2017 | marknesop.wordpress.com
Patient Observer , July 16, 2017 at 5:54 pm
I think Mark and/or others have said that Matt has latched on to NK as it is the undisputed evil in the world per the MSM. By extension, he hopes to prove that everything that the MSM states that Russian medial disputes must also be the truth.The MSM is a prolific generator of falseshoods fashioned to create the necessary public opinion to generate a call for action in the Congress and at least apathy in the electorate. And one thing for certain, whenever the MSM starts to cry about HR abuse or evil dictators, the real reason for the negative stories is something entirely unrelated.
In the case of NK, I can only speculate. Certainly a united Korea would no longer need or welcome the ongoing US occupation. A united Korea would be far more than its historical enemy, Japan, could handle. A united Korea could be a major part of the Chinese Eurasian economic development project. In short, a united Korea is a very bad thing UNLESS a pro-US/Japanese regime can be installed. That prospect looks very unlikely as as the memory of what the US did to them is burned into their neurons and Russia nor China would allow the necessary meddling for that to occur.
The MSM has never found a dictator/thug/mass murder that it didn't like if said dictator/thug/mass murderer was doing its bidding. IIRC, a US favorite was Pol Pot and the Khemer Rouge – those folks made NK look positively benign.
Who, again, are the sociopaths? Who, Matt? Or, will you wimp out when your line of attack fails (yet again).
|
|
|
Jul 16, 2017 | original.antiwar.com
North Korean Leadership May Be Ruthless and Reckless, But They Are Not Crazy
'Time is Not on Our Side': Former senior US government officials say there must be dialogue with North Korea
by Col. Ann Wright (ret.) Posted on July 15, 2017 July 14, 2017 Despite the rhetoric from the Trump administration about military confrontation with North Korea, the common theme of many U.S. experts on North Korea is that the US presidential administration MUST conduct a dialogue with North Korea – and quickly! Military confrontation is NOT an option according to the experts.And most importantly, the new President of South Korea Moon Jae-in was elected in May 2017 on a pledge to engage in talks with North Korea and pursue diplomacy to finally officially end the Korean conflict. Nearly 80 percent of South Koreans support a resumption of long-suspended inter-Korean dialogue, according to a survey by a presidential advisory panel showed in late June.
On June 28, 2017, six former high level experienced US government officials from both Republican and Democratic administrations over the past thirty years sent a letter to President Trump stating that "Kim Jong Un is not irrational and highly values preserving his regime Talking is not a reward or a concession to Pyongyang and should not be construed as signaling acceptance of a nuclear-armed North Korea. It is a necessary step to establishing communication to avoid a nuclear catastrophe. The key danger today is not that North Korea would launch a surprise nuclear attack. Instead the primary danger is a miscalculation or mistake that could lead to war."
The signatories to the letter were
William J. Perry, 19th US Secretary of Defense under the Clinton administration; George P. Shultz, 60th Secretary of State under the Reagan administration and now Distinguished Fellow, Hoover institution, Stanford University; Governor Bill Richardson, US Secretary of Energy and US Ambassador to the United Nations under the Clinton administration; Robert L. Gallucci, former negotiator in the Clinton administration and now with Georgetown University; Sigfrid S. Hecker, nuclear weapons expert and the last US official to visit the North Korea nuclear facilities and now with the Center for International Security and Cooperation, Stanford University; and Retired US Senator (Republican) Richard G. Lugar, and now president the Lugar CenterTogether, they wrote: "there are no good military options, and a North Korean response to a US attack would devastate North Korea and Japan. Tightening sanctions can be useful in increasing pressure on North Korea, but sanctions alone will not solve the problem. Pyongyang has shown that it can make progress on missile and nuclear technology despite its isolation. Without a diplomatic effort to stop its progress, there is little doubt that it will develop a long-range missile capable of carrying a nuclear warhead to the United States."
The experts ended their letter to President Trump by calling for quick action: "Today there is a window of opportunity to stop these programs, and it may be the last chance before North Korea acquires long-range capability. Time is not on our side. We urge you to put diplomacy at the top of the list of options on the table."
Two weeks earlier, on June 13, 2017, former Secretary of Defense William Perry and University of Chicago Korean War historian Bruce Cummings both strongly advocated for dialogue with North Korea at the Korean Peace Network's conference " Off Ramps to War " hosted by the Partnerships for International Strategies in Asia program at George Washington University's Elliott School of International Affairs in Washington, DC.
William Perry said, "North Korean leadership may be ruthless and reckless, but they are not crazy." He added, "Why do we have a double standard for North Korea? We accept Saudi Arabia as it is with its human rights violations, but we do not accept North Korea as it is-a nuclear power. Refusing to listen to the North Koreans about their goals and needs has meant that in the seventeen years since the last relevant dialogue, the North Koreans have developed and tested nuclear weapons and intercontinental missiles."
The Bush administration's naming North Korea as part of the "Axis of Evil" in 2002 and the Obama administration's subsequent "Strategic Patience" policy were not forms of diplomacy, argued Perry, but instead were "miserable policy failures." According to Perry, the US has not had a negotiating strategy with North Korea in seventeen years, and during that time, North Korea has continued to do what the US and other major powers do not want it to do – test nuclear weapons and missiles.
Perry said that the North Korean government has three goals:
Staying in power; Gaining international respect; Improving their economy.Perry emphasized that the North Korean government will sacrifice the last two goals – gaining international respect and improving the economy – to achieve the first goal, which is staying in power.
Because of the lack of listening to and acknowledging North Korean objectives on what its goals are – which includes signing a peace treaty to take the place of the 50+ year armistice, signing a nonaggression pact and reducing U.S.-South Korean military war games, Perry believes that the best outcome available to negotiators is to freeze the nuclear weapons and the ICBM programs, not their elimination.
Perry said he believes North Koreans would never use nuclear weapons as those weapons "are valuable only if they DON'T use them. They know the response from the US would be devastating, should North Korea explode a nuclear weapon."
University of Chicago history professor Bruce Cumings, author of The Korean War: A History , said at the symposium that the Clinton administration achieved very important goals with North Korea, including "North Korea freezing its plutonium production for eight years (1994–2002) and, in October 2000, indirectly working out a deal to buy all of North Korea's medium and long-range missiles – and signing an agreement with North Korean General Jo Myong-rok in a meeting in the White House stating that neither country would bear 'hostile intent' toward the other."
But the Bush administration led by Vice President Dick Cheney, Defense Secretary Donald Rumsfeld and Undersecretary of State John Bolton "actively sought to torpedo the Agreed Framework" and succeeded in pushing aside the agreements negotiated by the Clinton administration thereby destroying the 1994 freeze and refusing to acknowledge the Clinton-Jo pledge of "no hostile intent," particularly since the pledge was made by allowing a North Korean general inside the White House.
With President Bush's January 2002 State of the Union speech, in which he called North Korea part of an "axis of evil," the Bush administration turned its back on North Korea, abrogating the "Agreed Framework" and halting shipments of American fuel-oil permanently. In response, the North Koreans withdrew from the Non-Proliferation Treaty (NPT) and restarted their plutonium-producing reactor.
As Cumings wrote for The Nation , "The simple fact is that Pyongyang would have no nuclear weapons if Clinton's agreements had been sustained."
Sheldon Richman, executive editor of The Libertarian Institute and the former senior editor at the Cato Institute agrees with Perry that North Korean leader Kim Jung UN is not crazy. "Let us dispense, once and for all, with the idea that Kim is a madman," Richman wrote at Antiwar.com . " Brutality is not madness, and a madman wouldn't be expected to capitulate to economic pressure. He shows every sign of wanting his regime to endure, which means he would not want the US military or nuclear arsenal to pulverize it. Assuming rationality in this context asserts only that Kim's means are reasonably related to his ends."
Richman underscores the rationale for the North Korean government to develop nuclear weapons against the will of the US"Kim shows every sign of having learned the lesson of recent US regime-change policies toward Iraq and Libya, neither of which were nuclear states. Same with Syria, whose regime has been targeted by the US government. The lesson is: if you want to deter a US attack, get yourself some nukes."
Robert E. Kelly, Associate Professor of International Relations in the Department of Political Science at Pusan National University, makes a similar argument. "This is not a suicidal, ideological, ISIS-like state bent on apocalyptic war but rather a post-ideological gangter-ish dictatorship looking to survive. The best way to guarantee the North's survival is nuclear deterrence It is a rational decision, given Pyongyang's goals to, 1) not change internally, and 2) not be attacked externally. This is not ideal of course. Best would be a de-nuclearized North Korea. But this is highly unlikely at this point."
Track 2 Diplomacy with North Korea continues
Japan's Asahi Shimbun newspaper reported recently that Robert Gallucci and Leon Sigal, director of the Northeast Asia Cooperative Security Project at the Social Science Research Council, held nuclear and missile discussions in October 2016, with North Korean Vice Foreign Minister Han Song-ryol in Kuala Lumpur. Malaysia. The North Korean envoy said North Korea had communicated its desire to negotiate directly with the US without involving China, to whom 90% of its exports go.
Another Japanese newspaper, Mainichi Shimbun , reported that North Korea originally demanded Washington send to North Korea a former US President as a special envoy to resolve the case of Otto Warmbier, an American student who recently died after detention in North Korea.
According to the newspaper, Choe Son-hui, head of the North Korean Foreign Ministry's US affairs bureau, notified the US through its UN mission in May 2017. However, North Korea released Warmbier in a coma after Trump refused to send a former President and sent Joseph Yun, State Department Special Representative for North Korea Policy to North Korea instead.
Another Track 2 group met with a North Korean delegation in early June 2017. Sue Mi Terry, a Korea expert who has worked at both the CIA and the National Security Council and now is with the Bower Group Asia spoke on June 28, 2017 to NPR about meeting with North Korea officials to try to get nuclear talks back on track.
Terry said that to North Koreans, their nuclear arsenal "is a matter of survival. North Koreans have told us even in the recent meeting – and they've specifically brought up Libya – Gaddafi's case in Libya and Iraq – and said: 'Nuclear weapons is the only way for us to absolutely guarantee our survival, and this is why we're not going to give it up. We're so close to perfecting this nuclear arsenal. This is our final deterrent against the United States.' Ultimately it's about regime survival for them, and nuclear weapons guarantees it."
Terry said the North Koreans demand that the United States accept them as a nuclear power and there is "absolutely no flexibility or willingness to meet to talk about ending their nuclear program." In contrast to other experts, Terry believes it is "unrealistic for us (the US) to go from where we are to talk about peace treaty and discuss formally ending the Korean War."
She believes the solution is "continuing with maximum pressure with sanctions and trying to get China to do more. And if China does not come through, then we'll have to pursue secondary sanctions against Chinese banks and entities and see if that can get China to rein in North Korea a little bit more."
Ann Wright served 29 years in the US Army/Army Reserves and retired as a Colonel. She was a US diplomat for 16 years and served in US Embassies in Nicaragua, Grenada, Somalia, Uzbekistan, Kyrgyzstan, Sierra Leone, Micronesia, Afghanistan and Mongolia. She resigned from the U.S. diplomatic corps in March 2003 in opposition to President Bush's war on Iraq. She is the co-author of Dissent: Voices of Conscience .
Read more by Col. Ann Wright (ret.) America's Ready Supply of Enemies – May 11th, 2017
|
|
|
Jun 26, 2017 | marknesop.wordpress.com
Northern Star , June 24, 2017 at 1:31 pmhttp://www.history.com/this-day-in-history/korean-war-begins"The result of a North Korean regime collapse would be catastrophic and may trigger a dangerous race between China and the US-ROK (Republic of Korea) forces attempting to secure strategic and symbolic locations such as the Yongbyon nuclear facility and Pyongyang," Andrew Injoo Park and Kongdan Oh wrote for the National Bureau of Asian Research.
China worries about both of those, especially the latter.
Beijing values Pyongyang as a strategic buffer between itself and US-allied South Korea. If North Korea were to fall, it could lead to a US-allied unified Korea, with US troops right on China's border."
http://www.cnn.com/2017/06/22/asia/north-korea-war-devastation/
|
|
|
May 06, 2017 | www.unz.com
The North Korean "crisis" is a Washington orchestration. North Korea was last at war 1950-53. N. Korea has not attacked or invaded anyone in 64 years. N. Korea lacks the military strength to attack any country, such as South Korea and Japan, that is protected by the US. Moreover, China would not permit N. Korea to start a war.So what is the demonization of N. Korea by the presstitutes and Trump administration about?
It is about the same thing that the demonization of Iran was about. The "Iranian threat" was an orchestration that was used as cover to put US anti-ballistic missile bases on Russia's borders. An anti-ballistic missile (ABM) is intended to intercept and destroy nuclear-armed ICBMs (intercontinental ballistic missiles) and prevent them from reaching their targets.
Washington claimed that the anti-ABM bases were not directed at Russia, but were for the protection of Europe against Iran's nuclear ICBMs. Insouciant Americans might have believed this, but the Russians surely did not as Iran has neither ICBMs nor nuclear weapons. The Russian government has made it clear that Russia understands the US bases are directed at preventing a Russian retalliation against a Washington first strike.
The Chinese government also is not stupid. The Chinese leadership understands that the reason for the N. Korean "crisis" is to provide cover for Washington to put anti-ballistic missile sites near China's border.
In other words, Washington is creating a shield against nuclear retalliation from both Russia and China from a US nuclear strike against both countries.
China has been more forceful in its reply to Washington's efforts than have the Russians. China has demanded an immediate halt to the US deployment of missiles in South Korea. https://www.rt.com/news/386828-china-thaad-south-korea/
In order to keep Americans confused, Washington now calls anti-ABMs THAAD, Terminal High Altitude Area Defense. China understands that THAAD has nothing whatsoever to do with N. Korea, which borders S. Korea, making it pointless for N. Korea to attack S. Korea with ICBMs.
THAAD in S. Korea is directed against China's retaliatory forces. It is part of Washington's preparations to nuke both Russia and China with minimal consequence to the US, although Europe would certainly be completely destroyed as THAAD or anti-ABMs are useless against Russian nuclear cruise missiles and the Russian air force.
But no Empire has ever cared about the fate of its vassals, and Washington is uninterested in Europe's fate. Washington is interested only in its hegemony over the world.
The question is: now that Russia and China understand that Washington is preparing for a preemptive nuclear strike against them in order to remove the two constraints on Washington's unilateral behavior, will the two countries sit there and wait for the strike?
What would you do?
On April 27 I posted on this website a column, "Washington Plans to Nuke Russia and China." My column was a report that this was the conclusion of the Russians and Chinese themselves. I quoted Russian Lt. Gen. Viktor Poznikhir, Deputy Head of Operations of the Russian General Staff and provided links for his expression of concern such as: https://www.rt.com/news/386276-us-missile-shield-russia-strike/
Jus' Sayin'... May 4, 2017 at 9:07 pm GMT
BTW, I agree entirely with the essential point of this essay, Mr. Roberets. It's obvious to any rational and informed person that the USA is engaged in a geopolitical strategy to surround Russia and China with a coordinated anti-ballistic-missile system. The posting of THAAD in the Korean peninsula is the latest phase of this plan. The USA's establishment seems to be planning a strategic system that they think will give the USA a first-strike capability and the flexibility to start a nuclear war with impunity. This plan is insanely dangerous and puts the entire world at risk of a nuclear conflagration.
But the poignancy of your message is greatly diminished by the overwrought, paranoid style with which you present it.
dearieme May 4, 2017 at 10:44 pm GMT
KenH says: May 5, 2017 at 1:57 am GMT • 200 WordsAre the people who run the US really prepared to gamble on a guaranteed 100% success rate for anti-missile missiles? Won't they die too if they are wrong?
Still, it's the simplest way to explain their very odd behaviour. Perhaps they think they can frighten the Russians and Chinese into surrender. Sounds awfully risky to me.
nickels May 5, 2017 at 3:20 pm GMTWhat I find disturbing in all this is that the U.S. has to know that they can't simultaneously neutralize Russia and China's entire nuclear arsenals and every means of delivery. But if so then this means they are ready and willing to sacrifice a portion of the American landmass and tens of millions of people to nuclear fire just to be the last man standing. Russia has "boomers" or submarines that can fire nuclear missiles from sea. I don't think the Chinese have that capability yet but I haven't been paying close attention.
Russia has multiple ways to deliver nuclear warheads and even if our nuclear defenses are only partially breached that means a terrible loss of life. It seems the U.S. high command has war gamed every scenario imaginable and thinks we will win with "acceptable" losses which of course doesn't include they or their loved ones.
We've become as bloodthirsty and psychopathic as the Likud party of Israel. For all intents and purposes the mover and shakers within our government are either real or honorary Likudniks.
I have to wonder if the South Korean regime change of a few months back wasn't a CIA color revolution designed to put a puppet into government in SK that would be willing to host these missiles.
It had all the hallmarks:
-Fancy stage with a visual/audio propaganda machine
-Highly coordinated crowd (lighters, etc )
-Trumped up charges
-Demonization of the 'Church of Eternal Life', which is basically just another wacky protestant op,not a cult. If one looks at the google search results for this church (as opposed to, say bing) it is clear that they are on google's CIA list of organizations to demonize by leading search results to propaganda sites
-Use of the media to constantly demonize a single individual (Choi Soon) whose father was adviser to Ms Park (sounds like a pretty legit advisor to me)
-Ms Park had expressed a desire to work with both China and the USIn Tolkien's Silmarillion he describes the lineage of Sauron as essentially a fallen angel, aka a demon.
There is no doubt that Washington is run by a host of people who are possessed by demons.As far as using real names, the reason I don't spell a full name out is not the desire to be unknown, but to avoid a search engine like google from collating everything I do online into a search result. Its one thing to be known in a certain circle of the internet, another for any bloke to pull everything together without context or participation in the actual discussions.
Harry Huntington, May 5, 2017 at 3:35 pm GMT
@Paul Craig Roberts
Folks who have seriously looked at the subject cannot help but agree with you. People should recall that back in the 1950s, Henry Kissinger wrote a study of the idea of limited nuclear war. As head of Nixon's NSC, Kissinger gave us SALT I, the first and in many respects most successful nuclear arms agreement. SALT I banned ballistic missile defense. It was understood by everyone, that ballistic missile defense is not a "defensive" system, but is part of a first strike weapons package. Ballistic missile defense can never be made good enough to defend against someone else's first strike. Ballistic missile defense can, however, be expected to defend after YOU have launched your own first strike and taken out most of the other side's nuclear forces.
Of course the Russians have not been standing still with all of this. Their S400 system has capabilities against both US stealth aircraft and ballistic missiles. The Russians make incremental changes to their systems and the Russian S500 system will have full blown ballistic missile defense capabilities. The Russians are also deploying their Topol M ICBM systems, and soon a successor, which is mobile and has multiple maneuverable warheads and penetration aids designed to defeat US ballistic missile defense systems. Most likely, as it seems is always the case, the US neocons will trust too much in US technology and will be unpleasantly surprised by the Russian response to any US nuclear first strike.
The wildcard of course is that a nuclear war need not be fought entirely with nuclear weapons. US conventional cruise missiles can be launched to target Russian radars. Likewise, however, the Russian Kalibr cruise missiles can directly take on US ballistic missile defense by threatening both US sea based defensive systems and land based THAAD systems.
It is easy to picture a scenario where in a crisis Russia strikes first using its conventional cruise missiles to target US ballistic missile defense sites. US sea based systems cannot engage in ballistic missile defense if they have to expend all of their missiles defending themselves from conventional attack. Similarly, a THAAD system is of limited use if Russians successfully destroy the missiles on the ground, or if they destroy the radars.
The US was surprised when the Russians used their Kalibr missiles with great success in Syria. That success created another layer of complexity in the US planning for nuclear war.
botazefa: May 5, 2017 at 7:16 pm GMT
It is my understanding that our THAAD deployments are not particularly numerous in comparison to the existing ICBM arsenal. It is also my understanding that THAAD is not particularly accurate.
If the author is so thin skinned that he cannot handle disagreement, then perhaps he lacks the self awareness to label dissenters as narcissists. To put it more plainly, the inability to take criticism is one of the diagnostic criteria of Narcissistic Personality Disorder. To believe that ones comments are so interesting that they invite active espionage on the part of Mossad and NATO is indicative of grandiose thinking, another diagnostic criteria of NPD.
alexander says:May 5, 2017 at 8:10 pm GMT • 100 Words
@alexander
As though perhaps in the final tally we will have hit fifty two of "their" cities and they will only have hit 20 of "ours" .like Seattle , Houston, Atlanta, Miami, Chicago, Albany , Denver, Boston, Charlotte, San Francisco,Richmond, Trenton, Juneau,Wilmington, Raleigh, Concord,Providence,Detroit, Hartford and Columbia .
Is this "victory "in your mind , Utu ?
Can you really be suggesting this ?
34.Mao Cheng Ji says:
May 5, 2017 at 8:10 pm GMT • 100 Words
@utu
What is the purpose of anti-ABM installations around Russia and China? What is the purpose of claims of inflated abilities of these systems? Certainly not to prepare the first strike. It is to make Russia and China think that they will not win the first strike.It's exactly the opposite. Modern ABM systems are useless against the first strike with 1500 nuclear ICBMs among god knows how many decoys. They are useful, however, against a much weaker retaliation strike, provided that most of the enemy's ICBMs have been destroyed (by your first strike) inside their silos. You will probably lose a few cities, but win Total World Domination. And that's the game.
|
|
|
May 03, 2017 | fpif.org
The Korean police swarmed onto the golf course in Seongju, just 300 kilometers southeast of Seoul, just before dawn on April 26. The officers pushed aside the dazed protesters and escorted a group of US Army military trailers that carried the critical parts for the THAAD (Terminal High Altitude Area Defense) missile defense system.The deployment of THAAD in Korea has become extremely contentious since China expressed its strong opposition. The sudden deployment of the AN/TPY-2 radar system and two missile launchers and interceptors a week before the Korean presidential election on May 9 has created even greater controversy. It looks for all the world like a bid to make deployment a fait accompli even as the liberal candidate Moon Jae-in, who is the frontrunner in several polls, suggests that the system requires further debate.
Although the incident did not grab the headlines around the world, it was an obvious effort to circumvent the Korean political process. It also marks a fundamental shift in Korea-US relations .
But that's not all. President Donald Trump also went on to demand that Korea pay one billion dollars for the cost of the deployment, even though the Korean military is not actually purchasing the missile defense system and has agreed to deployment in the face of strong opposition.
President Trump went on to condemn the KORUS Free Trade Agreement, calling it a "horrible deal" and threatening to "terminate" it. Trump has linked together security issues with trade issues in an aggressive manner, hinting that the crisis might be resolved if Seoul were more accommodating in trade negotiations.
This mix of trade issues with security issues goes against the grain of the entire shared-values strategy that the United States has employed since the Second World War. Trump suggests, in so many words, that the military alliance is an economic exchange and that THAAD, or just about anything, can be modified or even eliminated if the price is right. Though this approach may seem like common sense to Donald Trump, the implication is that the United States military is a mercenary force whose purpose is not determined by a commitment to democracy and free markets but rather the balance in the national treasury.
And lo and behold, on May 1, Trump stated that he would be "honored" to meet with Kim Jong-un, the leader of North Korea, a country that Secretary of State Rex Tillerson has refused to engage in discussions, despite numerous offers by the Chinese. At other times, the Trump administration has suggested that military action against North Korea was imminent.
Korean Politics
Because of all these zigzags in U.S. policy, South Koreans perceive the Trump administration as irrational, self-centered, and impulsive. The demand for a large payment for THAAD has increased Moon Jae-in's skepticism of the system and boosted anti-American sentiment in the election. Moon is now openly critical of THAAD early deployment even in the face of conservative criticism.
The shift in Korean perceptions of the United States is driven by the complete lack of concern for procedure in the decision on THAAD. Acting president Hwang Kyo-ahn is not authorized to make such a critical decision. Also, former President Park Geun-hye agreed initially to THAAD without consulting with the National Assembly.
There has been literally no debate among legislators on THAAD. The issue is simply not a matter of a North Korean threat. China perceives THAAD as an effort to undermine its own defensive capabilities. Although experts can debate the fine points, deployment will trigger an arms race in Northeast Asia that could draw in Korea, Japan, Russia, and perhaps other nations. China currently has under 300 nuclear weapons (as opposed to the United States with almost 7,000). Worried that THAAD could neutralize this relatively small arsenal, China could increase that number to a thousand or more.
We do not know how the rapid deployment of THAAD was decided upon. Most likely it was an agreement reached between Kim Kwan-Jin, head of national security office in the Blue House, and Admiral Harry Harris, head of the US Pacific Command. Both are famous for their bellicose declarations and their close ties to military contractors. It seems less likely that Donald Trump was involved in the process.
But Donald Trump has just thrown oil on the fire with his recent comments that Korea had once been a part of China-according to Xi Jinping. He has eliminated all Asia experts from the State Department and has no one around him who has any expertise on the region. This lack of actual understanding combines with the astonishing capacity of the U.S. president to reverse himself on North Korea.
A New South Korean Policy?
A Moon administration is likely to pursue improved relations with North Korea, in contrast to the last ten years of conservative government. It will also encounter at least the same hostility that the Roh Moo-hyun administration encountered from the George W. Bush administration.
Moon is likely to try to bring back some version of Kim Daejung's "sunshine policy," which promoted diplomatic, economic, and cultural engagement with the North. Conservatives thought they'd put a stake through the heart of this engagement policy last year when they shut down the last vestige of cooperation, the Kaesong Industrial Complex, run jointly by the North and South. Such efforts to reopen dialog with North Korea will likely be combined with a push for the transfer of operational wartime control of the military to Korea over the next few years and a Korean foreign policy that is more independent of the United States.
In fact, Korea could well be the one of the most independent-minded of all the United States allies under a Moon administration. Obama's "strategic neglect" of North Korea and inaction in the face of nuclear tests has caused enormous frustration for South Korea. A Moon administration could forge its own policy toward the North that would be substantially different from Washington's.
North Korea is fully aware of the manner in which outside power overthrew governments in Libya and Iraq because they lacked sufficient deterrence. As a result, Pyongyang is unlikely to make any easy compromises, especially as Kim Jung-un has staked his legitimacy on the nuclear program as an assertion of national autonomy.
But for all the rhetoric of the need to stand up to North Korea, American engagement in Korea is in retreat. Increasingly China offers the real economic opportunities to Koreans, and Chinese language schools are popping up all over the place. By contrast, Citibank announced the closure of one-third of its branches in Korea in April, and the percentage of Americans among foreigners in Korea has declined significantly.
Astonishingly, in the face of threats of war with North Korea, the United States not only no longer has an ambassador to the Republic of Korea -- the last ambassador Mark Lippert was asked to step down on January 19 -- there is not even a candidate. Korea was essentially left out of the conversation between Trump and Shinzo Abe at the White House in February and also between Trump and Chinese president Xi Jinping at Mar-a-Lago. The failure of Secretary of State Rex Tillerson to have dinner with acting president Hwang Kyo-ahn when he visited Korea in March only added insult to injury.
Ultimately, the THAAD anti-missile system is part of a long-term relationship with the United States that dates back to the late nineteenth century. Overall, although North Korea is getting front-page coverage in the mainstream media, South Korea has not registered as a major player for the Trump administration. If steps are not taken to find common ground and engage Koreans about some other topic than the North Korean threat, there is a danger of a rise in anti-American sentiments and a corresponding drop in American influence.
Raekyong Lee is president of The Tomorrow, a leading progressive think tank in Seoul, Korea, dedicated to economic and security issues. He was deeply involved in the democracy movement in the 1970s and 1980s in Korea and writes frequently about international relations and politics.
|
|
|
May 01, 2017 | www.cnbc.com
THAAD deployment begins in South Korea on Tuesday, 7 Mar 2017China is lashing out at South Korea and Washington for the deployment of a powerful missile defense system known as the Terminal High Altitude Area Defense system, or THAAD, deposited at the Osan Air Base in South Korea on Monday evening.
The deployment of THAAD follows several ballistic missile tests by North Korea in recent months, including the launch of four missiles on Monday , three of which landed in the sea off the coast of Japan. Though THAAD would help South Korea protect itself from a North Korean missile attack, China is vocally protesting the deployment of the system, claiming it upsets the "strategic equilibrium" in the region because its radar will allow the United States to detect and track missiles launched from China.
North Korean provocations aside, THAAD's arrival on the Korean Peninsula comes amid heightened tensions between the new U.S. administration and China, as well as uncertainty surrounding the U.S. military's commitment to its security relationships in the region and around the world. Within that context, THAAD's deployment packs a significant amount of symbolic firepower alongside its battery of interceptor missiles.
Already there has been a blacklash. Liu Yuan, a retired Chinese general who is generally outspoken on Chinese security matters, wrote for China's state-run Global Times that the Chinese military could conduct a "surgical hard-kill operation that would destroy the target, paralyzing it and making it unable to hit back."
Though such military actions are unlikely, China has already forced the closing of 23 stores owned by Lotte, one of South Korea's huge family-run conglomerates (Lotte agreed to turn over a parcel of land in South Korea on which the THAAD system would be placed). State media has also encouraged Chinese citizens to boycott South Korean products, a move that, if effective, could rob major South Korean companies, like Samsung and Hyundai, of a massive consumer market.
South Korea is reportedly considering filing a complaint with the World Trade Organization over China's economic retaliation. The commercial ramifications of THAAD could still escalate further.
What can THAAD do?
THAAD is a relatively new addition to the U.S. military's missile defense arsenal. Produced by Lockheed Martin (and priced at more than $1 billion per system), THAAD consists of a battery of truck-launched interceptor missiles and a powerful X-band radar that can detect, track and target inbound missile threats.
In other words, THAAD can see enemy ballistic missiles coming and can knock them out of the sky as they plunge toward their targets. Unlike some missile interceptors that navigate into the proximity of a missile and then explode to destroy or deflect the incoming threat, THAAD's missiles simply slam into their targets head-on, destroying them purely through kinetic force.
THADD's military value is spelled out in its name. It intercepts ballistic missiles during their "terminal" phase - that is, when they have passed their apogee and begun falling toward their targets. They can intercept these missiles at very high altitudes, up to roughly 90 miles above Earth's surface. Unlike other missile defense systems, like the Patriot PAC-3 that are designed mainly to defend a particular patch of ground, THAAD's powerful AN/TPY-2 radar can both monitor and defend large areas from short- and medium-range missiles.There are a number of things THAAD cannot do, however. Given that its missiles do not contain a warhead, its batteries are fairly useless as an offensive weapon, a characteristic that some consider a feature from a political standpoint. In a statement announcing THAAD's deployment to South Korea, U.S Pacific Command was careful to note that "the THAAD system is a strictly defensive capability and it poses no threat to other countries in the region."
Moreover, THAAD is not designed to destroy missiles while they are boosting skyward, nor can it shoot down something like an intercontinental-range ballistic missile, or ICBM. (Intermediate and intercontinental range missiles travel far too fast for systems like THAAD to target and intercept.) In a scenario in which North Korea or China were to launch missiles bound for targets in the United States, THAAD batteries in South Korea and Japan would not be able to target those weapons.
A historical perspective
China has long vowed retaliation if the United States should deploy THAAD to South Korea, citing security concerns that center more on the radar than the interceptor missiles. THAAD's radar is powerful enough to peer into Chinese airspace, military officials there argue, allowing the United States to monitor Chinese missile tests and provide early warning of any Chinese missile launch, upsetting the strategic balance of power.
Following the election of Donald Trump to the U.S. presidency in November, one Chinese official called the potential deployment of THAAD a " political weather vane " for the new U.S. administration and its relationship with China.
"This marks a real act of courage on the part of the South Korean government, working with its American allies, to do what these two countries together feel is a necessary and appropriate action in the face of Chinese bullying." -Tom Karako, senior fellow, Center for Strategic and Int'l Studies
But as Dr. Jeffrey Lewis, director of the East Asia Nonproliferation Program at the Middlebury Institute of International Studies at Monterrey in California, points out, China's objection to THAAD rings somewhat hollow. Radar installations in Taiwan, Japan and even Qatar already have the capacity to peer into Chinese airspace, to say nothing of the many space-based satellites that provide missile tracking and early warning capabilities to the United States. "It's not that [China's objections] are irrational, but it's more about what the deployment symbolizes than the radar's actual capability," Lewis says.In other words, beyond its technical capability THAAD's deployment symbolizes further solidification of the military ties between the United States and South Korea, ties Beijing has sought to loosen for decades.
"I think the photo op really helped seal the deal for some of the political and assurance significance," Tom Karako, a senior fellow at the Center for Strategic and International Studies, says of the video released showing the first pieces of the THAAD system rolling off the C-17 at Osan on Monday evening. "This marks a real act of courage on the part of the South Korean government, working with its American allies, to do what these two countries together feel is a necessary and appropriate action in the face of Chinese bullying."
If THAAD is a political weather vane, Beijing now knows which way the wind is blowing. Why is this happening now?
The United States and South Korea declared their intention to deploy THAAD to South Korea last year (and have discussed the possibility going back as far as 2013), but China's staunch opposition to the deployment and other geopolitical considerations kept the United States from doing so.
One reason the United States and South Korea are moving to deploy THAAD now, Lewis says, is likely due to the fact that at least one of the major political stumbling blocks has been removed. South Korean president Park Geun-hye is currently embroiled in political scandal and facing impeachment, creating a unique political opportunity for the South Korean government.
"It's very controversial, the THAAD system," Lewis says. "And whoever comes after Park will have the system in place without the responsibility of having agreed to it." What lies ahead Consequences - intended and not - from the deployment of THAAD will continue to manifest themselves over the coming weeks and months. In terms of positive fallout, U.S.-based makers of missile defense systems like Lockheed Martin and Raytheon are positioned to benefit from growing ballistic missile threats across Asia, the Middle East and Europe - threats underscored by THAAD's deployment to South Korea.
A recent note to investors by Cowen and Co. defense analyst Roman Schweizer cites both Lockheed Martin (maker of THAAD) and Raytheon (maker of various interceptor missiles, as well as components of THAAD's radar and tracking systems) as likely beneficiaries of an ongoing uptick in global defense expenditures, in large part due to their missile defense technology.
However, one potential negative consequence of THAAD's deployment stems from the sense of complacency that such systems can foster. THAAD can soften the effect of a missile salvo, but it's not a silver bullet for either North Korean or Chinese ballistic missile arsenals that are both growing in size and sophistication.
"They're missiles, and this is missile defense, and for a lot of people that checks all the boxes," Lewis says. "The unintended consequence I can see is that you don't want the South Korean people to think this solves the North Korean missile problem, because it doesn't."
- By Clay Dillow, special to CNBC.com
|
|
|
Apr 25, 2017 | www.nakedcapitalism.com
Yves here. Even though some may try arguing that Hillary Clinton was discussing China's view of North and South Korea in her Goldman speech, it is naive to think that it is actually different from ours, despite the regular histrionics. As an anonymous reader at DownWithTyranny pointed out:Again, if you review our (and their) policies since '50 and think about it for only a minute, you realize both we and the Chinese want a split Korea. And we want it for much the same reasons. The North provides an annoyance to the US which inspires fear and stupidity AND billions spent on weapons to keep certain sectors rich and occupied.
Now that the south has emerged as an economic and manufacturing behemoth, the need to keep them separate is even more pronounced, for just the reasons enunciated.
By Gaius Publius , a professional writer living on the West Coast of the United States and frequent contributor to DownWithTyranny, digby, Truthout, and Naked Capitalism. Follow him on Twitter @Gaius_Publius , Tumblr and Facebook . GP article archive here . Originally published at DownWithTyranny
"We don't want a unified Korean peninsula We [also] don't want the North Koreans to cause more trouble than the system can absorb."
-Hillary Clinton, 2013, speech to Goldman SachsOur policy toward North Korea is not what most people think it is. We don't want the North Koreans to go away. In fact, we like them doing what they're doing; we just want less of it than they've been doing lately. If this sounds confusing, it's because this policy is unlike what the public has been led to assume. Thanks to something uncovered by WikiLeaks, the American public has a chance to be unconfused about what's really going on with respect to our policies in Korea.
This piece isn't intended to criticize that policy; it may be an excellent one. I'm just want to help us understand it better.
Our source for the U.S. government's actual Korean policy - going back decades really - is former Secretary of State Hillary Clinton. She resigned that position in February 2013 , and on June 4, 2013 she gave a speech at Goldman Sachs with Lloyd Blankfein present (perhaps on stage with her) in which she discussed in what sounds like a very frank manner, among many other things, the U.S. policy toward the two Korea and the relationship of that policy to China.
That speech and two others were sent by Tony Carrk of the Clinton campaign to a number of others in the campaign, including John Podesta. WikiLeaks subsequently released that email as part of its release of other Podesta emails (source email with attachments here ). In that speech, Clinton spoke confidentially and, I believe, honestly. What she said in that speech, I take her as meaning truthfully. There's certainly no reason for her to lie to her peers, and in some cases her betters, at Goldman Sachs. The entire speech reads like elites talking with elites in a space reserved just for them.
I'm not trying to impugn Clinton or WikiLeaks by writing this - that's not my intention at all. I just want to learn from what she has to say - from a position of knowledge - about the real U.S. policy toward North Korea. After all, if Goldman Sachs executives can be told this, it can't be that big a secret. We should be able to know it as well.
What Clinton's Speech Tells Us about U.S. Korea Policy
The WikiLeaks tweet is above. The entire speech, contained in the attachment to the email, is here . I've reprinted some of the relevant portions below, first quoting Ms. Clinton with some interspersed comments from me. Then, adding some thoughts about what this seems to imply about our approach to and relations with South Korea.
The Korea section of the Goldman Sachs speech starts with a discussion of China, and then Blankfein pivots to Korea. Blankfein's whole question that leads to the Clinton quote tweeted by WikiLeaks above (my emphasis throughout):
MR. BLANKFEIN: The Japanese - I was more surprised that it wasn't like that when you think of - all these different things. It's such a part of who they are, their response to Japan. If you bump into the Filipino fishing boats, then I think you really - while we're in the neighborhood [i.e., discussing Asia], the Chinese is going to help us or help themselves - what is helping themselves? North Korea? On the one hand they [the Chinese] wouldn't want - they don't want to unify Korea, but they can't really like a nutty nuclear power on their border. What is their interests and what are they going to help us do?
Clinton's whole answer is reprinted in the WikiLeaks tweet attachment (click through to the tweet and expand the embedded image to read it all). The relevant portions, for my purposes, are printed below. From the rest of her remarks, the context of Blankfein's question and Clinton's answer is the threat posed by a North Korean ICBM, not unlike the situation our government faces today.
MS. CLINTON: Well, I think [Chinese] traditional policy has been close to what you've described. We don't want a unified Korean peninsula, because if there were one South Korea would be dominant for the obvious economic and political reasons.
We [also] don't want the North Koreans to cause more trouble than the system can absorb . So we've got a pretty good thing going with the previous North Korean leaders [Kim Il-sung and Kim Jung-il]. And then along comes the new young leader [Kim Jung-un], and he proceeds to insult the Chinese. He refuses to accept delegations coming from them. He engages in all kinds of both public and private rhetoric, which seems to suggest that he is preparing himself to stand against not only the South Koreans and the Japanese and the Americans, but also the Chinese.
Translation - three points:
The U.S. prefers that Korea stay divided. If Korea were to unite, South Korea would be in charge, and we don't want South Korea to become any more powerful than it already is. We also don't want the trouble North Korea causes South Korea to extend beyond the region. We want it to stay within previously defined bounds. Our arrangement with the two previous North Korean leaders met both of those objectives. North Korea's new leader, ,Kim Jung-un, is threatening that arrangement.
It appears that China has the same interest in keeping this situation as-is that we do. That is, they want South Korea (and us) to have a Korean adversary, but they don't want the adversary acting out of acceptable bounds - coloring outside the lines laid down by the Chinese (and the U.S.), as it were. Clinton:
So the new [Chinese] leadership basically calls him [Kim Jung-un] on the carpet. And a high ranking North Korean military official has just finished a visit in Beijing and basically told [him, as a message from the Chinese]: Cut it out. Just stop it. Who do you think you are? And you are dependent on us [the Chinese], and you know it. And we expect you to demonstrate the respect that your father and your grandfather [Kim Jung-il, Kim Il-sung] showed toward us, and there will be a price to pay if you do not.
Now, that looks back to an important connection of what I said before. The biggest supporters of a provocative North Korea has been the PLA [the Chinese People's Liberation Army]. The deep connections between the military leadership in China and in North Korea has really been the mainstay of the relationship. So now all of a sudden new leadership with Xi and his team, and they're saying to the North Koreans - and by extension to the PLA - no. It is not acceptable. We don't need this [trouble] right now. We've got other things going on. So you're going to have to pull back from your provocative actions, start talking to South Koreans again about the free trade zones, the business zones on the border, and get back to regular order and do it quickly.
Now, we don't care if you occasionally shoot off a missile. That's good. That upsets the Americans and causes them heartburn, but you can't keep going down a path that is unpredictable . We don't like that. That is not acceptable to us.
So I think they're trying to reign Kim Jong in. I think they're trying to send a clear message to the North Korean military. They also have a very significant trade relationship with Seoul and they're trying to reassure Seoul that, you know, we're now on the case.
Clinton ends with a fourth point:
From the U.S. standpoint, the current problem is now on the Chinese to fix.
Clinton:
So they want to keep North Korea within their orbit. They want to keep it predictable in their view. They have made some rather significant statements recently that they would very much like to see the North Koreans pull back from their nuclear program. Because I and everybody else - and I know you had Leon Panetta here this morning. You know, we all have told the Chinese if they continue to develop this missile program and they get an ICBM that has the capacity to carry a small nuclear weapon on it, which is what they're aiming to do, we cannot abide that. Because they could not only do damage to our treaty allies, namely Japan and South Korea, but they could actually reach Hawaii and the west coast theoretically, and we're going to ring China with missile defense . We're going to put more of our fleet in the area.
So China, come on. You either control them or we're going to have to defend against them .
The four bullets above (three, and then one) give a very clear definition of longstanding U.S. policy toward the two Koreas. I think the only surprise in this, for us civilians, is that the U.S. doesn't want the Korean peninsula unified. So two questions: Why not? And, do the South Koreans know this? I'll offer brief answers below.
The "Great Game" In East Asia - Keeping the Korean "Tiger" in Check
South Korea is one of the great emerging nations in East Asia, one of the "Asian tigers," a manufacturing and economic powerhouse that's lately been turning into a technological and innovative powerhouse as well.
For example, one of just many, from Forbes :
Why South Korea Will Be The Next Global Hub For Tech Startups
American business has long led the way in high tech density or the proportion of businesses that engage in activities such as Internet software and services, hardware and semiconductors. The US is fertile ground for tech start-ups with access to capital and a culture that celebrates risk taking. Other countries have made their mark on the world stage, competing to be prominent tech and innovation hubs. Israel has been lauded as a start-up nation with several hundred companies getting funded by venture capital each year. A number of these companies are now being acquired by the likes of Apple, Facebook and Google. Finland and Sweden have attracted notice by bringing us Angry Birds and Spotify among others. But a new start-up powerhouse is on the horizon – South Korea . [ ]
In other words, South Korea has leaped beyond being a country that keeps U.S. tech CEOs wealthy - it's now taking steps that threaten that wealth itself. And not just in electronics; the biological research field - think cloning - is an area the South Koreans are trying to take a lead in as well.
It's easy to understand Ms. Clinton's - and the business-captured American government's - interest in making sure that the U.S. CEO class isn't further threatened by a potential doubling of the capacity of the South Korean government and economy. Let them (the Koreans) manufacture to their heart's content, our policy seems to say; but to threaten our lead in billionaire-producing entrepreneurship that's a bridge too far.
Again, this is Clinton speaking, I'm absolutely certain, on behalf of U.S. government policy makers and the elites they serve: We don't want a unified Korean peninsula, because if there were one, an already-strong South Korea would be dominant for obvious economic reasons.
As to whether the South Koreans know that this is our policy, I'd have to say, very likely yes. After all, if Clinton is saying this to meetings of Goldman Sachs executives, it can't be that big a secret. It's just that the South Korea leadership knows better than the North Korean leader how to handle it.
0 0 64 0 2 This entry was posted in China , Doomsday scenarios , Guest Post , Politics on April 25, 2017 by Yves Smith . Subscribe to Post Comments 41 comments Harshin like 1989 , April 25, 2017 at 1:00 amYves Smith Post author , April 25, 2017 at 2:45 amWeren't we scared shitless of the Japanese in the 80s, thinking they were gonna clean our clocks? Try not to get too worked up and overestimate the ability of a conformist society to bury us.
Larry , April 25, 2017 at 8:59 amIt's a lot more complicated than that. You forget that Japan was and is a military protectorate of the US. For instance, in the 1987 crash, the Fed called the Bank of Japan and told it to buy Treasuries. The BoJ told the Japanese banks to comply and they did.
The US ran the yen up via the Plaza Accords in 1985. Way up. They did succeed in denting Japanese exports to the US but it did squat for increasing US exports to Japan.
The US also forced rapid bank deregulation on Japan. It was like telling someone who ran a drayage company that they were really in the transportation business, giving them a 747, and telling them to fly it. I had Sumitomo Bank as a client when the deregulation was starting. They were (correctly) considered the best run bank in Japan. They didn't even have modern asset-liability management adequate to handle traditional retail and wholesale banking, let alone capital markets operations. The Japanese bubble and bust was in no small measure our doing.
oho , April 25, 2017 at 10:01 amWhile I certainly understand all of that about Japan, is it not the same case with South Korea? My understanding is that we have between 25-30,000 troops constantly stationed along the DMZ and within South Korea. I would presume we're also gladly selling the South Koreans military technology. And let's say that magically North and South Korea do reunite, what happens then with the Chinese border? Won't the Koreans still want to remain essentially a military protectorate during what would certainly be a messy reunification period so as to not have to worry about China working to undermine the process? I would say the US would have a major role in shaping how the reunification were to go and do it's best to keep the billionaire classes happy as can be.
PlutoniumKun , April 25, 2017 at 11:58 am> I would presume we're also gladly selling the South Koreans military technology.
There's a big govt-sponsored push to develop an indigenous Korean defense/aerospace industry. It's 0.5 – 1 generation behind the US (on paper), but more than sophisticated enough for export to developing nations.
>won't the Koreans still want to remain essentially a military protectorate
Not necessarily. Koreans don't view China as an existential threat/rival as US neocons do. China is Korea's #1 export market. And Korea has no existential threats in its neighborhood (ex. North Korea).
historically, the only invaders that came from the North were the Mongols and Khitans (a Manchurian tribe) not Han Chinese. (if i recall correctly)
carycat , April 25, 2017 at 1:24 pmThe Koreans have a very sophisticated domestic defence industry – and its already started to annoy the US as weapons like the T-50 trainer (a sort of cheap knock-off of the F-16) is attracting sales US companies were hoping for (it might even be in with a chance of winning the competition to supply the US with new supersonic trainers). They've a new tank purpose built for fighting in mountainous regions and is probably the best in the world for that role. But most of their weaponry is still US made.
Korea is the Poland of Asia – a country forever plagued by being sandwiched between two larger, nastier neighbours. In theory they should be friends with Japan, but old wounds haven't healed, and they are not particularly pro-Chinese historically either. They currently have a very delicate relationship with China – in theory very good, in practice, the Chinese are fond of reminding them of their weaker position, as with the current economic-boycott-in-all-but-name over the siting of THAAD missiles in Korea. I don't think they would look forward at all to the decisions required if they found themselves sharing a border with China. Like Japan, they find delegating hard geopolitical decisions to the US to be comfortable, it avoids having to face up to hard issues.
Altandmain , April 25, 2017 at 10:12 amWhat is not mentioned is that Japan is a bigger threat in terms of military aggression or economic competition to Korea. Plenty of Koreans still have 1st hand knowledge of how they were treated by invading Japanese troops.
Mark P. , April 25, 2017 at 1:10 amI would not underestimate Japan like that.
Eamonn Fingleton is perhaps the best writer about this.
https://www.forbes.com/sites/eamonnfingleton/2015/04/01/this-is-no-april-fool-japan-is-beating-the-pants-off-the-united-states/#51d39cea5b88It is dumb and frankly, quite racist to assume the Japanese are conformist. Many of the top materials sciences areas are now dominated by Japan. The US continues to run a deficit on Japan.
Oh and Japanese culture has its own following. Pokemon, Japanese anime, and a few things like Sushi are their own inventions.
Colonel Smithers , April 25, 2017 at 5:01 amEh. This post is very much 'Department of Breaking News: Rain is Wet.'
Two points -
[1] The bolded quote from Forbes - But a new start-up powerhouse is on the horizon – South Korea. [ ] - very much understates the situation. For instance, some tech cognoscenti like to talk about the stacks. See forex this book -
The Stack: On Software and Sovereignty
By Benjamin H. Bratton
https://mitpress.mit.edu/books/stackThe stacks are Amazon, Google, Amazon, Microsoft, Facebook and Apple. There is only one non-American stack and that's Samsung. That's not a small deal. South Korea has arrived.
[2] Gaius Publius claims: 'It's easy to understand Ms. Clinton's - and the business-captured American government's - interest in making sure that the U.S. CEO class isn't further threatened by a potential doubling of the capacity of the South Korean government and economy.'
No. If Mrs. Clinton and the U.S. CEO class are threatened, then the one thing they won't mind is the re-unification of the two Koreas.
That's because conservative estimates are that modernizing North Korea's economy could cost South Korea at least $500 billion. Per capita GDP in North Korea today is roughly $1,000-$1,200. Whereas South Korea's per capita GDP is $33,062, according to the World Bank.
The cost of German reunification was a trifle by comparison.
Marco , April 25, 2017 at 5:35 amThank you, Mark.
With regard to reunification and its cost, around the time of Kim Il Sung's passing and the mass outpouring of grief, it was suggested that the Northerners had psychological issues and were not of a type that could fit into the South's economy / society, so reunification was best kicked permanently into the long grass.
This sort of view has often been expressed about Ossis by Wessis in Germany. There is a joke that Wessis would like to rebuild the wall, but higher.
Colonel Smithers , April 25, 2017 at 5:43 amIf Stuxnet could wreak havoc with Iranian nuclear infrastructure I wonder what strange and delightful memetic goodies our tech-spook chefs could cook up against an Apple rival like Samsung. The Galaxy Note S7 debacle was WEIRD.
Larry , April 25, 2017 at 9:04 amThank you, Marco. Very good point.
PlutoniumKun , April 25, 2017 at 7:00 amI don't think the Galaxy Note fiasco was weird at all. The stories that emerged in the aftermath indicated that Samsung saw a gap to exploit in Apple's iPhone update cycle and they rushed their product to market with substandard QC. The battery was ultimately under physical stress that destabilized the Li batteries cells and leading to spontaneous combustion. Rushing substandard products to market to grab market isn't unique to Samsung by any stretch, but to think that America had anything to do with it is just pure speculation that ignores the reported facts.
Bill Smith , April 25, 2017 at 7:30 amYes, I was thinking that too, a fear of a united Korea as some sort of global competitor to the US doesn't really make sense in the short to medium term. It would certainly take up most of Koreas energies and spare resources at least 10 years to deal with it. And its hard to see how Korea's big companies would benefit so much, as they already have access to cheap manufacturing zones all over Asia. Anyway, a unified Korea would still be significantly smaller than in terms of population and economy than Japan.
If the US establishment is really against unification (I have to say, that my interpretation of whats written is that HRC was talking more about China's views), I'd say it would have more to do with it probably leading to the US having a weaker hold over the Korean peninsula, as a unified Korea would likely pursue a more independent foreign policy.
John B. , April 25, 2017 at 7:58 amI agree with you that the way HRC was speaking she was giving the Chinese view.
Our view for opposition would be a unified Korea led by what was North Korea.
visitor , April 25, 2017 at 9:48 amI agree with you that Clinton was summarizing China's view, not the U.S. view, when she said, "We don't want a unified Korean peninsula, because if there were one South Korea would be dominant for the obvious economic and political reasons." I suspect U.S. strategists would prefer a unified, South-dominated Korea on China's border, to help contain China better. The Pentagon could hope for even more military sales to a unified Korea pressed right up against China.
That said, getting from here to there would be so disruptive I doubt any U.S. administration would try to accomplish it. Though with Trump, who knows?
joe defiant , April 25, 2017 at 2:12 pmit would have more to do with it probably leading to the US having a weaker hold over the Korean peninsula
South Korea has a technologically advanced economy and a modern army. It increasingly designs and produces its own fighting equipment (e.g. tanks) instead of buying them from, crucially, the USA. In several decades of hard work, it built entire industries that can provide everything that is needed: steel industry, naval yards, automobile industry, electronics, telecommunications, software, etc.
A reunification would endow the fully up-to-date South Korean army backed by a roaring advanced economy with the one weapon it does not have: the atomic bomb.
Neither China, nor the USA, nor Japan, nor Russia want that.
Bill Smith , April 25, 2017 at 2:52 pmThis nails the situation IMHO. Everyone subjected to US imperialism dreams of nuclear power because the bargaining power it gives against US power. The US is doing more to promote other nations gaining nuclear weapons than it is in slowing it.
Mark P. , April 25, 2017 at 4:07 pmOther countries have had nuclear weapons and given them up. No reason to believe it couldn't happen in Korea if the South ended up with the whole thing.
Mark P. , April 25, 2017 at 3:42 pmAbsolutely correct.
redleg , April 25, 2017 at 8:01 pm'A reunification would endow the fully up-to-date South Korean army backed by a roaring advanced economy with the one weapon it does not have: the atomic bomb.'
No. The Norkean nukes are simple fission weapons that would provide no real technological or strategic advantage to any future re-unified Republic of both Koreas.
Despite what you've heard, no nation-state that seriously tried to build simple fission weapons ever failed to do so. This includes the likes of South Africa, which dismantled its weapons. Ukraine also gave up its weapons and other countries, like Sweden have curtailed such nuclear bomb programs.
These countries did this because it's not clear that in general nukes provide a strategic advantage in international relations, unless you're in a situation where you're surrounded by enemies like Israel or Pyongyang.
Fission weapons are simple once you've acquired the enriched uranium and plutonium. How simple can they be? So simple that in the case of the Fat Man device dropped on Nagasaki, the U.S. bomber crew kept the fissile components disassembled till they approached the target because the potential existed otherwise to go critical if there was, say, excessive air turbulence that shook the plane on the way to the target.
Basically, the Norkeans seem to be at the stage of boosted fission weapons, where (to simplify) some fusion fuel (deuterium) is wrapped around a fission device - what Edward Teller called an "Alarm Clock" type of bomb, and Andrei Sakharov a "Sloika" or "Layer Cake" device. In other words, the Norkeans have gotten no further than pre-1953 U.S. nuclear boosted fission technology - that is, no further than the U.S. sixty-four years ago.
Not that you want such weapons in Pyongyang's hands. Also, what makes a difference is that they can access 2017 rocket and computer guidance technology, so they can put these relatively bulky bombs atop rockets. But if you really want serious nuclear warheads of all sizes and capabilities, you need staged fusion devices - H-bomb technology, and it took minds of the caliber of von Neumann and Teller a decade to work out how to make those.
To sum up: if South Korea wanted to build mere fission weapons of the type that Pyongyang has it could do so immediately. So could Japan and others.
Mark P. , April 25, 2017 at 10:30 pm(Over)Reliance on electronics makes a first world economy and way of life enormously vulnerable to that old design though EMP.
Science Officer Smirnoff , April 25, 2017 at 8:02 pmTrue.
Mark P. , April 25, 2017 at 10:26 pm- H-bomb technology, and it took minds of the caliber of von Neumann and Teller a decade to work out how to make those.
Just a footnote: S Ulam should get at least equal billing with Teller. This is a notorious case of not giving credit where credit is due. Or discredit-when the future of humanity is at stake?
(Is it clear how much v Neumann had a hand in on that key problem?)
Colonel Smithers , April 25, 2017 at 4:56 amSorry re. Ulam. I was in a hurry.
Is it clear how much v Neumann had a hand in on that key problem?
In the sense that all the other guys ran their maths and theories by von Neumann, and Ulam in particular was best buddies with him. When it came time in 1953, post-Ivy Mike, to do the road show presentation to the U.S. Air Force to tell them that in future H-bombs could be built small enough to make ICBMs feasible, it was von Neumann and Teller who made the presentation.
Von Neumann also had the clout on the AEC and elsewhere by then to make it happen, too.
Kurtismayfield , April 25, 2017 at 7:39 amThank you for this clarification, Yves. Splendid, as always.
This issue reminds me of attitudes towards Germany in / around 1989 – 90. You may recall Thatcher's trip / plea to Moscow to prevent unification. France came up with a different way of "containing" Germany I remember particular comments about the combination of wirtschaftwunder West Germany and what was then considered the Warsaw Pact / Comecon's best performer, including in intelligence, East Germany. The musings also stretched to sport, West Germany being good at football and East Germany at athletics, and, again, what a pairing that would be.
With regard to Sumitomo, former colleagues who worked there (in the 1990s) say similar, but don't mention US interference. Did not Sumitomo and Hawai'i's Kamehameha, ahem, bail out Goldman Sachs soon after the Tequila crisis?
barefoot charley , April 25, 2017 at 10:01 amGerman reunification was a threat to the other states of Europe, and history has shown that the threat was real. Look at their economic domination of the EU. I don't think a unified Korea is a threat to anyone. Perhaps the US laments that it is losing a semi-client state, and they prefer the "let's bribe the North Koreans every five years" strategy that worked with the previous regime.
I am surprised that Russia does get more involved; there is a shared border with North Korea. Maybe they don't care if it is a Chinese client state or a neutral reunified Korea next door.
Susan the other , April 25, 2017 at 1:55 pmAs the great French postwar litterateur/politicien Paul Mauriac said, "I love Germany so much I'm glad there are two of them."
jwwz , April 25, 2017 at 5:08 amFrom 1919 right up to Germany's blitz across Europe, Churchill was maneuvering to turn Germany's aggression eastward. I find it interesting that no one is analyzing Russia's reaction to NK's aggressiveness because it could well be that anti-Russian sentiment here in the US has considered turning NK inland, against eastern Siberia. It could also be that NK's nuclear capabilities are already neutered by Russian jamming technology. But still, the Russian have been very quiet. Allowing the reunification of the Koreas would entail a new constitution and new international treaties and agreements which would all serve to tame NK. It's just a piddly little state.
Bill Smith , April 25, 2017 at 7:18 amLong-term, however, German reunification also provided the new Germany with cheap labor which was used to discipline its own workers and boost exports in order to undercut its neighbors/competitors, something I bet South Korean chaebol wouldn't mind.
Reunification also brings into play proliferation issues. The ROK for many years had a nuclear arms program (enriching uranium as recently as 2000), and DPRK tech, however stone age it is in comparison, adds considerable weight to this issue. A reunified Korea with nukes is absolutely not something China or the US wants.
Dwight , April 25, 2017 at 8:06 amThatcher was concerned that German unification would threaten Gorbachev's political survival. Page 315, 'The President, The Pope and The Prime Minister'.
This is explained in more details in published parts of Horst Telchuk diary (advisor to Helmut Kohl). make sure democracy takes hold in Eastern Europe before Germany unites otherwise push back on and or by the Soviet Union
Further along in the book it says Mitterrand was passionately opposed to German unification in private but much more circumspect in public.
Quite Likely , April 25, 2017 at 9:42 amWhen Clinton said "We don't want a unified Korean Peninsula" and "We don't want the North Koreans to cause more trouble than the system can absorb," she was speaking as the Chinese, not the U.S. Clinton switched to the third person "the Chinese" in the same paragraph, which may explain the confusion. The U.S. may fear economic competition from a unified Korea, but the main concern of the U.S. is losing a pretext for military bases on China's (and Russia's) border.
tegnost , April 25, 2017 at 11:09 amInteresting stuff, but yeah this is pretty obviously Clinton talking about China not wanting a united Korea. Maybe she / other US policymakers have that same preference, but there's no evidence they do in this speech. It's obvious why China wouldn't want a strong American allied Korea on its border. American tech companies being concerned about South Korean competition being more of a threat if they absorbed the North is much less plausible.
Painter's Drunk , April 25, 2017 at 9:48 amok then what do clinton and goldman sachs want if she's telling the chinese view? American tech companies, indeed all american companies want to be protected from competition the world over, see the TPP, see ISDS Clinton defenders seem to be unable to see past her smartly pragmatic views into the fact that she carries water for the aforementioned goldman sachs, who if you haven't noticed basically run the gov't for both parties, and what they want is to make the most money with the least risk and they have no qualms about creating conflict, nurturing conflict, and sowing conflict if it means there is an easy competition free path to profit. Couldn't we just stop with the reading of tea leaves with clinton? All of the parsing about how she said something but that wasn't what she meant, especially when what she says is power is the most important thing, we don't care who gets hurt, unless it's one of us, the acceptable elite, who eat babies with their oatmeal. If you want to tell me what clinton thinks with citations that ould be great, but spare me the malarkey that you know what she didn't mean in her statements. Probably the main reason she lost is because she and her supporters could not say what she stood for. What does she stand for in this case?
No Telling , April 25, 2017 at 10:37 amFolks:
I think this sort policy – the policy of "Lets you and him fight" has parallels in domestic policy.
Often referred to as "Wedge " issues. The center can much more easily control things if the proper buttons are pushed –
This of any issue – guns, women's health, welfare, food stamps (SNAP), and so on – the list is long –
Each side has proponents who can easily be influenced much like Pavlov's dog, to vote, contribute, and so forth. And these are deliberate manipulations to keep the center in power – nothing more.
The elites use this power to continue the looting.
Ask any Congress person.
Boris Vian , April 25, 2017 at 11:22 amEnough hate to go around, so no telling.
Teddy selling Korea to Japan, and hosing over the Czar.
http://historynewsnetwork.org/article/121083China & Korea border/sea lane disputes
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/worldnews/asia/china/12065626/Beijing-lays-claim-to-South-Korean-waters.html
https://chinaperspectives.revues.org/806
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Paektu_Mountain
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gando_ConventionIn summary, love / hate relationships, but toward the USA it is mostly hate.
neighbor7 , April 25, 2017 at 12:04 pmGood article- thanks for posting this. I don't fault the strategy here, but I think that our leaders need to do more to be this open with the American public and not just bankers.
HAL , April 25, 2017 at 1:04 pm"I'm not trying to impugn . . . WikiLeaks by writing this."
To even suggest the possibility, while making use of their tremendous resources, has a hint of the schizophrenia of mainstream media re Wikileaks.
Anon , April 25, 2017 at 4:14 pmThis seems like a strained reading of the plain text of the statements:
Well, I think [Chinese] traditional policy has been close to what you've described. We don't want a unified Korean peninsula, because if there were one South Korea would be dominant for the obvious economic and political reasons.
The We here clearly refers to China - China doesn't want a unified Korea because it thinks it would be one big South Korea. This is exactly the sort of groundbreaking revelation that we have all come to expect from Hillary Clinton. Then later on in that same quote, she talks about We don't mind if you shoot off the occasional missile and that's good, again, using the same rhetorical technique (where "We" is the PLA).
Finding basically no support for your thesis in the quotes, you then tack on some nonsense about how the US elites need North Korea because Google is afraid of Naver or whatever. Japan is within missile range, has over 2x as many people and a 50% higher GDP per capita, and seems not to be much of a threat. It just doesn't make sense that the US as afraid of the competition from a unified Korea, which would have only 25m more people than South Korea, basically all of whom are starving and crazy. Look what it cost Germany to unify, with much less of a disparity.
There are a lot of reasons why the US might favor a divided Korea: an excuse to maintain a massive military base a few hundred miles from Beijing, or military spending and warmongering generally. But none of them are supported by this primary source, which is just a bland recitation of conventional wisdom, which, along with fealty, is all you get for $250,000.
Mark P. , April 25, 2017 at 10:28 pmAgreed – my reading was also that the "we" is referring to China.
H. Alexander Ivey , April 25, 2017 at 9:12 pmOf course it is.
Well, I've seen it all. When people say Hillary meant China when she said "we" and there is no clear indication that "we" doesn't refer to the USA, when the actions of the last 50 years support the interpretation that "we" means the USA and not China, when "we" as in China would point away from the misdeeds of Hillary as SecState, then I've seen it all.
|
|
|
Apr 24, 2017 | www.theamericanconservative.com
Speaking of Zen takes, check out my latest column at The Week , which is about how Trump's sloth and incompetence could wind up saving us from war with China:Students of international affairs who take the long view have for some time been worried about the trajectory of U.S.-China relations. While in theory a cooperative relationship would be most beneficial to both parties, in practice dominant powers and rising challengers rarely are able to work out a fruitful accommodation. Instead, most often the two stumble into a conflict that devastates both countries' interests.
Graham Allison calls the underlying theory - detailed in his new book - the Thucydides Trap. So long as both powers rationally assume that the dominant power aims to maintain its supremacy, even accommodative policies will be interpreted as a way to get the rising power to settle for less than it might achieve by revisionist agitations. So if the dominant power is accommodative, the rising power will take advantage, provoking a reversal by the dominant power and a confrontation. But if the dominant power is confrontational and tries to encircle the rising power, it will provoke the rising power to break out - and in the meantime the dominant power will exhaust its resources more quickly than the rising power does, accelerating the power transition.
So how can war be avoided?
Allison's prescription is for robust communication along with a willingness on the part of the dominant power to think big in terms of how the international order will have to change to accommodate the rising power. Rather than try to prevent or limit the power transition, the dominant power has to facilitate it, get the rising power to understand that this is in fact the policy, and thereby forge a cooperative path through the transition that gives both powers an appropriate role to their new relative power position. I've argued in this space before that Korea would be a perfect place to try to achieve those twin goals.
The Obama administration's much-touted but never-completed "pivot" to Asia could be understood as an effort to preserve America's position within the context of partnership with China - or as an effort to contain China and maintain American supremacy. Strengthened alliances with countries like Australia and Vietnam were intended to discourage China from adventurism in its near-abroad, while the Trans-Pacific Partnership was designed to counter Chinese economic leadership in the region. On the other hand, the TPP did not explicitly exclude China, and it is plausible to think that its ultimate purpose was more to keep America in than to keep China out. Obama clearly saw a value in working with the Chinese rather than merely against them, but he also recognized that China intended to challenge America's interests in the western Pacific and aimed to counter it.
We'll never know whether the Obama strategy would have been a way out of the Thucydides Trap, or whether it would have led us right into it. We'll never know because President Trump has trashed the strategy entirely, pulling out of the TPP , musing about abandoning the one-China policy , threatening unilateral action in Korea , and calling for tariffs on Chinese manufacturers. His initial policy mix looked like it was premised on the assumption that war was inevitable, so we might as well make it happen on our terms.
But a funny thing happened on the way to the battlefield: The Chinese realized we were bluffing.
Our military options in Korea aren't really viable , and Trump has proved that he knows they aren't by his eagerness to get the Chinese to handle the problem - eagerness so overwhelming it has already led him to abandon a core campaign theme, confronting the Chinese on trade . Trump has already reaffirmed the one-China policy. And he has not only gratuitously insulted key allies , but demonstrated tactical incompetence in his communications about the mission of the aircraft carrier Carl Vinson . Watching Trump, America's Asian allies surely are questioning our reliability and basic competence, while the Chinese surely are far less worried that America will be able to restrain their rise even if we desire to do so.
Normally, this would provoke the rising power to be more confrontational. But if the Chinese really understand Trump, they'll see that they could get far more by picking his pocket than by mugging him. Trump is transparently eager for a deal - almost any deal. The Chinese could probably ask for the moon and the stars - or control of the South China Sea - in exchange for minor promises - to let their currency rise a bit (which has already happened), to build a few manufacturing plants in Ohio, to get North Korea to restrain itself for a few months. Why wouldn't the Chinese try to get what they want at the table rather than taking the risk of a confrontation?
Of course, normally a political leader would pay a gruesome price for cutting a terrible deal with a key rival. If Barack Obama or Hillary Clinton had rolled over for the Chinese, the Republican Party would go ballistic. But Donald Trump's brand is all about making America great again. His most vocal liberal critics, meanwhile, are more concerned that he's going to stumble into World War III than that he is going to be insufficiently firm in defending America's interests. While, as with Syria, they may support any military actions he does take, they are unlikely to provoke him into backing up his blustery threats with actual shows of force.
Paradoxically, Trump could achieve by sloth and incompetence what is very difficult for dominant powers to accept: a transition out of that dominant position.
Read the whole thing there .
|
|
|
Apr 20, 2017 | www.unz.com
Washington has never made any effort to conceal its contempt for North Korea. In the 64 years since the war ended, the US has done everything in its power to punish, humiliate and inflict pain on the Communist country. Washington has subjected the DPRK to starvation, prevented its government from accessing foreign capital and markets, strangled its economy with crippling economic sanctions, and installed lethal missile systems and military bases on their doorstep.
Negotiations aren't possible because Washington refuses to sit down with a country which it sees as its inferior. Instead, the US has strong-armed China to do its bidding by using their diplomats as interlocutors who are expected to convey Washington's ultimatums as threateningly as possible. The hope, of course, is that Pyongyang will cave in to Uncle Sam's bullying and do what they are told.
But the North has never succumbed to US intimidation and there's no sign that it will. Instead, they have developed a small arsenal of nuclear weapons to defend themselves in the event that the US tries to assert its dominance by launching another war.
There's no country in the world that needs nuclear weapons more than North Korea. Brainwashed Americans, who get their news from FOX or CNN, may differ on this point, but if a hostile nation deployed carrier strike-groups off the coast of California while conducting massive war games on the Mexican border (with the express intention of scaring the shit of people) then they might see things differently. They might see the value of having a few nuclear weapons to deter that hostile nation from doing something really stupid.And let's be honest, the only reason Kim Jong Un hasn't joined Saddam and Gadhafi in the great hereafter, is because (a)– The North does not sit on an ocean of oil, and (b)– The North has the capacity to reduce Seoul, Okinawa and Tokyo into smoldering debris-fields. Absent Kim's WMDs, Pyongyang would have faced a preemptive attack long ago and Kim would have faced a fate similar to Gadhafi's. Nuclear weapons are the only known antidote to US adventurism.
The American people –whose grasp of history does not extend beyond the events of 9-11 - have no idea of the way the US fights its wars or the horrific carnage and destruction it unleashed on the North. Here's a short refresher that helps clarify why the North is still wary of the US more than 60 years after the armistice was signed. The excerpt is from an article titled "Americans have forgotten what we did to North Korea", at Vox World:
"In the early 1950s, during the Korean War, the US dropped more bombs on North Korea than it had dropped in the entire Pacific theater during World War II. This carpet bombing, which included 32,000 tons of napalm, often deliberately targeted civilian as well as military targets, devastating the country far beyond what was necessary to fight the war. Whole cities were destroyed, with many thousands of innocent civilians killed and many more left homeless and hungry .
According to US journalist Blaine Harden: "Over a period of three years or so, we killed off - what - 20 percent of the population," Air Force Gen. Curtis LeMay, head of the Strategic Air Command during the Korean War, told the Office of Air Force History in 1984. Dean Rusk, a supporter of the war and later secretary of state, said the United States bombed "everything that moved in North Korea, every brick standing on top of another." After running low on urban targets, U.S. bombers destroyed hydroelectric and irrigation dams in the later stages of the war, flooding farmland and destroying crops
"On January 3 at 10:30 AM an armada of 82 flying fortresses loosed their death-dealing load on the city of Pyongyang Hundreds of tons of bombs and incendiary compound were simultaneously dropped throughout the city, causing annihilating fires, the transatlantic barbarians bombed the city with delayed-action high-explosive bombs which exploded at intervals for a whole day making it impossible for the people to come out onto the streets. The entire city has now been burning, enveloped in flames, for two days. By the second day, 7,812 civilians houses had been burnt down. The Americans were well aware that there were no military targets left in Pyongyang
The number of inhabitants of Pyongyang killed by bomb splinters, burnt alive and suffocated by smoke is incalculable Some 50,000 inhabitants remain in the city which before the war had a population of 500,000." ("Americans have forgotten what we did to North Korea", Vox World)
The United States killed over 2 million people in a country that posed no threat to US national security. Like Vietnam, the Korean War was just another muscle-flexing exercise the US periodically engages in whenever it gets bored or needs some far-flung location to try out its new weapons systems. The US had nothing to gain in its aggression on the Korean peninsula, it was mix of imperial overreach and pure unalloyed viciousness the likes of which we've seen many times in the past. According to the Asia-Pacific Journal:
ORDER IT NOW"By the fall of 1952, there were no effective targets left for US planes to hit. Every significant town, city and industrial area in North Korea had already been bombed. In the spring of 1953, the Air Force targeted irrigation dams on the Yalu River, both to destroy the North Korean rice crop and to pressure the Chinese, who would have to supply more food aid to the North. Five reservoirs were hit, flooding thousands of acres of farmland, inundating whole towns and laying waste to the essential food source for millions of North Koreans.10 Only emergency assistance from China, the USSR, and other socialist countries prevented widespread famine." ("The Destruction and Reconstruction of North Korea, 1950 – 1960", The Asia-Pacific Journal, Japan Focus)
Repeat: "Reservoirs, irrigation dams, rice crops, hydroelectric dams, population centers" all napalmed, all carpet bombed, all razed to the ground. Nothing was spared. If it moved it was shot, if it didn't move, it was bombed. The US couldn't win, so they turned the country into an uninhabitable wastelands. "Let them starve. Let them freeze.. Let them eat weeds and roots and rodents to survive. Let them sleep in the ditches and find shelter in the rubble. What do we care? We're the greatest country on earth. God bless America."
This is how Washington does business, and it hasn't changed since the Seventh Cavalry wiped out 150 men, women and children at Wounded Knee more than century ago. The Lakota Sioux at Pine Ridge got the same basic treatment as the North Koreans, or the Vietnamese, or the Nicaraguans, or the Iraqis and on and on and on and on. Anyone else who gets in Uncle Sam's way, winds up in a world of hurt. End of story.
The savagery of America's war against the North left an indelible mark on the psyche of the people. Whatever the cost, the North cannot allow a similar scenario to take place in the future. Whatever the cost, they must be prepared to defend themselves. If that means nukes, then so be it. Self preservation is the top priority.
Is there a way to end this pointless standoff between Pyongyang and Washington, a way to mend fences and build trust?
Of course there is. The US just needs to start treating the DPRK with respect and follow through on their promises. What promises?
The promise to built the North two light-water reactors to provide heat and light to their people in exchange for an end to its nuclear weapons program. You won't read about this deal in the media because the media is just the propaganda wing of the Pentagon. They have no interest in promoting peaceful solutions. Their stock-in-trade is war, war and more war.
The North wants the US to honor its obligations under the 1994 Agreed Framework. That's it. Just keep up your end of the goddamn deal. How hard can that be? Here's how Jimmy Carter summed it up in a Washington Post op-ed (November 24, 2010):
" in September 2005, an agreement reaffirmed the basic premises of the 1994 accord. (The Agreed Framework) Its text included denuclearization of the Korean Peninsula, a pledge of non-aggression by the United States and steps to evolve a permanent peace agreement to replace the U.S.-North Korean-Chinese cease-fire that has been in effect since July 1953 . Unfortunately, no substantive progress has been made since 2005
"This past July I was invited to return to Pyongyang to secure the release of an American, Aijalon Gomes, with the proviso that my visit would last long enough for substantive talks with top North Korean officials. They spelled out in detail their desire to develop a denuclearized Korean Peninsula and a permanent cease-fire, based on the 1994 agreements and the terms adopted by the six powers in September 2005 .
"North Korean officials have given the same message to other recent American visitors and have permitted access by nuclear experts to an advanced facility for purifying uranium. The same officials had made it clear to me that this array of centrifuges would be 'on the table' for discussions with the United States, although uranium purification – a very slow process – was not covered in the 1994 agreements.
" Pyongyang has sent a consistent message that during direct talks with the United States, it is ready to conclude an agreement to end its nuclear programs, put them all under IAEA inspection and conclude a permanent peace treaty to replace the 'temporary' cease-fire of 1953 . We should consider responding to this offer. The unfortunate alternative is for North Koreans to take whatever actions they consider necessary to defend themselves from what they claim to fear most: a military attack supported by the United States, along with efforts to change the political regime."
("North Korea's consistent message to the U.S.", President Jimmy Carter, Washington Post)
Most people think the problem lies with North Korea, but it doesn't. The problem lies with the United States; it's unwillingness to negotiate an end to the war, its unwillingness to provide basic security guarantees to the North, its unwillingness to even sit down with the people who –through Washington's own stubborn ignorance– are now developing long-range ballistic missiles that will be capable of hitting American cities.
How dumb is that?
The Trump team is sticking with a policy that has failed for 63 years and which clearly undermines US national security by putting American citizens directly at risk. AND FOR WHAT?
To preserve the image of "tough guy", to convince people that the US doesn't negotiate with weaker countries, to prove to the world that "whatever the US says, goes"? Is that it? Is image more important than a potential nuclear disaster?
Relations with the North can be normalized, economic ties can be strengthened, trust can be restored, and the nuclear threat can be defused. The situation with the North does not have to be a crisis, it can be fixed. It just takes a change in policy, a bit of give-and-take, and leaders that genuinely want peace more than war.
MIKE WHITNEY lives in Washington state. He is a contributor to Hopeless: Barack Obama and the Politics of Illusion (AK Press). Hopeless is also available in a Kindle edition. He can be reached at [email protected] .
|
|
|
Apr 20, 2017 | www.theamericanconservative.com
Lindsey Graham outdoes himself in warmongering with a new call for attacking North Korea:
"Would you be for a preemptive strike?" Today Show host Willie Geist asked the South Carolina Republican. "If that's what it would take," Graham replied resolutely.
"It would be terrible but the war would be over here (there), wouldn't be here," Graham continued. " It would be bad for the Korean Peninsula. It would be bad for China. It would be bad for Japan, be bad for South Korea. It would be the end of North Korea. But what it would not do is hit America [bold mine-DL] and the only way it could ever come to America is with a missile."
Graham routinely supports the most irresponsible, dangerous, and immoral policies, so it is not surprising that he is in favor of doing this. The striking thing about his answer is how cavalier he is about calling for starting a war that he admits would be disastrous for everyone in the region.
Leave aside that he completely forgets about the tens of thousands of Americans stationed in South Korea that would come under immediate attack in retaliation for the so-called "preemptive strike" he wants. Note that the action he's talking about wouldn't actually be "preemptive," but would be an unprovoked attack and the start of a major war. Leave it to Graham to find a way to find a North Korea policy so horrible that it puts the U.S. in the wrong.
The senator casually contemplates a course of action that would likely lead to the deaths of hundreds of thousands of people and destabilize the region for years to come and he shrugs it off by saying the war "wouldn't be here." It doesn't shock me that a professional warmonger doesn't care about the effects of this preferred policies, but it is a bit of a surprise that he is so open about his callous disregard for the lives of civilians and soldiers in South Korea and Japan who would pay the price for the act of aggression he supports.
The next time you hear Graham feign concern for lives lost in some foreign conflict or pretend to be on the side of our allies, remember this answer and realize that his only desire is to get the U.S. into more unnecessary wars regardless of the consequences.
Posted in foreign policy , politics . Tagged North Korea , Lindsey Graham , Japan , South Korea .
|
|
|
Apr 20, 2017 | www.cnn.com
North Korea is a country prepared for conflict.Still technically at war with its southern neighbor, ordinary North Koreans are warned to be in a state of constant vigilance to threats from the outside, particularly from the US. Those fears seemed to be confirmed this month, after US President Donald Trump launched a surprise strike on a Syrian airfield and dispatched a naval battle group -- which he described as " an armada " -- to northern Asia.
Trump's saber-rattling -- he has accused Pyongyang of "looking for trouble" -- is familiar to consumers of North Korean state media, who have been warned for decades by their leaders of imminent US attack and attempted regime change. "The aggressive acts of war on the part of the United States are getting increasingly reckless," a North Korean official told CNN in Pyongyang this week. Read More "In response, we will continue to strengthen our self-defense capability."
Tragic history
Looking at the country's history, paranoia over a potential US attack is understandable. It's estimated that during the Korean War, American planes dropped some 625,000 tons of bombs on North Korea -- more than during the entire Pacific theater of World War II -- including 32,000 tons of napalm. Around 600,000 North Korean and 1 million South Korean civilians were killed , along with hundreds of thousands of troops. Curtis LeMay, an air force commander at the time, estimated in 1988 that US planes killed 20% of the population "over a period of three years or so." According to Blaine Harden , author of "The Great Leader and the Fighter Pilot," Kim Jong Un, like his father and grandfather before him, "(has) kept memories of the war and the bombing terrifyingly fresh. State media warn that, sooner or later, the Americans will strike again." To this end, North Korea maintains a massive standing army of more than 1.2 million soldiers, with millions more paramilitary troops and reservists, according to the International Institute for Strategic Studies (IISS). South Korea also maintains a high state of alert, with more than 500,000 people in its armed forces, IISS says, plus the thousands of US troops deployed in the country.
The North Korean constitution states that "national defense is the supreme duty and honor of citizens," and the country is governed by the "songun" -- or military-first -- policy, which places the armed forces above all else. In recent years that has meant huge investment in the development and deployment of nuclear weapons and long-range ballistic missiles.
Paranoia
Intense focus on the military in a cripplingly poor country like North Korea can cause much hardship, but Pyongyang justifies its policies based on a narrative of imminent threat from foreign forces. That narrative was on clear display this week, with North Korean state media -- which usually tightly controls information about the outside world -- going big on the deployment of the USS Carl Vinson and Trump's surprise strike in Syria.
One Pyongyang resident told CNN, "we're at the brink of war, but if that happens, we'll all go to the front lines to fight the Americans."
The regime has held up Trump's actions in Syria, as well as those of his predecessors in Iraq and Afghanistan, as justification for seeking to further the North Korean nuclear weapons program, which it claims is vital for defense. "Previous US administrations have been attacking those countries who haven't gotten nuclear weapons, and the Trump administration is no different from previous US governments in pinpointing those non-nuclear states," a North Korean official told CNN.Pyongyang fears that if it was not nuclear armed, it would suffer the same fate as Syria and plunge into chaos and civil war.
Relative calm
South of the border, the situation is much different. On Tuesday, officials sought to reassure South Koreans that the US would not take unilateral action against North Korea without consulting Seoul. "The United States makes it clear that it will not take a new policy or measure without consultations with us," South Korean Foreign Ministry spokesman Cho June-hyuck told reporters.
Defense Ministry spokesman Moon Sang-gyun warned people against being "blinded by exaggerated assessments on the security situation of the Korean Peninsula." Moon Jae-in, leader of the opposition Democratic Party and frontrunner to be the country's next President, said on Facebook that there "should never be a pre-emptive strike without South Korean consent." "Neighboring countries are taking advantage of the absence of a president in South Korea to try to exclude us and handle issues on the Korean Peninsula according to their own understanding," Moon said.
The country's former President, Park Geun-hye, was impeached after a corruption scandal. On the streets of Seoul, South Koreans who spoke to CNN were far less worried about a potential of war than their northern neighbors. "I do feel uneasy about North Korea provoking war," said Jeon Hyung-min, 26. "But I don't think a US strike would happen and if North Korea can judge the situation, they will not continue any armed provocation for now." Seo Deok-il, in his 70s, said he was "not anxious" about the news. "I don't think war will break out," he said. "If I was scared, I would have immigrated to another country."
CNN's Paula Hancocks and Jeung-un Kim contributed reporting from Seoul, South Korea. Will Ripley reported from Pyongyang, North Korea. James Griffiths reported and wrote from Hong Kong.
|
|
|
Apr 17, 2017 | www.moonofalabama.org
Anon1 | Apr 14, 2017 9:18:34 AM | 1
Outraged | Apr 14, 2017 9:30:57 AM | 2Isnt it amazing, the media in the west will always (ALWAYS!) be there for western nations when they want to wage a war, year after year. And then they say that we, who protest and expose them we are somehow the propagandists and disinformation agents?!
As b show, North Korea is the rational, but no one in our "free" western media brings these fact up.
No wonder western populations dont have any faith in their states and media.
I really hope North Korea put an end to this by standing tall, the pathetic China have backed away apparently..
Bravo b. Bravo.Hoarsewhisperer | Apr 14, 2017 9:50:19 AM | 3Another key consideration from a strategic military perspective, re the massive extensive military 'exercises' by US/SK annually is such can and have been used historically in war to create a sense of routine & normalcy, so if the Nth should be complacent, and its been going on for decades, a surprise attack can be launched and have devastating effects, even thought the Nth is on 'annual' 'alert'.
Maintaining heightened readiness, to Stand To! , stand ready for an attack, especially daily before dawn and prior to & after sunset, bayonets fixed, eye-peeled, adrenaline pumping, day after day, when the extended 'exercises' run, year after year after year is very difficult psychologically for the troops involved, corrosive of morale and discipline, and the Empire is very cognizant of this indeed.
Anon1 | Apr 14, 2017 9:18:34 AM | 1Jeff Kaye | Apr 14, 2017 10:04:05 AM | 4I really hope North Korea put an end to this by standing tall, the pathetic China have backed away apparently..
China doesn't have the option of backing away because a North Korea threatened by AmeriKKKa is also a China threatened by AmeriKKKa. I hope Trump knows what he's doing because the Chinese most certainly do know what they're doing.
Thank you, b!BRF | Apr 14, 2017 10:07:06 AM | 5The pressure to capitulate to the US government on this issue is immense. The propaganda relentless. For over 64 years the American people have been living the Big Lie.
The oozing sore of a Cold War that never ended, that was really a Hot War for millions, now threatens to metastasize into Total War. I cannot see how this ends well for any of us, mainly due to the intransigence and irrationality of the US ruling class, who do not care how much blood they shed.
The USA as representing western elites have never signed off on the Korean War as a truce and cessation of hostilities but not a peace treaty is the current situation. This war continues and is being pursued by other means, mainly financial and with sanctions, by the west and its South Korean proxies.Mark Stoval | Apr 14, 2017 10:11:29 AM | 6The imposition of a state of tension by the west is all the west seems capable of with the result in the current situation and any time a solution is proposed that could lead to a lessening of tensions the west either sabotages or outright rejects the initiative.
This on going policy by the west is of course aimed at its geo-political adversaries in China and Russia as allies of the North Korean nation. The only fix that I can see is an economic collapse in the west that leads to a pull back from western imperial outposts as they become too expensive to maintain. This can only take place with the demise of the Federal Reserve Note (USD) as the world reserve currency which is printable in any amount the western elites desire in maintaining their grip and domination through imperial dictate over the rest of the world. End this financial death grip and the rest follows very very quickly.
No small country is safe from the evil empire (USA) if they don't have nuclear weapons. Witness what happened to Iraq (and others) who had no weapons of mass destruction. (even though USA claimed they did)stumpy | Apr 14, 2017 10:13:43 AM | 7The USA has always believed the myth that WW2 saved the economy from the Great Depression and that the country would have slide back into depression without a war to fight --- hence the cold war and all the CIA wars ever since. Then came the "destroy the middle east" for the sake of Israel. (or oil or whatever)
The USA remains today the greatest impediment to world peace that there is. The USA may set off nuclear war and the destruction of all civilization at some point.
God help us all.
Dead on, b.Anon1 | Apr 14, 2017 10:15:53 AM | 8If you parse Obama's Nobel prize acceptance speech he hints at the theoretical model he used to cut off chances for peace anywhere. With China's premiere in the room, no less.
Let me also say this: the promotion of human rights cannot be about exhortation alone. At times, it must be coupled with painstaking diplomacy. I know that engagement with repressive regimes lacks the satisfying purity of indignation. But I also know that sanctions without outreach - and condemnation without discussion - can carry forward a crippling status quo. No repressive regime can move down a new path unless it has the choice of an open door.Effing liar. America offers the choice of an open door to North Korea? Ha. We like our indignation without cream and sugar, to maximize purity.
HoarsewhispererOutraged | Apr 14, 2017 10:22:50 AM | 9There is no other way to declare that China have backed off, otherwhise we wouldn't see this preparation for war by Trump that came after his big China meeting last week.
China will sure remember this idiot stance they have taken when the wars begin, after North Korea, China will be in the cross-hair themselves.
@ Posted by: Jeff Kaye | Apr 14, 2017 10:04:05 AM | 4Ronak | Apr 14, 2017 10:31:30 AM | 10All honor & respect to you Invictus , for daunting, tireless & seemingly endless endeavor. Deepest & abiding respect indeed, Sir/Madam. Wishing you & yours safety & joy this Easter. ' Vale, Pax Tecum '.
I still wonder why China stayed away from Syria with no talk of supporting Russia. This is/was a golden chance to show solidarity, in my opinion. Both NK and Pakistan are Chinese partners and nuclear powers. With MOAB in Afghanistan and forces around NK, this is a clear message to China. Is China setting a classic trap militarily or they just choosing to fight economically or otherwise? Somehow, Chinese reaction does not add up.somebody | Apr 14, 2017 10:35:14 AM | 11Chinese way of rebuking TrumpLysander | Apr 14, 2017 10:39:27 AM | 12"On the Korean Peninsula issue, it is not the one who espouses hasher rhetoric or raises a bigger fist that will win," Wang said.It is utmost stupidity. Trump is parking US war ships in reach of North Korea, Russia and China. Now he depends on them not to do anything.
Anon1 | Apr 14, 2017 10:48:53 AM | 14If you ever ask a local jingoist to list all the countries attacked by North Korea vs a comparable USA list, you will illicit blank stares, followed by anger, followed by the suggestion you go live in North Korea. Putin's analogy of chess with a pigeon comes to mind.@ 8, China does not care about the current leadership of North Korea at all. Their concern is to keep US forces no closer to the Chinese border than they are now, and that they will do.If Trump actually is dumb enough to strike, the Chinese will happily stand by and watch him hang himself. Just as promised at Mar-a-Lago.
Lysanderstumpy | Apr 14, 2017 11:11:39 AM | 15+1 on that.
Actually what you are describing is the average westerner today (although, perhaps the average westerner is a jingoist today), they are indoctrinated every day by by the MSM, they have no idea whats going on in the world, its so tragic when you try to explain world events and they always react like you said, anger, hate, accuations etc.Trump throwing stones at the mother of all hornet nests. Wonder what this all does for Samsung and Hyundai stock prices.james | Apr 14, 2017 11:28:04 AM | 16thanks b... many good comments already too! thanks folks.. @12 lysander - bang on example of how ignorant most folks remain.. why is the usa here there and everywhere on the planet where their war machines? answer - they are the planets most warmongering nation, hands down..WorldBLee | Apr 14, 2017 11:38:51 AM | 18Good article, b. This is extremely relevant yet almost never discussed in the US. North Korea is said to be "crazy", and is treated as some kind of rabid, non-human country that threatens the US. Of course, the opposite is more true.Tobin Paz | Apr 14, 2017 11:59:34 AM | 19It's important to note that every country that disagrees with the US is called crazy. Al-Assad is a "butcher", an "animal", a "dictator who kills his own people". Every time the US wants regime change they first vilify the leader of said country to turn him into a non-human entity that should be feared and loathed. This self-justifies the impending destruction of the country, which after all happened "for its own good."
If I told you ten years ago that the defacto American diplomat to North Korea Dennis Rodman would get kicked out of the country for getting drunk and taking a shit in a Pyongyang hotel; and that WWE hall of famer and reality TV star Donald Trump would threaten to attack North Korea as POTUS... would you have believed me?Anon1 | Apr 14, 2017 12:02:37 PM | 20Chinese FM earlier today said 'war might come to Korea any time now', basically, US and allies could attack Korea and we wont do aynthing about it, what a corrupt nature they are show off now, disgusting.somebody | Apr 14, 2017 12:13:11 PM | 21The Huge Moron has got himself into a situation now where China is mediating between the US and Korea.likklemore | Apr 14, 2017 12:19:51 PM | 22Kudos b putting this together. That was some digging.Hoarsewhisperer | Apr 14, 2017 12:25:07 PM | 23Here is my 2 dumb questions: will the person who did the tallying of the MOAB taking out the 36 in Afghanistan be sent to NK for a similar task? Not to be crass, but given it was the "mother of all bombs" should the Pentagon folks not be embarrassed to release the count? KROI.
China warns, and this from Her Majesty's paper, The Telegraph.co.uk with video interview:
LINK"World 'on the brink of thermo-nuclear war', as North Korea mulls test that could goad Trump"
~ ~ ~ ~ ~
Trump, as we have observed, does not enjoy being goaded - fights back when he is accused of having small hands.
And Kim Jong-Un? Well never mind.
~ ~ ~ ~
Wish all abundant blessings this Easter. We may not see 2018.
Posted by: Anon1 | Apr 14, 2017 10:15:53 AM | 8likklemore | Apr 14, 2017 12:26:43 PM | 24Imo, the main reason AmeriKKKa is threatening Korea at this time is because Xi scared them, and their freedom of navigation charade, out of the South China Sea. And now they're adding blackmail to the provocation by putting NK between them. It's cowardly and stupid, which is why I said I hope Trump knows what he's doing, because it doesn't look that way to me.
A violent conflict in NK will create a NK refugee problem which, as history illustrates, is AOK with AmeriKKKans but no-one else.
And if Xi has scared AmeriKKKa once, he can do it again.and linked in the article is Democratic-Leader Pelosi 's tweet:Greg Bacon | Apr 14, 2017 12:33:42 PM | 25President Trump's escalation on Syria, Saber-Rattling on North Korea Necessitate Immediate Congressional Scrutiny
~ ~ ~ ~
somewhat late after Congress abandoned it's war powers to the past 4 presidents.
Why is NK our problem?GoraDiva | Apr 14, 2017 12:36:48 PM | 26NK has seen what happens when nations give up their WMD's Iraq got invaded and Saddam first tortured, then hanged. Libya got smashed and Qaddafi got a bayonet up his arse.
Now Syria is in the cross-hairs, with much of the nation in ruins, close 500K dead, millions more wounded and millions more homeless, with Assad being fitted for a hemp necktie.
So why should Kim give up his nukes, where's the benefit?
For anyone even marginally interested in the issue of NK vs SK - please take time to listen to this interview - https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ba3dgDUtE9A (actually, 2 2-hr interviews).fastfreddy | Apr 14, 2017 12:47:00 PM | 28Historian Bruce Cumings looks way back in trying to explain the peninsula and its troubles. One point he makes is that the Korean war gave Truman a perfect excuse to expand the military and set up the national security complex. One thing he does not say is that US likely has zero interest in defusing the conflict - lest they'd have to leave the area.
Trump is not a huge moron. He is an actor - pretending to be a moron for his moron fan club. He is very convincing. Superb acting. Terrific. An Armada of Stagecraft. Unfortunately, his moronic behavior leads to moronic and zany consequences.Anon1 | Apr 14, 2017 12:49:02 PM | 29I'm now wondering how much worse the Known Entity - the Murderous Bloody Hillary could have been. Trump is a bull in a China Shop.
HoarsewhispetE Ring 46Z Vet | Apr 14, 2017 12:51:46 PM | 30IMO, if anyone it is Trump that have "scared" the chinese or rather baited the Chinese with good trade deals and have got the word from the chinese that they wont rescue NK nor attack US if US feel like attacking NK. This is why Trump acting so tough now, he know China+UN+EU+Nato will support his coming war.
b, this occasion, your writing is very one-sided. You left out (as did all the commentators to this moment) the decades of brinksmanship by NK, demanding as much as $50 million annually from all the presidents prior to Bush 43, including oil shipments.Anon1 | Apr 14, 2017 1:00:32 PM | 31Consider this: (who ever is in charge of the WH now or last time, etc.) does not matter as much as "perhaps" that entire region, and the multiple layers of MIC/Deep State folks/their proxies in Congress in the USA, are finally fed up with the brinksmanship for cash to keep that guy's family and supporters in power, and now that NK lunatic has raised the anti to the nuke level (thanks Bill for helping them out there in the 1990's)... it looks like the Pentagon will work the decisions at their level as we now see in real-time.
I served a recent tour there. "Ready to Fight Tonight" is not just a motto with South Korea. They have lived it since 1953 and they are really tired of it.
30GoraDiva | Apr 14, 2017 1:03:41 PM | 33Could you rephrase your whole chunk of text, it makes no sense, US dont "pay" North Korea anything and the lunatic is not in NorthKorea but in the White House allied with your dear South Koreans.
@30Outraged | Apr 14, 2017 1:08:11 PM | 34
You've likely absorbed too much MCM (c - corporate) reporting; for a more complex understanding of the subject, pls listen to https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ba3dgDUtE9A - that is you're interested in learning, as opposed to just repeating MCM talking points.@ Posted by: E Ring 46Z Vet | Apr 14, 2017 12:51:46 PM | 30Peter AU | Apr 14, 2017 1:32:44 PM | 37Respectfully, your comments are very one-sided, and you appear to be profoundly ignorant of the entire genesis of the Korean v US conflict and the motivations and conduct of involved parties since the days of the Kuomintang (KMT), Chiang Kai-shek, in the Chinese Civil War starting in 1940 but especially US actions from Sept 1946 and 1949 onward, as well as relevant USSR/Chinese involvement.
Should you be interested there is significant detail in posts re 'Forgotten & buried History' of which you may be oblivious in the last three threads posts, or not.
If you served in SK, ' Ready to Fight Tonight ', then why did you not bother to actually learn something of the Korean history, if only the last 70 years, with you and your buddies lives 'on the line', as opposed to merely regurgitating 'kool-aid' propaganda & misinformation ?
And while we are studying this, the empire is making more plans.Outraged | Apr 14, 2017 1:33:11 PM | 38http://www.reuters.com/article/us-mideast-crisis-usa-mattis-idUSKBN17G1C1
U.S. Defense Secretary Jim Mattis will visit Saudi Arabia, Egypt, Israel, Qatar and Djibouti starting on Tuesday, the Pentagon said in a statement on Friday.It said Mattis would "reaffirm key U.S. military alliances," and "discuss cooperative effort to counter destabilizing activities and defeat extremist terror organizations" during the April 18-23 tour. In Israel, he will hold talks with Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu, the statement said.
.......Syria? or Iran? When the above group talk about terrorist organizations they are talking Hezbollah. It is starting to look like the US is about to launch a two front war. Korea/China, Middle East/Russia.
@ Posted by: From The Hague | Apr 14, 2017 1:20:25 PM | 36b | Apr 14, 2017 1:33:38 PM | 39Have been involved in detailed discussions that have carried thru the last three threads re Korea covering from 1940, to the critical events of Sept 1945, then thru to 1949 and just as important 1949 onwards, PRECEDING the Korean War of '50 ... many extracts, numerous links/sources/references, from multiple participating posters. Hm, suppose start around here:
@E Ring 46Z Vetchump change | Apr 14, 2017 1:39:08 PM | 40I you come here for "neutral" piece that give equal weight and view to all sides you are in the wrong place. No author does that anyway and there are mountains to read that always highly endorse the U.S. side on each and every issue. I am not from the States and have a way more neutral view than you will find in your media. But I am not one sided. I have my moral position, my conscience and I follow it. I know what the U.S. has done to Korea - unnecessarily and for what I consider nefarious reasons.
I also know that the claim NoKo was "demanding as much as $50 million annually from all the presidents prior to Bush 43, including oil shipments." is stupidly wrong.
It was only Clinton who made a deal with NoKo which included for the U.S. side the delivery of oil and grain and the building of two civil nuclear reactors in North Korea. North Korea, in exchange, was to stop all nuclear work it had proceeded with including its own building of civil reactors which it urgently needed for electricity. It was a deal. Both side got something out of it.
It was Clinton who broke that deal. It was Clinton who never delivered on his promises. The delivery of oil and grain was slow and ended early. Only the foundations of the reactors were build (by North Korea). No components were delivered. Bush only officially ended the deal Clinton had already renegaded on.
"demanding as much as $50 million annually from all the presidents prior to Bush 43"Outraged | Apr 14, 2017 1:41:42 PM | 41Should take lessons from Israel and demand 3 Bil. 50 mil is chump change. How much do you think these annual maneuvers cost? More to the point, isn't it interesting that the US's war budget is practically unlimited, while money spent on peace is always too much.
You probably support tax cuts for oligarchs while bitching about money squandered upon the poor, homeless and ill.
Followup to #38Skip | Apr 14, 2017 1:43:49 PM | 42Also very highly recommend the following article and embedded links/references re Korea and consequences/issues surrounding detailed expert factual analysis re possible war here:
Posted by: Outraged | Apr 12, 2017 8:38:58 PM | 248, 'Is There A New U.S. Syria Policy? Is There One At All?' thread. Cheers.
@30Anon1 | Apr 14, 2017 1:52:11 PM | 43I wonder how warm and fuzzy the USA would be if NK had 60+ years ago, devastated our population with the bloodlust described by MacArthur, yet still had 50,000 troops stationed all along the Mexican border(DMZ)with nuclear capabilities that in an instant could destroy Houston, Austin, Dallas, Phoenix and Los Angeles??? Somehow I hear screaming and howling coming from the bowels or our esteemed Washington overlords. Kim's behavior is no more foolish.
Air China to suspend some flights to North Korea http://presstv.ir/Detail/2017/04/14/518018/Air-China-suspend-flights-North-KoreaPeter AU | Apr 14, 2017 1:55:14 PM | 45Well well well, this is almost getting comical, chinese show its true nature once again, what a backstabbing nation. China will be as complicit in this war on NK as Trump (and other pathetic allies). How many billion dollar deals did the stupid president get by Trump to be able to accept this tremendous blunder?
Is the US going the full John McCain? China rising, pivot on Asia behind schedule. Resources Diverted back to Middle East when Obama's headchoppers threatened US oil at Erbil. More resources for the pivot on China with Russia's re entry into the world of hard power.Ronak | Apr 14, 2017 1:55:59 PM | 46At this stage, Russia was supposed to be the gas station that produced nothing. Syria should have fallen to US headchoppers. Philippines has pulled out of the pivot on China.
Obama's leading from behind, and proxy wars largely failed. This leaves the US very short on time to take down China, plus they now have to deal with a Russia that has risen from the dead.
So US going full John McCain to make up for time lost / ground lost through the Obama years?
@ Posted by: Peter AU | Apr 14, 2017 1:32:44 PM | 37SmoothieX12 | Apr 14, 2017 1:57:01 PM | 47I still think it's a one-front war. Saudi's just formed a NATO-like Sunni force with an ex-Pakistani general as it's head. Now they have a about 20 nation force for basic ground ops and this will help Saudi's in Yemen and may be Syria especially with Pakistan's depth in recruiting regulars and non-regulars. This could not have happened without US approval, imo.
@37, Peter AUkarlof1 | Apr 14, 2017 2:08:37 PM | 48Syria? or Iran? When the above group talk about terrorist organisations they are talking Hezbollah.It is starting to look like the US is about to launch a two front war. Korea/China, Middle East/Russia.US is in no position to launch any serious military operation as of now, certainly not against Iran, not to speak about Russia. Bombing something? Sure, as long as it is stand-off weapons and no US casualties. Yet, US is under pressure to "perform" something because, as of lately things are not going too well for US in general and her military in particular. Consider all these plans a self-medication. Per China, China is not in the shape to fight US Navy as of now, not does she want to risk losing the access to US markets.
For those wondering what book the page is from, it's Napalm: An American Biography by Robert Neer, Belknap, 2013. Using google, enter this exactly into the search box: macarthur "biblical devastation resulted" hit search and the top result will take you to the page. (The actual url is about 4 lines, so I refrained from posting.) I do suggest reading the next several paragraphs, but they are not for the squeamish as what's described is 100% revolting. If after reading the text you cannot fathom why the North Koreans detest Americans more than anything else, then you'll make a perfect Neocon and ought to join Cheney and Co.SmoothieX12 | Apr 14, 2017 2:10:57 PM | 49Thanks b for posting that extract provided by Jeffery Kaye!
somebody | Apr 14, 2017 2:11:06 PM | 50No one has forgotten the near genocide and no one in Korea, north or south, wants to repeat the experience.Meanwhile, overwhelming majority of US political "elite" is generally an office plankton with law or political "science" (or journalism--which is not a profession or a skill) degrees from Ivy League "humanities" departments and their comprehension of the war is limited to Hollywood. Most difficulties in life they ever experienced was, most likely, being overbooked for the first class seats on the flight to Hawaii (or any other resort).
46) Not trueOutraged | Apr 14, 2017 2:14:53 PM | 52PAKISTAN'S Parliament rejected a Saudi request to dispatch troops to combat Houthi rebels in Yemen, much to the chagrin of the Kingdom of Saudi Arabia (KSA). When Pakistan joined the Saudi led 34 nation military alliance, Iran took offence believing itself to be the target. Pakistan thus found itself between a rock and a hard place. Stung by the sensitivities of both its friends, Pakistan has had to rethink its diplomatic overtures to maintain the right balance between Tehran and Riyadh.@ Posted by: Peter AU | Apr 14, 2017 1:55:14 PM | 45Peter AU | Apr 14, 2017 2:15:00 PM | 53Succinct overview recap, though very pessimistic ;)
Its occurred to me you may not fully follow, with utmost respect, what I've referred to on occasion as: no key indicators re logistics/materiel mandatory pre-deployments with minimum ~3-6 months lead times, ONCE, a decision to go to War, or an Op that risks War breakout, any War, has been taken and formally committed to, before the War or risk 'of' Operation, can commence ?
To do so without such pre-deployments well in advance of boots-on-the-ground, ships firing armaments or aircraft launching strikes, ie engaging in Ops that have inherent escalation to War risk, virtually guarantees failure and defeat should a War subsequently breakout ... Lieutenants study tactics, Field officers/Commanders/Generals/Admirals study logistics, to paraphrase numerous famous military commanders, especially smarmy/cheeky/insubordinate military logisticians ;)
SmoothieX12 47 China is not in the shape to fight US Navy as of nowMonolycus | Apr 14, 2017 2:27:04 PM | 54That is a good reason for the US to act now. Look up the Rand Corp report - Thinking the Unthinkable. Report finance by the pentagon as a military strategy for taking down China.
In the report, if the US acts now, they have a good chance. In five years time it will it will be 50/50 and in ten year it is all over for the US. By then China will be militarily superior or at a point when any US force projection against China will be totally destroyed very quickly.
Rand report here. I had the title wrong in earlier posts. PDF can be read online or downloaded from the Rand Corp link
Thinking Through The Unthinkable http://www.rand.org/pubs/research_reports/RR1140.htmlThank you, E Ring 46Z Vet @#30 for that.karlof1 | Apr 14, 2017 2:28:49 PM | 55I still read this blog from time to time, but this very issue is why I almost never comment anymore. North Korea is to the Left as Israel is to the Right, and it infuriates me. The decades of kidnapping foreign nationals, hijacked planes, international assassination attempts-- basically 70 years of deliberate destabilization and human rights abuses are all justified because... "America" spelled any various number of ways is eeeeeeeevil.
I live in South Korea and have for the past 15 years. I posted a story here in 2012, shortly after Kim Jong-un came to power, about a defector badmouthing North Korea. B chastised me for believing such propaganda and responded with a linked story about how Kim Jong-un had created an agricultural revolution resulting in a surplus of crops that year and was a hero as a result of it. I am in South Korea.
Kim Jong-un had been in power for less than a year. The time of year was very, very early Spring and the ground in South Korea was still frozen and no crops of any sort had been planted at all, so I know they could not possibly have been planted yet in the north. Yet I was the one believing in baseless propaganda. There's just no way to have any rational debate when the subject is as sacred a cow to the residents here as North Korea is. You'll catch abuse for your comment daring to suggest any culpability whatsoever for poor, innocent bystander North Korea, but I wanted to reassure you that there do exist a small minority of us who appreciated what you had to say.
The conclusion from a review of the book by SF Gate: "Neer has provided a valuable book that fills in historical gaps and sheds much-needed light on a history that many would rather forget ." [Emphasis mine] http://www.sfgate.com/books/article/Napalm-by-Robert-M-Neer-4377836.phpRonak | Apr 14, 2017 2:29:12 PM | 56The #1 reason the Outlaw US Empire gets away with its continuation of massive crimes against humanity is that its citizenry is mostly ignorant--made so purposefully--of the history that matters and are today's equivalent of "Good Germans."
However, that doesn't excuse the remainder of the planet's citizenry from demanding an end to the criminal actions of the Rogue United States.
@ Posted by: somebody | Apr 14, 2017 2:11:06 PM | 50Outraged | Apr 14, 2017 2:35:49 PM | 57Thanks for the link.
This rejection was a while ago, 2015 or so? Or was there a new one after the general was given the top post? I had assumed things have changed since.
Anyways, cornering Iran is the goal that the US/Israel trying to accomplish, at least from reading the pattern of activities. Slippery slope indeed.
@ Posted by: Peter AU | Apr 14, 2017 2:15:00 PM | 52Anon1 | Apr 14, 2017 2:45:17 PM | 58Thought scenario ... US launches attacks and starts War with China, no virtually 'non-concealable' 6 month mandatory preparation lead-time ... however unlikely, events don't go well for PLA ... China assesses at risk of conventional defeat ... however unlikely, no possibility to continue to conventionally resist or recover for an extended conventional conflict or guerilla campaign... fires a demonstration tactical nuke (no casualties) to send a message re de-confliction/de-escalation, or else ... US either stands down or its MAD. Game Over.
Alternately US just goes MAD straight up and risks it all with a supposed surprise First Strike (highly improbable to adequately conceal) ... only a few Sino nukes make it to Stateside, yet enough to wipe out 80Million+ instantly and same number in initially non-KIA casualties of varying degrees plus turn to 'glass' half a dozen major cities ... well armed citizens response/reaction to their new post-apocalyptic lives of joy & happiness ?
53 / MonolycusYonatan | Apr 14, 2017 2:47:10 PM | 59Thanks for proving how well the South Korean state propaganda work, you are basically calling for war against your own country (or perhaps you are not even a native korean?) and your own people, and you are calling people here crazy?
The 'Big Event' that Kim Jong Un boasted of, and had 'everyone' paralyzed in fear of nuke tests - the grand opening of a new mass residential area in Pyongyang.somebody | Apr 14, 2017 2:47:13 PM | 60https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=FxPw26MeviQ
As others have stated, this whole mess is yet another US creation - the consequence of a 'nukes for oil' deal that the US reneged on - NK would cease nuke development in exchange for eased sanctions.
Posted by: Ronak | Apr 14, 2017 2:29:12 PM | 55somebody | Apr 14, 2017 2:56:20 PM | 61Dated April 14, 2017
Another fresh link - 17 hours ago
ISLAMABAD: Defence Minister Khawaja Asif on Thursday assured the National Assembly that Pakistan would not become part of any alliance against a Muslim state.Responding to a calling attention notice, he said that the terms of reference (TOR) of the Saudi-led military alliance would be unveiled by Saudi authorities next month.
He said that the TOR of the alliance, which is to be led by former Chief of the Army Staff Gen Raheel Sharif, and its aims and objectives will be presented in parliament before formally deciding whether Pakistan should become part of it or not.
"We have committed to safeguarding Saudi Arabia's soil for the safety and sanctity of the two holy sites - Makkah and Medina - but we will not become part of any conflict against any Muslim state, including Iran," the defence minister said, responding to the notice moved by Pakistan Tehreek-i-Insaf (PTI) MNA Dr Shireen Mazari.
add to 59b | Apr 14, 2017 3:03:08 PM | 62Egypt's cooperation is not that safe either
In Libya, the three states seem to be in lock step, supporting Khalifa Haftar, for example. In Palestine, a theatre long abandoned by the Arab leaders, Cairo has a deep-seated interest and is backing the anti-Hamas Mohammed Dahlan, who is also very close with the ruling family in the UAE.In Yemen, the Egyptian regime has announced its plan to maintain its limited presence, although Cairo's unwillingness to expand this presence is another source of disagreement with Riyadh.
The issue on which there is the most daylight between Cairo and Riyadh, however, is the most significant conflict affecting the region today: the Syrian war.
While Riyadh has backed forces opposed to the regime since the outset, Cairo has moved from a position of ambivalence to open support for the regime.
...
Although rumblings of an Egyptian military presence in Syria have not been substantiated, Egyptian rhetoric and diplomatic efforts have firmly supported Assad. Most recently, Cairo abstained from a key vote in a UN Security Council resolution that would have imposed sanctions on the Syrian government, no doubt to the displeasure of the Saudis.
This position is more consistent with the Egyptian regime's outlook; Sisi rose to power on an anti-Islamist platform and is waging a war against a small scale insurgency in the Sinai. The Trump administration's policy goals in the region seem to align with Sisi's vision of supporting authoritarian regimes against Islamists. This agenda puts both Trump and Sisi into Assad's camp.
For this reason, it seems that Sisi's dream of a joint Arab military force will not materialise anytime soon, at least not with joint Egyptian and Saudi participation.
Without agreement on Syria, this endeavor to unify Arab governments under his leadership is dead on arrival, as the Syrian conflict is currently the most significant security threat.
The link to the book extract in the post which @karlof1 provided. The book is Napalm: An American Biography by Robert Neer, Belknap, 2013Yonatan | Apr 14, 2017 3:03:41 PM | 63The linked pages following the one above are about the extremely cruel effects of Napalm as used in Korea.
Karlof1 @48, @54Peter AU | Apr 14, 2017 3:04:29 PM | 64The US laid a similar (though smaller scale) trail of destruction in Germany at the end of WWII.
The development of napalm specifically to target civilians ties in the testing of the two US nuclear weapons in Japan. The Japanese target cities were left untouched by conventional air raids throughout, even though they contained valid military targets such a torpedo production plants.
The occupants were so used to seeing US planes pass them by without ill effect, that on the fateful day they stood out in the open watching the planes pass by as normal or so they thought. The two attacks - for different designs of weapon - were designed to test and calibrate the effects of nuclear weapons on undamaged cities and unprotected civilians. They were actual medical and physical experiments on real people.
@ outragedOutraged | Apr 14, 2017 3:06:51 PM | 65I have been giving your posts a lot of consideration. How to tie the logistics and so forth lead time, to what we are seeing take place?
create major incident, congress quickly votes for war?Can the US deploy faster than we have seen in the past? Most US wars since WWII have been wars of choice, done at leisure, in a time and place of US choosing.
The difference between now and all the years since WWII, through the cold war and so forth is that the US has very little time left. In trying to think how the US is acting different now to the past, or actually dig up solid points I would probably point to MH17. With MH17 Australia, one of the five eyes gladly sacrificed some people for empire. That shook me. The evidence was the same as the crap dossier on Assad gassing his own people, yet not a word of protest out of any Australian politician.
The US now have total and complete control over all its vassal. The US can now say and do anything, no matter how obvious, and the bobble heads as Putin calls them, just bobble their heads in agreement.
I think what we will see in the next few years will be much different to the last 70 or so years. If the US does nothing, it will start to collapse as the power of the dollar is eroded by other currencies taking up market share.
I believe US will act, and that means taking down China as China is currently the number one threat to the US. China simply continuing the way it is, manufacturing, trading ect will take down the US.
The US is going to war. Much thought and training going into fighting peer, or near peer adversary. At the same time, China and Russia are working to prevent the US from going to war.
What you have said about lead time does have to be taken into account to try and work out US strategy. Does the US need another Pearl Harbour to get its population on a war footing for the coming war with China? Sink a few useless aircraft carriers, similar to battleships being sunk at Pearl harbour when WWII was a aircraft carrier war and battle ships were largely obsolete?
US think tanks like Brookings and Rand. Fronts for the 0.01% ? US policy roughly follows the lines put out by these type think tanks.
@ MonolycusSmoothieX12 | Apr 14, 2017 3:14:00 PM | 66If you truly earnestly believe:
The decades of kidnapping foreign nationals, hijacked planes, international assassination attempts-- basically 70 years of deliberate destabilization and human rights abuses are all justified because...following on from the defeat of Japan at end WWII occurred without any similar actions prior to, concurrent with and subsequent to events of the Korean War, and the issues are purely of Left & Right 'isms', not basic matters of Humanity, then frankly, you're viewpoint/position is wilfully documented counter-factual, IMHO. Have seen no 'abuse' as you assert.
You live in SK ? Respectfully, please enlighten us as to the history of the island of Jeju from Sept 1945 thru to today, as an example, maybe comment on the abandoned truth & reconciliation inquiries/compensation and the persisting existing community divisions thru to this day, hm ?
@52, Peter AUronny | Apr 14, 2017 3:16:05 PM | 67That is a good reason for the US to act now.From US point of view--absolutely. US establishment, yet again, thinks that it can control escalation. Conventionally, North Korea is a punching bag. But I also would be very careful with any (I underscore--any) supposedly "reputable" US analytical source assessments of anyone. Overwhelming empirical evidence testifies to the fact that often they have no idea what they are talking about.
Kim Jong-un orders evacuation of Pyongyang: reportOutraged | Apr 14, 2017 3:25:30 PM | 68North Korean leader Kim Jong-un ordered 25 percent of Pyongyang residents to leave the city immediately, according to a Russian news outlet on Friday. The Pravda report said that in accordance with the order, 600,000 people should be urgently evacuated.
@ Peter AUPeter AU | Apr 14, 2017 3:31:49 PM | 69If the US does nothing, it will start to collapse as the power of the dollar is eroded by other currencies taking up market share.Stepping back from fundamental military strategy/necessities ...
If China/Russia were facing imminent War, then they would very probably dump all US reserves and Treasury Bonds first, and pre-emptively trigger economic collapse & rout. Unless it's MAD first strike stuff, where is the industrial and manufacturing base of the US/UK to sustain and win a 'Total War' ? Russia/China/Iran/NK are all militarily self-sufficient ... long-term sanctions do that, somewhat self-defeating, no ?
IF the US collapses without War occurring, the 0.01% driving this will have already relocated in advance to, New Zealand or Iceland, etc ? To live lives of luxury, whilst purchasing collapsed US corporations for pennies on the dollar, perhaps, and wait for the investment to mature, maybe ? Ruthless bastards, citizens of the world ;)
Yet, mistakes & miscalculations can occur unintentionally when even only a sustained 'strategy of tension' goes on and on ...
Another thing to consider now when looking at US actions... US have pinned all their hopes for military dominance on the F-35. Thirty years of R&D, a trillion dollars, and all they have produced is a flying scrapyard. The F-22 is a top aircraft, but they scrapped production to concentrate all resources on the F-35. I read not long ago that production of upgraded Super Hornets is about to kick off again.somebody | Apr 14, 2017 3:37:12 PM | 70The F-35 has put the US too far behind. By the time they have designed and produced another 5th gen or later version aircraft, it will be all over for the US.
53/monolycos It is possible your opinion is not shared by South KoreansPeter AU | Apr 14, 2017 3:40:15 PM | 712003, report for congress South Korean Politics and Rising "Anti-Americanism": Implications for U.S. Policy Toward North Korea
These shifts in the South Korean polity, particularly the rise in anti-Americanism, confront the Bush Administration with a policy dilemma: how to manage the U.S.-ROK alliance while pursuing a more confrontational approach toward North Korea than that favored by many, if not most, South Koreans.You make good points Outraged. Will wait and watch, but I have a bad feeling that comes from a lot of small, on their own, seemingly inconsequential events/moves.somebody | Apr 14, 2017 3:41:39 PM | 72add to 69SmoothieX12 | Apr 14, 2017 3:41:41 PM | 73Opinion polls taken over the past few years generally have found that large majorities of respondents favor a partial or total withdrawal of U.S. troops from South Korea, though most holding this position say they favor a drawdown unless there are improvements in North-South Korean relations; few favor an outright withdrawal.@68, Peter AUOutraged | Apr 14, 2017 3:42:31 PM | 74The F-35 has put the US too far behind.It is not just F-35, it is a combination of factors of strategic, technological and operational nature. Take a look at LCS program or at the cost of SSBN Ohio-class replacement--a single hull for $8.1 billion. This is more than Russia spent on all 8 of her latest state-of-the-art SSBNs of Borey-class (Project 955, 955A)--3 afloat, 5-in different stages of readiness.
Followup to 67Ike | Apr 14, 2017 3:50:58 PM | 75The US is going to war. Much thought and training going into fighting peer, or near peer adversary."The US is going to war. Much thought and training going into fighting peer, or near peer adversary. " Do not see substantive evidence of the former, yet. Re the latter, other than neo-con/lib chickenhawk warmongers and detached from facts/reason/competent analysis & reality stink-tanks, again, see no evidence other than endless PR and rabid rhetoric, MSM abetted.
Have you seen the most recent data/reports on DOD readiness levels, it's not a pleasant read if you're a jingoistic warmonger ... would argue, short version, the opportunity existed prior to 2001, maybe even as late as 2004-2006 at a pinch ... since then, and now, the window has closed and the opportunity lost ... the vassals you refer to have been as suborned as they are now since the late '40's, they just are now led by such incompetents that they don't have the sense to conceal that they are, bought & paid for, bobbleheads. Yet, they are good time opportunists and no guarantee of staying the course should it come to a potential WWIII, see Germany/Italy/etc ...
Thanks for a great article. It is so good to read truthful information and not the propaganda bullshit the MSM saturates us with.Anon1 | Apr 14, 2017 3:51:40 PM | 76
If more people read this the outrage would force the fascist US government to back off.And again,Hoarsewhisperer | Apr 14, 2017 3:56:35 PM | 77US successfully test drops nuclear gravity bomb in Nevada https://reportuk.org/2017/04/14/breaking-us-successfully-test-drops-nuclear-gravity-bomb/
Of passing interest...according to CGTN World Today, April 15, China and Russia's foreign ministers spoke by telephone on Friday to discus stability on the Korean Peninsula.Outraged | Apr 14, 2017 4:03:27 PM | 78@ Posted by: Hoarsewhisperer | Apr 14, 2017 3:56:35 PM | 76karlof1 | Apr 14, 2017 4:06:09 PM | 79Who knows, maybe NK will be rehabilitated, as is, and accepted back into the Russia/China 'Axis', openly, as for the then USSR/ChiCom 'Axis' pre and during the Korean war ? After all, given the insane and surreal rabid propaganda in western MSM, what difference would it make re supposed 'image' in the eyes of the supposed 'International Community' (US/UK/Israhell & good time vassals) ... any ?
Peter AU--Peter AU | Apr 14, 2017 4:10:21 PM | 80Perhaps the most important yet neglected fact related to the build-up for war with China is the lack of preparing the ignorant US citizenry via the sort of dehumanization campaign waged at Islam/Muslims. Heck, just the great preference for Chinese food makes such a campaign more than difficult--the Yellow Peril proclamations of the past long ago ceased to resonate. Plus, I'll certainly echo Outraged's point about USA lacking the required industrial capacity and raw material for any such war other than MAD versus China/Russia. One of the main reasons the Lead From Behind strategy was adopted along with using terrorist proxies to destabilize Russia/China is because of that rather stark reality.
Yonatan @62--
Thanks for your reply. Napalm was developed at Harvard and the book was published by one of Harvard's publishing houses. Given its current attitude, I bet Harvard would now call its own published work Fake News, and disallow it from classrooms while removing it from libraries.
Monolycus--
The following extracts are from Australian National University Professor Gavan McCormack's Target Korea: Pushing North Korea To The Brink of Nuclear Catastrophe and detail just which side did most of the murdering:
"At the outbreak of war in 1950, one of the first acts of the [South Korean] Rhee regime was to order the execution of political prisoners, whose deaths were in due course attributed to atrocities by the incoming Northern forces...Declassified U.S. documents indicated that `more than 2,000' political prisoners were executed without trial in the early weeks, hundreds of them were taken out to sea from the port of Pohang and shot, their bodies dumped overboard...Throughout the country, according to Gregory Henderson, then a U.S. Embassy official in Seoul and later a prominent historian of Korea, probably over 100,000 people were killed without trial or legal warrant. Investigations into all this have scarcely begun...
"When Seoul was recaptured by U.S. and South Korean forces perhaps as many as 29,000 Koreans were executed on suspicion of collaboration with the North...The occupation of Pyongyang and many other cities and villages above the 38th parallel [by South Korean forces] was characterized by atrocities...According to one estimate, 150,000 people were executed or kidnapped...
"The official U.S. Army report at the end of the [Korean] war gave 7,334 as the figure for civilian victims of North Korean atrocities, a small fraction of those now known to have been executed by [government of South Korean leader] Rhee in the first moments of the war alone...
"...The Taejon Massacre...became the centerpiece of the U.S. case for North Korean brutality...A U.S. Army report on the massacre, including graphic photographs, was published around the world in October 1953...
"At Taejon, a town of about 160 kilometers south of Seoul, a massacre undoubtedly occurred..."...It is hard to avoid the conclusion that the most brutal North Korean atrocity in the South was actually a Southern atrocity in a brutal ongoing civil war...
"...The figure of 1,800 massacre victims was given...Somebody--presumably in either the American military or government--seems to have made the decision to turn this into a Northern massacre, the characteristic, single atrocity of the entire war. The truth seems inescapable: The worst atrocity of the war was committed by forces acting in the name of the United Nations, and a concerted effort was then made to cover it up by blaming it on the North Korean enemy...
"...On the admission of [U.S.] General Ridgeway's Head Office, more POWs died in United Nations camps than in North Korean camps..." http://wherechangeobama.blogspot.com/2013/05/revisiting-history-of-korea-again-part-4.html?m=0
Re US war manufacturing base. Where is the MIC at now? US is by far the largest manufacturer of military hardware. The assembly of the final product has not been offshored. How much do they import in the way of raw or processed materials? Steel smelting, rolling ect - Aluminium - Titanium?Anon1 | Apr 14, 2017 4:13:54 PM | 81Rare earth metals required for high tech military is imported from China, North Korea has the other known large recoverable rare earth reserve. Any US war with China would most likely be a naval missile war, something along the lines of the Rand report?
Lawrence Wilkerson, a former U.S. Army colonel: U.S. Creating New Foes, Too Many To HandleSmoothieX12 | Apr 14, 2017 4:21:06 PM | 82
http://www.mintpressnews.com/former-bush-chief-staff-u-s-creating-new-foes-many-handle/225999/karlof1 | Apr 14, 2017 4:25:05 PM | 83Any US war with China would most likely be a naval missile war, something along the lines of the Rand report?China does have limited versions of both Klub-NK and Club-S, those were shorter ones until recently when China started to get her hands on actual Russian versions of such weapons as P-800 Onyx with their ranges of 660 kilometers, add here SU-35 (also in Russian configuration) and S-400, also in Russian configuration, and you have a rather interesting dynamics suddenly.
China's very weak spot navy-wise is their submarine force, despite some good SSKs, PLAN's nuclear submarine component is atrocious--a generation or two behind what Russia and US operate. So, for now it is a mixed bag. Plus there is an issue of targeting, I don't know if Russia will make her Liana system available to China. Can China today sink US nuclear carrier? Possibly, In 5-7 years it will become not only possible but highly probable.
Peter AU @79--b | Apr 14, 2017 4:40:02 PM | 84US MIC armament production ought to be seen/understood as MIC profitmaking scam that happens to produce few usable/battle-worthy assets. There's a very good reason for calling the USA's once mighty industrial heartland the Rust Belt--it's literally rotting away as a ride on Amtrak's Capitol Limited will testify.
It would be far cheaper, saner and moral to obtain rare earth minerals and other goods via trade than expanding industrial capacity, instituting a military draft, outfitting such a force, then waging a war for conquest.
@MonolycusPeter AU | Apr 14, 2017 4:40:46 PM | 85I tried for some 15 minutes to find the comment you wrote about and can not find it.
But two remarks:
byongjin policy ('progress in tandem' or 'move two things forward simultaneously') was developed and implemented years before Kim Jong-un came to power. He (more precise: those who are behind him) made it an official party policy and created the slogan long after the program had started. The first nuclear test in NoKo was 2006 - five years before him. The deterrence effects were already in place as well as a lessened conventional positioning, the economic trend was already positive.
I may well have berated you about the uncritical quoting of a North Korean defector. These are notorious liars. Their income in South Korea was reported to be paid by the secret service in dependence of the media splash they create.
There is huge amount of fake horror stories about North Korea in the South Korean (esp. Chosun Ilbo) and global press. Much of it is planted by the South Korean government. U.S. media have thankfully stopped to regurgitate most of the stories for now as too many turned out to be false .
Kim Jong-un had his dogs maul one of his uncles?
Stripped naked, thrown into a cage and torn apart by 120 starving dogs: How Kim Jong Un had 'scum' uncle executed
That story ran one way or another in every bigger western media. It was false. The uncle was executed but after a (sham) trial and with guns by a regular execution command.North Korea hacked Sony? No it did not. It was an insider hack by a former Sony IT person. Sony made the "North Korea hack" up to escape culpability and to sell an otherwise unsellable bad movie.
Kim Jong-un's ex-girlfriend reportedly executed by firing squad
Bad, bad boy. But later she turns up on live TV , smiling and laughing as ever.Kim Jong-Un kills his half brother by having an unprotected person smear highly toxic VX in his face in a very public place in Malaysia? The person who does that gets not hurt one bit? Check the life style of his half brother - girls and drugs and rock&roll - lots of drugs and lots of alcohol. The dude much more likely had a heart infarct and the rest was made up like the other stories above.
North Korea did and does some outrageous stuff. So did and do other countries. How many alleged "communists" and "sympathizers" did the various dictatorships in South Korea kill under U.S. tutelage? Thousands? Ten thousands? A hundredthousand at least. How many sabotage acts did they engineer in North Korea? How many were hurt by those?
I am not blind on one eye. But the anti-NoKo propaganda is similar to the propaganda that created the war on Iraq fever. It is now even more important to look from the other side and to write that up, not just some pseudo-concerned "all sides are bad" pieces.
Looking in vain for the old Monolycus comment I came across a piece I wrote in 2012.
Therein I quote Tariq Ali from a piece he wrote about his 1970s visit to North Korea. This bit from the end of the piece on the U.S. position under Bush/Obama is enlightening:
Over lunch I asked her about [the Bush administration] plans for North Korea. She was cogent. 'You haven't seen the glint in the eyes of the South Korean military,' she said. 'They're desperate to get hold of the North's nuclear arsenal. That's unacceptable.' Why? 'Because if a unified Korea becomes a nuclear power, it will be impossible to stop Japan from becoming one too and if you have China, Japan and a unified Korea as nuclear states, it shifts the relationship of forces against us.' Obama seems to agree with this way of thinking.SmoothieX12 karlof1Willy2 | Apr 14, 2017 4:43:41 PM | 86It really makes little sense what the US is up to. Are they relying on bluff and bluster to win the day? Anon1 @80 put up a good link. It is one of the things that has me worried.
What we are seeing now, is it bluff and bluster? or is it Doolittle raid/battle of Midway type culture - US can overcome all no matter what?
- North Korea has some good reasons to not trust the US.From The Hague | Apr 14, 2017 4:45:58 PM | 871) In the 1990s they had a deal with the US, in which the US would supply Nort Korea with oil in return for a suspension of their nuclear program. But the US didn't deliver on theri promises.
2) In 2003 or 2004 the US made some serious movements that did suggest that the US was preparing a MAJOR attack on North Korea. Under secretary Paul Wolfowitz also made some remarks that would suggest such a move.
3) The G.W.Bush administration (2000-2008) deliberately increased tension with North Korea.
38 41 OutragedSmoothieX12 | Apr 14, 2017 4:46:09 PM | 88Thanks!
Very relevant historical background.@84, Peter AU.somebody | Apr 14, 2017 4:47:27 PM | 89What we are seeing now, is it bluff and bluster? or is it Doolittle raid/battle of Midway type culture - US can overcome all no matter what?Both. I am not sure that I can correctly estimate a percentage of both. Let me take a wild guess: bluster/bluff-60-65%, Doolittle--35-40%. The foundation of Pax Americana is a mythology of the "best military in the world", without this myth the whole house of cards begins to fold. It was folding with increasing speed since circa 2008 and accelerated tremendously in 2014.
Shadowbrokers just released NSA hacks for Windows Systems enabling kids to go to work over the Easter Weekend.Win | Apr 14, 2017 4:48:24 PM | 90NSA hacks include the Swift System.
By the way, google "North Korean hackers" and have fun.
@MonolycusOutraged | Apr 14, 2017 5:05:51 PM | 91Great that you swing by every so often. But I am not sure why you are offended when people criticise your point of view. That's what comments are for. And that's why this blog is here. To present an alternative view to mainstream lies. And just because you live in South Korea does not mean you have an objective view of the situation there. In the bigger picture, the mad dogs in the US government do all the things you mention, but no doubt because they are America they are ignored and their actions declared righteous. The agreements are historical and it was not North Korea who backed away, broke them or refused to consider them. North Korea has the tightest sanctions on earth and so b's reporting about the rationale for North Korea's actions is timely. Instead of the insidious propaganda we get from Western media. Enjoy yourself in South Korea. Just remember who invaded who there and who is causing mayhem in the rest of the world. Hint; it is not Kim Yong-Un.
@ Peter AUokie farmer | Apr 14, 2017 5:07:18 PM | 92An old saw, but a profound truism, 'No Battleplan survives first engagement with the enemy'.
So Rands 'plan' ain't worth much ... secondly, if you go into combat/war without actually considering the enemies own moves/counters/plans/actions, then you've already lost before the first shot is fired.
For example, the Chinese have built an autobahn grade highway which ends ~10Kms short of the China-Afghan border, they have 3 combined arms army groups including air divisions from the adjacent Western Military Region they could send over that border pass, after getting the combat engineers, sweating hard and using machinery, to finish the final stretch in a matter of hours ... the remaining army group & numerous Police divisions could secure the military region, as its isolated from potential threats other than Indian border effectively.
Within 3-4 days forced march, worst case, they've crossed the Iran-Afghan border and the ME is toast ... concurrent and co-ordinated with similar capabilities from Russia, the ME is toast. And in conjunction with Iran free to wipeout the GCC's pathetically unprofessional non-commital 'green' 'parade only' militaries.
What has the US got, pre-positioned to prevent it ?
The conventional forces that NATO used to have deployed, pre-positioned and in number to defend a USSR, now RF, multi echelon armored deep penetration into EU, no longer exists ...
The Bundeswehr is a shadow of its glory days as an armored/mechanized shield during the Cold War, now periodically ridiculed for not having sufficient MGs or ammunition to train with on joint training exercises ... War ready in 2017 ?
The nuclear and non-nuclear subs of both sides would promptly slaughter each other in a mutual knife-fight, sudden death, whilst taking out the majority of the Carriers, US/UK/FR ... the remainder of the Carrier group escorts exist and are designed/configured to defend/protect & shield the carrier, not very useful once its at the bottom of the ocean along with all the strike aircraft, pilots, support crews and sailors ...
@ From the Hague
You are most welcome, a group effort.
link http://eng.tibet.cn/world/1481178463674.shtmlb | Apr 14, 2017 5:21:19 PM | 93For those beating up on China (or applauding it) for suspending flights with NoKo.Jen | Apr 14, 2017 5:23:04 PM | 94Thanks B for the information regarding how the US and South Korea time their military maneuvers to coincide with the rice planting and harvesting periods in North Korea. I had not been aware of this before.fastfreddy | Apr 14, 2017 5:33:25 PM | 95Bill Clinton's offer to North Korea to supply grain and materials for building two new reactors and his later reneging on that do not surprise me at all as these are of a piece with the Clinton Foundation raising hundreds of millions for Haiti's post-quake reconstruction which in the end resulted in the construction of one factory employing 30 people making T-shirts for export. No doubt with the North Korean "offer" the Clintons got something of that.
Also thanks to Karlof1 for being the tireless terrier that he is in hunting down the information about US-allied atrocities during the Korean War.
I would like to pose to Monolycus and the other South Korean-based commenter the challenge of explaining how South Korea rapidly recovered from total war devastation in the early 1960s to the point where in 1988 the nation's capital could host the Summer Olympic Games. This all took place in the space of less than 30 years. If you both can do this convincingly and somehow mention Park Chunghee as an enlightened free-market democratic capitalist ideologue, rest assured I will be blown away.
American Technological progress is probably stymied by the manner in which it is conducted. That is to spread contracts for hardware/software/parts among competing states via state representative congressional bag men. Wasting time and money in the process. Hoping for cost overruns and delays which increase profits. Small wonder the state-of-the-art US warplane is shit.Pft | Apr 14, 2017 5:41:44 PM | 96I'd have to question Kims sanity if he OK's a missile or nuclear test at this time. Trumps obviously a mad man trying to show how tough he is in order go terrorize countries and maybe his own citizens into submission. However, he has the means to execute the destruction. The MSM will be behind him all the way and Americans love war because God blesses them and they believe they are the good guys fighting evil and making the world safe for liberty and Democracy. American exceptionalism they call it.. The citizens as a group might be the most insane of all of these entities. Certainly the dumbest.james | Apr 14, 2017 5:45:36 PM | 97b - great responses to the naysayers here.. very informative as well. thank you..Jen | Apr 14, 2017 5:49:40 PM | 98B @ 92: I should think Air China's flight cuts are due to people suddenly cancelling flight plans after the threats made by the Trump government against Nth Korea.Peter AU | Apr 14, 2017 5:52:13 PM | 99Anticipating though that if the US were to make the first move against Nth Korea, Air China's flights back and forth between China and Nth Korea are going to be very full. I believe there are some 2 million Koreans living in China (mainly in Manchuria) and many if not most of them have family in Nth Korea. Beijing must consider preparing for a refugee exodus into China's northeast provinces if there are as yet no plans.
mmm... well something major is brewing. What is smoke and mirrors and deflection and what is the real US strategy?paul | Apr 14, 2017 6:40:24 PM | 101
Syria, Korea, Mattis cooking up a plot with GCC+Isreal = IranWow - I'm impressed with this approach from China. But they still need to be a bit stronger about denying the US the right or the chance to attack NK. Even Russia has several times sent a fleet to Syria. China should do this to ward off the Hegemon.jfl | Apr 14, 2017 7:00:05 PM | 102@or, @p aukarlof1 | Apr 14, 2017 7:01:52 PM | 103interesting discussion on the likelihood of war, upcoming.
i think certainly outraged has the 'rational' analysis of war well in hand. but i don't think that war is rational in, literally, the end.
i think the 'smartest guys in the room' in the us are not military types, but financial types. the same guys who run the hedge funds run the 'rational analysis' and forecast the 'outcomes' of wars, purely imaginary. and they have the rest of the world backing down before the 'overwhelming' might of the us wehrmacht, though a good part of their analysis is based on their own 'funny money' based 'power', which is only as good as everyone else's willing suspension of disbelief. no 'rational actor' would not back down, they say, in double negative. they're reductionists, and their results only hold true in the very much reduced world they've disconnected, bottled, and simulate their 'trades' in.
i think there is a very real chance that they'll take us all over the edge, especially now that they have the donald himself unequivocally - well for him - on board. we'll see, won't we?
we won't be safe from all this until after the air has been let out of their financial balloon, for good this time, and they are no longer the 'smartest guys' in the room. and then we'll only be safe if we claim our world and install an alternative management.
thanks b, for the excellent perspective on the ceaseless grind the us has put the peninsula under over the past six decades. i never noticed their lockstep of stress and torture with the agricultural cycle either. hades and persephone all over again. i guess it never stops.
Jen @94--Krollchem | Apr 14, 2017 7:13:33 PM | 104Thanks much for the complement. There are two main credible reporters on the Korean War that I use: IF Stone's The Hidden History of the Korean War was published in 1952 and was excellent for its timely veracity; Bruce Cumings, recently History Chair at University of Chicago, has written extensively on Korea, and his two volume The Origins of the Korean War is the most extensive examination of the conflict. In 2010, he published a very abridged version that looks serviceable, easier to find and much less expensive. This links to a review of Stone's book in doc format, www.ais.org/~jrh/Hidden_History_of_Korean_War.doc Cumins also co-authored Inventing the Axis of Evil: The Truth about North Korea, Iran, and Syria which is short and very readable. Cumins has also examined and written about the relationship between War and Television within the USA. And here's a website containing many of IF Stone's writings, http://www.ifstone.org/index.php
I am amazed by the depth of the comments on Trump's military threats against North Korea (trolls excepted). I would hope that Trump is just playing Teddy Roosevelt who "carried the big stick" using the white fleet to intimidate Japan:dh | Apr 14, 2017 7:15:01 PM | 105
http://www.u-s-history.com/pages/h942.htmlUnfortunately, would appear that Trump actually wants to degrade North Korea's nuclear program using strategic bombers (B52, B-1b and B2) currently deployed at Guam (a rerun of the US attack on Iraq nuclear reactor?).
https://reportuk.org/2017/04/14/us-defcon-nuclear-threat-warning-increased-with-north-korea-on-verge-of-war/The US has positioned two cruise missile carrying destroyers within 300 miles of the North Korean nuclear test site awaiting the USS Carl Vinson aircraft carrier strike group including the WC-135 "nuclear sniffer" aircraft.
U.S. Air Force has also just staged and epic Elephant Walk at Kadena Air Base Japan comprised of HH-60 Pave Hawks, F-15 Eagles, E-3 Sentries and KC-135 Stratotankers as a show of force (see Superstation95 for photos).
In addition to the thermobaric bomb demonstration in Afghanistan, the US just tested the upgraded B61-12 nuclear gravity bomb (just linked by Anon1)
Trump's "Big Stick" approach has led to mass movements of:
(1) China moved 200,000 troops on the border of North Korea;
(2) Evacuation of about 600,000civilians from Pyongyang;
(3) Plans by Japan's National Security Council on how to evacuate its nearly 60,000 citizens from South Korea;
(4) Lots of flights out of South Korea.
There are reports that China has sent its submarines sent out to sea (setting on the bottom?) and is likely making additional preparations without fanfare.
North Korea has recently stated that if an attack is perceived a nuclear war will occur. I would expect that the first strike would be an airburst meant to wipe out all electronics not protected by Faraday cages, including unhardened military communications systems.
I hate to speculate on where the other nuclear bombs will be " delivered". Under a worst-case scenario it could result in some global cooling about 20% of that predicted http://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1002/2013EF000205/full
On the US West coast it would be wise to stock up on iodine tablets as attacks on nuclear reactors and other nuclear facilities will release iodine 131 from fuel rods as well as other biologically hazardous radionuclides including strontium-90, cesium-137, and uranium-234.
It may be the Make America Great Again is actually represents the Jewish word for combat (MAGA). Such an approach was warned against by General Smedley Butler in his critical essay "War is a Racket". https://www.ratical.org/ratville/CAH/warisaracket.html
As a side note the South Korean elections are coming up soon. Does anyone have a point of view?
@104 The hedge fund guys are only good if they make the right bets. What they depend on is inside information, which companies are in trouble, which country is going to get whacked etc. But they don't always get it right. And their thinking is mostly short term.blues | Apr 14, 2017 7:18:52 PM | 106'Alternative management' would be nice. Maybe a race of benevolent aliens could take over.
I feel I should simply repeat what I said yesterday on this site. It still seems rather relevant:Peter AU | Apr 14, 2017 7:43:14 PM | 107This is where this is going, I would guess:
US Airstrike on North Korea Risks Leading to '5-6 Chernobyl-Type Disasters' https://sputniknews.com/politics/201704131052612166-us-north-korea-chernobyl/
/~~~~~~~~~~
"Approximately 30 nuclear power plants are operational in South Korea. Several of them could be destroyed even if conventional bombs and shells are used. This could lead to five-six Chernobyl-type disasters on a relatively small area of 99 square kilometers that could instantly turn into a place unsuitable for life," he explained.
\~~~~~~~~~~But that's not all we're going to get:
/~~~~~~~~~~
The Pentagon "cannot but take into account that in case of an airstrike against North Korea, US-made Tomahawks will fly toward the territory of Russia and China. This is a more dangerous scenario than the show of force in Syria," he said. "Russia will not be able to wait for US missiles to accidentally land on its territory. Moscow will be forced to shoot down the missiles while they are in North Korean airspace."
\~~~~~~~~~~Meanwhile, tens of millions of South Koreans perish, with a few becoming radionuclide refugees. Good job, eh?
@ bluesPiotr Berman | Apr 14, 2017 7:51:15 PM | 108
I would guess that SK, Japan, Australia, are all viewed simply as forward military bases by the US, that can be abandoned if required.@ jfl
I have read although ,in a casual way rather than a study, too much of the history of wars. Often what comes across the insanity of a country starting a war and then is itself destroyed. Nazi Germany - leading edge tech, smart people. Country of sixty million conquered virtually all of Europe with ease then took on Russia. Instead of being content with being a leading country, they were willing to gamble everything to have it all.
This is somewhat where the US is at today. The position is that it has over reached and now needs to pull back and consolidate, but we are not seeing that. instead, we are seeing the US become more threatening.
So for me that needs to be matched/reconciled to Outraged comments on pre-positioning, indicators ect.
TRUMP READY TO REMOVE CRAZED NORTH KOREAN KILLER [GLOBE as observed in my supermarket yesterday, front page reported on-line]Willy2 | Apr 14, 2017 7:53:30 PM | 109IN a gutsy move to save the world from global disaster, courageous President Donald Trump has drawn up a ruthless, top-secret plan to kill North Korean warmonger Kim Jong Un before he can push the button that would unleash nuclear holocaust!
D.C. insiders tell GLOBE the iron-willed president is fed up with roly-poly Kim's blustery bull and is determined to squash the pint-sized dictator, who recently launched four intercontinental ballistic missiles into the Sea of Japan!
"Trump has put the elite fighting teams of Delta Force and SEAL Team 6 in Trump has put the elite fighting teams of Delta Force and SEAL Team 6 in South Korea on standby and ordered Tomahawk missiles and nuclear weapons to the North Korean border!" a White House insider tells GLOBE.
Get all the details and the latest information on the White House's latest moves against the tyrannical North Korean dictator in this week's issue of GLOBE.
====
Piotr: I understand how "top-secrets" can make it to our intrepid GLOBE reporters. But how did they determined who is "iron-willed" and who is "rolly-polly". E.g. it seems to me that Mr. Trump and Mr. Kim have similar BMI. Or how both leaders exhibited iron will firing employees.
- MEDIA MATTERS had a VERY interesting take why we could see a US attack on North Korea:jfl | Apr 14, 2017 8:27:18 PM | 110@109 p auDr. Wellington Yueh | Apr 14, 2017 8:39:34 PM | 111i agree. no matter what happens, it won't be good ... until the Mother Of All Bubbles has burst. and then it might be but a brief respite indeed if we don't take advantage of the lull in 'play' to 'decapitate' our own 'leadership'. it's our sheer, mere 300 million+ souls (600 million+ soles?) to their 535 caputs ... think we have a chance?
@jfl #114:Julian | Apr 14, 2017 8:44:26 PM | 112A primary problem there is that they have convinced at least 20% of those 300M to be human shields in the service of Empire.
frances | Apr 14, 2017 9:02:27 PM | 113Apologies if this has already been mentioned - but if the USA were to unilaterally launch strikes on North Korea could Russia itself intervene and launch missiles against the ships/fleet at fault - ie - against those who have abrogated their responsibilities to international peace and security? The aggressor nation.
Could Russia sink the ships with the USS Carl Vinson in the name of maintaining international peace and security??
What side of Korea is the Carl Vinson and is it closer to the coastline of Russia or Syria?
Krollchem | Apr 14, 2017 9:24:28 PM | 115According to Jim Stone NK has a very formidable 50+ submarine fleet. He also said these subs are of NK manufacture based on their upgrades to Russian 1990's designs. They are nowhere to be seen at the moment and as they run on batteries when still, there is no easy way to detect them if they are on the ocean floor.
Many are nuclear, have on average 100 mile range and the largest one could travel to and hit the West Coast. So if the Trump armada attacks they may quickly find themselves on the bottom of the South China Sea. And as for a war with China, IMO there is no way the US can win conventionally IMO. And if it looks to go to nuclear, Russia will regretfully reduce us to ash. It appears Trump has turned over management of the military to the generals. I have the same sense of pending disaster that I would have if I, on rounding a corner bumped into 1000 Daleks and with not a Doctor in sight.
A Russia missile cruiser arrived in Korea on April 11th:DemiJohn | Apr 14, 2017 9:33:42 PM | 116Amazing how Kim Jung-un is demonized. Certainly a bully but there is much worse ... and Erdogan is untouchable.Krollchem | Apr 14, 2017 9:43:21 PM | 117blues @108jfl | Apr 14, 2017 10:13:07 PM | 118Good point about the nuclear reactors.
In addition nuclear reactors require fossil fuel power plants as backup up they suddenly lose power. In case of an air blast over South Korea the electrical grid would shut down with possible meltdown of reactors which didn't go into standby prior to the nuclear detonation.
An even more critical issue is that a lack of power would shutoff cooling water to the spent nuclear fuel storage ponds. This would result in the water boiling off and
"Once the fuel is uncovered, it could become hot enough to cause the metal cladding encasing the uranium fuel to rupture and catch fire, which in turn could further heat up the fuel until it suffers damage. Such an event could release large amounts of radioactive substances, such as cesium-137, into the environment."
http://www.ucsusa.org/nuclear-power/nuclear-waste/safer-storage-of-spent-fuel#.WPF2kI61tt8
http://allthingsnuclear.org/dlochbaum/spent-fuel-damage-pool-criticality-accident
It is important to remember that there is more spent nuclear fuel in spent fuel rods than in the reactors. There is a DOE computer program for calculating the radionuclide composition of the fuel vs storage time (Origin code). but I cannot find it on the internet. The release of these daughter products and the long term dispersal onto the land would turn Korea into a dead zone for hundreds of years.
@125 username ... not your real name. my name is john francis lee. i've never understood people who hide behind 'clever' usernames.Alaric | Apr 14, 2017 10:17:31 PM | 119This is very disturbing but I still believe it is show and that trump is just using theater to intimidate N Korea and actually China to control N Korea.marcus_lepidus | Apr 14, 2017 11:11:46 PM | 120i fully expect that China will give him a bogus way of looking tough that will achieve nothing and do little to n Korea. The problem is what happens if n Korea and China call his bluff and give him no way to look tuff.
Is it possible this is a distraction for further actions in Syria?
Maybe connected.....maybe not? With the election of Trump....word gets out that North Korea is very interested in talks with the incoming administration....and then what happens: Kim Jong-un's brother dies in a spectacularly suspicious fashion. Now that Park has been impeached.......and her likely successor looks to be someone open to talks with North Korea, the US is suddenly on the brink of war with the DPRK. Coincidence...neocon serendipity? Inquiring minds wanna know!Peter AU | Apr 14, 2017 11:12:18 PM | 121129yesu | Apr 14, 2017 11:23:25 PM | 122
into sci-fi entertainment much?@29 - This is why Trump acting so tough now, he know China+UN+EU+Nato will support his coming war.Posted by: Anon1 | Apr 14, 2017 12:49:02 PM | 29NotTimothyGeithner | Apr 14, 2017 11:33:03 PM | 123
ridiculous idea to even contend with. scared of what? the very first place for he n.korean nukes will be US army basesin japan, even before s korea.everyone knows the so called armada is a bluff here in asia, on other note, it shows USA doesn't provide security to the freedom of navigation that it keeps on pushing onto others. it does the opposite, it shows all the nations what freedom of navigation really means ..... to push for war instead of protecting trade, of which almost all the trade is coming from china anyways.
it brings a huge conundrum in decision making, if trump doesn't do anything, all countries in asia will switch alliances towards china in the long run, except for broke jokes japan/usa.
if trump does do something ridiculous, there won't be much of US/japan influence left in asia as china/russia will be forced to respond, and respond it will not like the fake wars washington is content with nowadays. trump obviously wants to change the tune of the conflicts....... but sending an armada into enemy territory while espousing support from nato..... (pacific nato?) puts so much fear into any nation here, knowing there is no petroleum logistics here for the war lovers.
where u going to buy oil from Hong kong? singapore? japan? russia?
@127 The simple answer is much like Obama, Trump is turning to bumbling around the international stage now that his domestic Presidency is finished. Between the Freedom Caucus and extinction of the Democrats who have been reliable crossover votes, there isn't a working majority in Washington.Kalen | Apr 14, 2017 11:34:00 PM | 124The key event wasn't the chemical weapon false flag or Rachel Maddow's latest Glenn Beck screed but the failure to repeal ACA and the recognition the Republicans don't have a plan to go or much of anything. The budget will be up in a few months, and he still has the same problem he has ACA: Demcorats who cant provide cover and the Freedom Caucus types.
"Wag the Dog" scenarios focus on salacious scandals, but the collapse of domestic Presidencies are usually followed by war Presidencies. Trump is largely the idiot he appears to be and is simply grabbing onto the various interests within the borg. Trump will bounce from "enemy" to "enemy" trying to find an issue to get his Presidency back on track.
One other jewel of US propaganda is why US is there, Keeping peace between NK and SK? Not at all US is there to keep peace between both Koreas and Japan and US stake imperial claim against China.Peter AU | Apr 14, 2017 11:47:55 PM | 125Numerous cases of Japanese even minute encroachments on territorial waters of whole Korea were met by SK and NK alike with joint condemnation recalling ambassadors and even small shooting war and that including sharp conflict between both Koreans and Japan over so called disputed islands and waters.
In fact a claim that US role there is stabilizing the situation cannot be entirely dismissed however the issue is that it is the US THAT CAUSED THIS INSTABILITY IN THE FIRST PLACE pushing regional divisions what amounts to precluding possibility to really end WWII among enemies resolve issues that still remind unresolved like Korea and move on with acknowledgment of reality of Chinese economic and political leadership which would be just return to historical situation just two centuries ago with modern solutions for coexistence.
But that would spell the end of globalist project under US imperial umbrella, a prospective that is strongly opposed on all sides for diametrically different reasons.
Something that has struck me as this thread goes on.. WWII never ended. Nazi/imperial Japan quest for empire morphed into US quest for empire that is coming to a climax today.Anoncommentator | Apr 14, 2017 11:51:21 PM | 126Wide ranging fascinating interview with former high ranking CIA intelligence officer, Robert David SteelePeter AU | Apr 14, 2017 11:55:22 PM | 127
https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=8UfYLA7FCqQcontinuing from 135Krollchem | Apr 14, 2017 11:58:45 PM | 128Russia/USSR won WWII in Vietnam, and Vietnam is now an independent sovereign country. US won WWII in Germany and Germany is still an occupied country. Japan has never been disputed and remains a US occupied country. Korea has never been settled and WWII is still ongoing.
"Deputy Defense Minister General of the Army of Russia, Dmitry Bulgakov has arrived in Khabarovsk Krai near North Korea to inspect troops."Circe | Apr 15, 2017 12:12:39 AM | 129"Russia also moved military vehicles (Air Def) toward Vladivostok not far from the border with North Korea"
Link also shows videos of Chinese units moving toward the North Korean border
http://thesaker.is/news-brief-brics-joint-communique-troops-deployment-near-korean-peninsula/
If North Korea, Russia, Iran, China or any other country that resists Zio-U.S. imperialism sent an Armada off the U.S. coast on the fourth of July, the U.S. wouldn't hesitate to sink it immediately, no questions asked. Trump is proving every day that he's a dangerous idiot.Anoncommentator | Apr 15, 2017 12:31:18 AM | 130This is going viral and so it should!!! https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=rkj9UCHO0Tcdenk | Apr 15, 2017 1:03:56 AM | 131so mark pence is in sk with the troops 'observing easter prayer', what fucking hypocrites , 'god's army' on the way to another killing spree. --Peter AU | Apr 15, 2017 1:10:32 AM | 132i wonder if pence's son is with the grunts ? mao sent his son together with the troops to help nk beat back the murkkans, hundreds of thousands never went home, including mao's son.
but nuthin about the chinese sacrifice was mentioned in the nk war memorial hall, its all about the 'great leader'.
during the sino/soviet split, nk had no hesitation ditching beijing for the more powerful ussr.by all accounts kim jong un would dearly wish to dump beijing for the more powerful unitedsnake...if only washington would accept him.
wouldnt be surprised if kim is eventually 'cowed' by trump's armada and submit to washington wish.
then trump would brag 'didnt i tell you all the past prez are pussies, it takes a real man to get things done'
hehhehe
=============
@ outraged.jfl | Apr 15, 2017 1:20:07 AM | 133
What would we see for a naval and to a lesser extent air war to blockade China? No ground war component with the massive logistic tail that requires. Obama's pivot on China entailed moving 60% of US naval assets to Asia pacific region.Where are US subs located? Where are US missile ships located. What is classified in the way of US naval asset positioning and not available to the public?
Carriers are smoke and mirrors. A bygone era.From what I can make of it, Carter pre-positioned India as a US asset in 2016.
it may be that b has hit the nail on the head again ...Dr. Wellington Yueh | Apr 15, 2017 1:21:00 AM | 134"As a first step, the Democratic People's Republic of Korea (DPRK) may suspend its nuclear and missile activities in exchange for the suspension of large-scale U.S.-Republic of Korea (ROK) military exercises," Wang told a press conference on the sidelines of the annual session of the National People's Congress.... what happens is that tee-rump unveils essentially this plan at the 'last minute' and takes credit for it, having exercised us all and directed the attention to his spotlight on the yellow sea.i hope that's what happens. we're stuck with this clown for four more years. he has no talent of his own, unless you call this kind of 'performance' talent ... and in fact he seems to have claimed it ... he may be an a**hole but he's the world's biggest a**hole! ... at least we might all live through it, ruled by a 70 year-old enfant terrible. tee-rump will play dummy and putin and xi can alternate as ventriloquists ... smiling and holding the dummy up to take the bows.
@145: I don't really consider folks here'bouts as peasants. There are trolls and sock puppets. B and the commentators here (you and jfl are high on the list!) comprise a collection of 'reality lenses' that I find useful.somebody | Apr 15, 2017 1:30:34 AM | 135RE: My initial response to jfl, the 20% I envision as human shields might be splittable, but you're only going to flake off a few %. Also, ignorance/apathy/fear (or incapacity for some other reason) on 'our side' brings the numbers way down. Add to that attrition from whatever course of action Empire attempts, and you have even fewer. Since we seem to be dealing with the 'upset-the-table' kind of losers, I'm sure they'll do something spectacular as a coda.
Anyway, currently reading "The Shining", "Conquest of the Useless", "Roughing It", "Moby Dick". Just finished Gregory Benford's "Galactic Center" series...that was gripping and depressing for 6 long volumes.
North Korea's statement names the "Trump's administration serious military hysteria" This description is correct.blues | Apr 15, 2017 1:31:08 AM | 136Hmmm. Hmmm.jfl | Apr 15, 2017 1:34:21 AM | 137/~~~~~~~~~~
Zero Hedge -- Krunch Time for Korean Krackpot Despot, Kim Jong-Un: Missile Crisis Countdown Has Begun -- Apr 14,2017
http://www.zerohedge.com/news/2017-04-14/krunch-time-korean-krackpot-despot-kim-jong-un-missile-crisis-countdown-has-begunVice President Pence is scheduled to visit Seoul on Sunday, during his first Asian trip. The timing of his visit, after the Day of the Sun, might indicate the US does not plan any pre-emptive strike against North Korea on the Day of the Sun However, while Pence is ostensibly going to South Korea to talk with the government there about North Korea's nuclear development, the White House has also said it has contingency plans for the VP's visit, should North Korea carry out another nuclear test, indicating the possibility of a sudden shift to a war footing if Kim goes ahead with his apparent plans.
\~~~~~~~~~~What if Pence doesn't make it out in time?
Hmmm.
@146 denk, 'by all accounts kim jong un would dearly wish to dump beijing for the more powerful unitedsnake...'Peter AU | Apr 15, 2017 1:40:24 AM | 138but that's a plan made looking in the rearview mirror ... isn't it? the future is china's. the very recent past is the 'legacy' of the us, burnt-out shooting star. sacrificed to the greed of its ruling class. in this life, at any rate.
any opportunist worth his wages would go with china at this point in the game. and isn't kim really just the korean version of trump?
an apprentice working for the apparat that really runs the country as their frontman, to bound about on stage and keep the world's attention on korea?
151Julian | Apr 15, 2017 1:53:59 AM | 139
Ignorance/apathy covers the middle 75% or so. A US manual on special forces hybrid/covert warfare covers that well. Even has a pie chart. Too many home brews at the moment to dig up the link, compounded by the fact that it is nearly time for my nana nap.Re: Posted by: Pft | Apr 14, 2017 5:41:44 PM | 97jfl | Apr 15, 2017 2:05:06 AM | 140If Kim does want to 'provoke' the Americans and test a missile or nuke surely he's most likely to do it a bit later than people think - ie - like Tuesday night Korean time - perhaps just before US markets open for Tuesday after the holidays. Or are they open on Monday? If they are, perhaps 9-10pm Monday night Korean time???
Try and cause a 'panicked' market crash before Trump can react? Ensuring he will react against the backdrop of a market crash should he choose to react.
Anyone know - are US markets open on Monday?
@151 tjkPft | Apr 15, 2017 2:29:45 AM | 141i re-read moby dick myself a couple of years ago. found a whale chart to go along with it, which helped bring the voyage to life ... back in the day ... when i was a kid there were always films from africa on tv, millions of gazelles and wildebeasts. i imagine they're all gone now, as are the buffalo, as go the whales.
i think that, just as the man himself has turned on a dime when confronted with 'reality', so too will we and many of our usian brothers and sisters, many his followers, once we reach the point of personal betrayal required to open our eyes to our real enemies, to forget the scripted 'enemies' our real enemies had taught us to love to hate. but i've never been through a real meltdown and revolution before, so i don't know. that looks to me the way things are headed though. deplored by all sides, yet thought to be well under control, yet we all have our own peculiar 'red lines', and are being pushed, relentlessly toward them. we are many and growing more numerous; they are few and getting fewer, by their own design.
@135 Peter AUHoarsewhisperer | Apr 15, 2017 2:31:02 AM | 142The wars to consolidate the world under one power has been going on for well over a century. Britain took the lead early on before passing the torch to the US once Rhodes plan to recover America was accomplished, sometime between Mckinleys assassination and the and of WWI . Wall Street and the money power in the city of London were always in sync. Albert Pike predicted 3 World Wars would be needed.
The main change has been the form of government envisioned for the future. This has changed from Communism to Fascism. Many supporters of fascism here in the 1930's including FDR. After WWII many of the fascist bankers and industrialists in Germany and Japan got off light and were reintegrated into the global economy where they trained up the next generation of fascists. They joined forces with those likeminded folks in the US and Brits by working together in BIS, various international agencies and groups like the Bilderbergers and Trilaterals to develop strategies to acccomplish their goals in the short and long terms
This is oversimplistic but time is short
...michaelj72 | Apr 15, 2017 2:40:23 AM | 143
After all, given the insane and surreal rabid propaganda in western MSM, what difference would it make re supposed 'image' in the eyes of the supposed 'International Community' (US/UK/Israhell & good time vassals) ... any ?
Posted by: Outraged | Apr 14, 2017 4:03:27 PM | 78That's a really good question. Imo, Western propaganda often seems to have an influence on the actions and statements of AmeriKKKa's fake enemies. There are two (maybe more?) ways of looking at this.
1. The fake enemies really are worried about public opinion in the West.
2. They're not worried, but deem it sensible to pretend that they are, because anything they can do to encourage AmeriKKKa to believe more of its own bullshit should lead to an escalation to the point where it crosses the line dividing the sublime from the ridiculous - which is what seems to have happened this year.we are ruled by idiots, con men, war-mongers, and Neanderthal whackos. Any attack by the US would be a massacre and humanitarian disaster of epic proportions. Plus, I assume, the north korean army that remains would likely shower much of south korea with tens of thousands of rockets, mortars and missiles. http://www.counterpunch.org/2017/04/14/whackos-in-washington-the-risky-game-of-regime-decapitation/Peter AU | Apr 15, 2017 2:51:26 AM | 144Whackos in Washington: the Risky Game of Regime Decapitation by Dave Lindorff
.....But what would the result of such a strike be?
For one thing, almost certainly it would mean the contamination of part or even much of the country in North Korea with nuclear fallout and radiation. For another it - given the long history of US "precision" targeting going terribly wrong - it would mean much death and destruction for the long-suffering North Korean people.
It would also mean chaos in a country that for nearly three-quarters of a century has been ruled by one absolute tyrant or another, in which there is simply no organized system of governance at lower levels to handle anything, from delivery of health services to distribution of food. If you think the chaos that followed the US invasion and overthrow of Saddam Hussein and the Baathist leadership of Iraq was bad, or that the chaos of the US overthrow of Gaddafy in Libya was bad, you ain't seen nothing yet if North Korea's leader gets offed in a US strike.
In theory, China, South Korea or Japan could step in with troops, money and civilian personnel to help reestablish some kind of order and peace, while preventing the rise of yet another tyrannical government, but none of that is likely. The Chinese would probably not want to take it on, the Japanese are viewed negatively as a former colonial power, and South Korea may not want the financial burden of rescuing the North, which would be staggering.
Meanwhile, while the US could relatively easily, and at minimal cost, "take out" North Korea's missiles, nukes and leadership, especially in the case of the Trump administration, there is absolutely no interest in taking on the costs of occupying and subsidizing the rebuilding North Korea following such an ill-conceived attack......
163George Smiley | Apr 15, 2017 3:27:44 AM | 145
"Any attack by the US would be a massacre and humanitarian disaster of epic proportions."Just part of human nature. Very common throughout history.
As technology increases, the scale increases.A lot of people do not know that the US bombed the hell out of the entire of north Korea during the war. Like to ashes. The Chinese, and even more so, the Soviet reconstruction project for north Korea was the biggest of its kind post WWII. Even bigger than what actually went to European reconstruction I believe, but don't quote me on that (not in terms of what was earmarked but spent).okie farmer | Apr 15, 2017 3:28:25 AM | 146ALSO perhaps the biggest crime was bombing the north's huge dams. Unless your a poor farmer you don't know what kind a thing that it is to do. No military value (I heard it was bombed because they ran out of other targets in some way).
Its insane and breeds a toooon of animosity. Plus rejecting all attempts at peace talks. Plus having the media only present it in one way and an attitude of RA RA we don't engage in diplomacy with the terrorist obviously he only listens to force.
Crazy world. And most people can't see past it at a level more deep than "crazy dictator with a bad haircut."
The world is so fucked up.
The 'mother of all bombs' is big, deadly – and won't lead to peace Medea BenjaminGeorge Smiley | Apr 15, 2017 3:30:53 AM | 147
"I'm really very good at war. I love war, in a certain way," bragged candidate Donald Trump at a campaign rally in Iowa. This is the same Donald Trump who avoided the Vietnam draft by claiming a bone spur in his foot, a medical problem that never kept him off the tennis courts or golf courses, and miraculously healed on its own.
But with the escalation of US military involvement in Syria, the record number of drone attacks in Yemen, more US troops being sent to the Middle East and, now, the dropping of a massive bomb in Afghanistan, it looks like Trump may indeed love war. Or at least, love "playing" war.
https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2017/apr/14/the-mother-of-all-bombs-big-deadly-ineffI've also heard the total death toll was between 1/10 and 1/5 of the total population.George Smiley | Apr 15, 2017 3:37:42 AM | 148Of the TOTAL population. Imagine knowing no one could name a person not being touched by the violence. Having total families decimated. Breeds a ton of hatred and understandably so. We need to get that its not just as one sided as having everyone "brainwashed" without access to outside culture. Its an insane outlook.
Solo sorry for the triple post, also needed to say that because everyone hates this crazy dictator people never take the anti war position. Its just we should charge in with our guns - or giant missiles - blazing hooorahh.No one sees the death and destruction that will take place. The artillery alone not even nukes, would smash Seoul. They can't see beyond the black and white of 'allow dictator nukes' and 'kill him.' There's never room for diplomacy here - its just as bad as 'negotiating with terrorists.' What a crock of shit. And trumps played his hand badly cause he has no wiggle room. Makes Syrian strike looks like a joke. So much for being friendly with China. How about a piece of delicious cake as consolation?
b | Apr 15, 2017 3:45:16 AM | 150@Outraged - deleted a bunch of your comments with long list of military equipment no one is interested inGeorge Smiley | Apr 15, 2017 3:45:27 AM | 151provide links to such stuff, don't copy it.
--
@all - deleted a bunch of nonsensical one-liners and some sniping at each other that I considered off topic. Go back to kindergarten if you need that.
LOVE B's take on the economics of nuclear might is. Crazy I never heard of those documents. Doesn't help that the North has been straved of food - and more importantly OIL. Means a lot of money when you get down to brass taxes. Worst of all, north Korea NEEDS subsistence farming and its so mountainous you need oil and diesel to blow these hilly as hell fields. When you strave them of oil, you strave them of food again in a way. Without subsistence farming they strave for the most part. And people think that drives people AWAY from a demagogic/personality cult type figure. It only endears them more. It, in a way, is proving the dictator right... That the US IS OUT TO GET US (and it is) and THE US IS STARVING YOU NOT ME (also true).b | Apr 15, 2017 4:02:52 AM | 152@all - done some housecleaning here for Day of the Sun - Juche 105 (.i.e.today)ashley albanese | Apr 15, 2017 4:31:45 AM | 153
---The parade in North Korea yesterday was quite a show. Lots of new TEL (Transport-Erector-Launch Vehicles) for big intercontinental missiles. We don't know if real missiles were inside but NoKo likes to show new stuff off and only field it a year or two later.
Video of the 3 hour parade from NoKo TV https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=okxM0AUsh_w The interesting mil stuff starts around 2h 14m with the leg swinging girls (intentionally?)
Some remarks on the off-road capable TEL North Korea's 2017 Military Parade Was a Big Deal. Here Are the Major Takeaways
Even though Pyongyang withheld from testing this weekend amid rumors of possible retaliation by the United States, North Korea is still looking to improve its missile know-how. Moreover, the long-dreaded ICBM flight test also might not be too far off now. Given the ever-growing number of TELs - both wheeled and tracked - North Korea may soon field nuclear forces amply large that a conventional U.S.-South Korea first strike may find it impossible to fully disarm Pyongyang of a nuclear retaliatory capability. That would give the North Korean regime what it's always sought with its nuclear and ballistic missile program: an absolute guarantee against coercive removal.(will put the above in a post update)smoothie X2 82oneoffposter | Apr 15, 2017 4:38:31 AM | 154
Ah -- what lies beneath the waves? . I remember in the early 1970's comments in the Western press that China through budget constraints was putting its 'eggs' into the submarine basket - cost effectiveness - . The article stressed that Chinese strategists deliberately eschewed using non-Chinese designs and 'fast track' technology so as to develop submarine systems that would have unique , secret capabilities honed to Chinese conditions . Perhaps of all weaponary the Chinese sub-mariners may have some surprises in store . Let's hope we never have to find out --Dear b and community. I read all of your posts on this topic with interest.George Smiley | Apr 15, 2017 5:17:39 AM | 155The focus seems to be on what DPRK (north), PRC and USA might do. I would like to suggest that closer scrutiny should be applied to what is actually going on in RK (South). I think that this tension is being ratcheted upwards primarily to influence the outcome of the presidential election in the South.
For the past two presidential terms, the South has had Lee Myung-Bak and Park Geun-Hye both of whom took a hardline against North Korea and have killed the Sunshine Policy of their predecessors (Kim Dae-Jung and Roh Moo-Hyun). As we all know, Park has recently been impeached. In normal circumstances it could be expected that an opposition figure like Moon Jae-In would be the favourite to win the election. This may not be in the interests of either the US, Japan or the powers-that-be in South Korea.
The election is 9 May 2017, and the US president has just ensured that North Korea will be front and centre in the campaign.
Just a thought. Thanks for everyone's contributions. This is a really good place to gain insight.
@154PavewayIV | Apr 15, 2017 5:24:32 AM | 156Extremely interesting take. Plus the anti THAAD movement is growing. Incidents between American soldiers in South Korean bases and the locals have been growing and that doesn't help. Remember that Osprey crash a couple months back?
It all adds up.
oneoffposter@154 - Thanks for that, oneoffposter. Korea would (supposedly) have been re-unified in the late 90's if it wasn't for US and Japanese efforts to prevent that from happening. I don't have specifics to back that up, but that 'feels' about right with regards to US actions over the years.jfl | Apr 15, 2017 6:15:41 AM | 157South Korea is clearly benefiting economically (finally) from US support, but also pays a price by being another lapdog to the US and an eternal host for our military presence, willing or not. I suspect it's 'willing' because the US does everything possible to remind South Koreans of their peril by demonizing the North. South Korean press is worse than the US MSM.
Likewise, the US does everything possible to antagonize North Korean leaders and rattle their cage, making them seem even more insane than they usually are. Resulting, of course, in the South Koreans eagerly approving an eternal US presence for protection and the North Korean leaders sliding further into a black hole of indignation and rage. We didn't create the psychopaths in North Korea, but we're sure good at keeping them in power. They're useful to us.
I'll be watching the elections in the South with much interest now.
i wonder how much we really know about the koreans. it's hard for me to imagine that the korean people hate and fear each other. korea is not a settler country, like us five eyes, where the possibility of setting one group against another is so conveniently ready to hand to the oppressors. can either set of koreans hate and fear one of their governments more than the other? i think, as someone else pointed out above, the worst of the terror after the war was undertaken by korean compradors of the japanese, at american instigation. i remember reading about a program to 'allow' southerners to cross the border for family reunions. i think it was terrifically popular.V. Arnold | Apr 15, 2017 6:36:59 AM | 158who pointed out above that wwii has not yet ended on the korean peninsula. i always knew that the war was 'technically' not over in the sense of no peace treaty's having been signed ... the same obtains between russia and japan, doesn't it? that's an indictment right there of the us. in both cases, as the us still has japan on a short leash.
treating peoples like objects, we'll be objects of hate ourselves, finally. already are in many quarters, of course. but in far fewer than we 'merit'. i don't see how that cannot change now that we have embraced 'the dark side', as cheney put it, and now the unabashed evil-clown/wicked-witch with trump/clinton in the 2016 coin toss.
now with mercenaries, cruise missiles, drones, chemical weapons, and none of our own skin in the game ourselves any longer, we really do fit the description of creatures from another planet to our victims. the image of hg wells' aliens in tripods sticks in my mind. that must be just what americans - not even in - drones and cruise missiles must seem to our victims.
atonement. at-one-ment a friend of mine used to say. with the human race. how long will that take for america and americans, once 'the pride of man' is broken in the dust again.
Well, it's 19:02m in Korea, on the 15th and no nuke blast. President Loon (my apology to the bird) will have to pack up his toys and go home.somebody | Apr 15, 2017 6:43:12 AM | 159
I wonder how much that hubris cost the US?Posted by: oneoffposter | Apr 15, 2017 4:38:31 AM | 154jfl | Apr 15, 2017 7:14:42 AM | 160From German experience this would not work. Every South Korean knows that war with the North was/would be total desaster.
It is also clear that North Korea will only open up if they feel safe. The break down of communist systems is over, there is no use to wait for that.
German Social Democrats had their best election results when promoting a "change by approach" policy.
The main issue will be South Korea's relationship with the US and China. Traditionally South Korea has profited more from the US than from exchange with China. I bet this has already changed. But the US managed to create a security conflict between China and South Korea that ensures increased Chinese military support for North Korea.
@159 sb, 'South Korea has profited more from the US than from exchange with China. I bet this has already changed. 'oneoffposter | Apr 15, 2017 7:54:29 AM | 161The top export destinations of South Korea are
China ($131B),
the United States ($72.7B),
Vietnam ($26.6B),
Hong Kong ($26.3B) and
Japan ($25.5B).The top import origins are
China ($90.1B),
Japan ($44.6B),
the United States ($42.7B),
Germany ($20.2B) and
Saudi Arabia ($17.7B).@160 jflsomebody | Apr 15, 2017 7:57:38 AM | 162Thanks for posting the figures. I don't know what the present day figures are like (your source seems to be posting figures for 2015).
Since then, Park Geun-Hye gave the go ahead for THAAD to be installed overriding the objections of the local people. People more informed than I question (to put it mildly) the benefit this gives to South Korea. However, it has already had an impact on the South's economic relationship with China (and I guess, the political relationship too), showing just how important the question of who holds power in South Korea really is.
Posters here often refer to the US/NATO attempt to split the Russia/China axis. It seems to me that this KOR/CHINA relationship also would not be welcomed.
The ideas and slow-build towards reunification as evidenced by Kim Dae-Jung & Roh Moo-Hyun (e.g. Sunshine policy and the Truth commissions) were (in my opinion) logical steps to be taken towards first reducing the tensions on the peninsula leading perhaps to reunification talks (you never know). It is impossible to know now where they would have led, but they have been thoroughly discredited at this point and it is difficult to see how they could be restarted.
S.Koreans file petition with constitutional court against THAAD deploymentsmuks | Apr 15, 2017 8:17:00 AM | 163SEOUL, April 6 (Xinhua) -- South Korean residents and civic group activists on Thursday filed a petition against the deployment of the U.S. Terminal High Altitude Area Defense (THAAD) missile defense system, which they depicted as unconstitutional.Residents from Seongju county and Gimcheon city in southeast South Korea and peace activists gathered outside the constitutional court in central Seoul, holding a press conference before submitting the constitutional appeal.
According to the petition document, the residents and activists said the THAAD deployment violated many of the constitution clauses while failing to follow any appropriate procedures.
Seoul and Washington abruptly announced a decision in July last year to install one THAAD battery in the county by the end of this year. Just three days before the announcement, Defense Minister Han Min-koo told lawmakers that he hadn't been informed of any notice about the THAAD installation.
Foreign Minister Yun Byung-se visited a department store when the THAAD deployment decision was announced, indicating no advance discussions between ministers of defense and foreign affairs and the presidential office.
The petitioners said the decision-making process on THAAD was rough and ready as there was no approval in the cabinet meeting, and that it was unilaterally determined by the national security council of the presidential office.
"The THAAD decision did not follow any proper procedure. No effort has been made for dialogue with residents," said Ha Joo-hee, an attorney at Lawyers for a Democratic Society, an advocacy group composed of liberal lawyers.
So much provocation, vilification and preparation of the public...for nothing.col from oz | Apr 15, 2017 8:26:51 AM | 164The Neocons had really hoped that NK would react in some spectacularly 'menacing' way on its national holiday...but no, just a parade with some huge phal...er, missiles. Sad.
It doesn't really matter *who* starts an aggression, but somebody at some point would surely lose his nerves, no? And NK would make for such a good villain, reminding SK and Japan of how dearly they need all that 'protection'.
Let's see where the next act will play out. Ukraine once again, or Libya?
(on that MOAB - looks like a strong message that 'we' are not about to give Afghanistan up, but rather willing to up the ante...)
Beautifully written 157 jfl esp NOWsmuks | Apr 15, 2017 8:32:42 AM | 165@ oneoffposter | Apr 15, 2017 7:54:29 AM | 161Curtis | Apr 15, 2017 8:59:05 AM | 166Yet bet NATO wouldn't be happy. The entire 'containment' policy towards Beijing rests on the surrounding states being hostile to/ scared of China. Already SE Asia has all but 'fallen' (from a western viewpoint), what remains is Japan and SK. Detente? God forbid!
The THAAD deployment places SK (even more) firmly in the cross-hairs of China's missiles. So now, at least they have some reason to fear it and scramble for 'protection'...mission accomplished!
(President Park didn't approve of this...which is why she was removed.)
Is there a way out of this? Not really. The US running out of money, maybe.
bCurtis | Apr 15, 2017 9:01:20 AM | 167
I read the nj.gov link and it does not tend to match your narrative in that paragraph although I agree that official narratives tend to twist the truth. I cannot see the Soviet motives towards Korea as anymore altruistic than Japan's especially in that time period. The Soviets are no more saints in the WWII period than the US.I do agree that US maneuvers close to the borders of "opponents" whether Russia or NK are antagonistic and unnecessary. And sometimes stupid action takes place after them like we saw in Georgia 2008. Putin shook a finger at Bush and rightly so. If Mr. "Art of the Deal" really were a deal maker he would meet at Panmunjon with the leaders of NK, SK, Russia, and China and sign an final official end to the Korean war and set the framework for demilitarization of the peninsula and trade/other deals.
somebody jflAnon1 | Apr 15, 2017 9:06:26 AM | 168
Excellent points. What South Korea wants should be paramount to the issue of what the US should do. Seoul is very vulnerable.smuksGravatomic | Apr 15, 2017 9:18:57 AM | 169For nothing? The american ship have pretty much just arrived, within next 4 weeks we probably will see something happen by the US. He simply cant back now.
@HoarsewhispererGravatomic | Apr 15, 2017 9:23:57 AM | 170According to US MSM the Chinese are totally on board and only have moved troops to bolster the border and help the US. And Russia and China really aren't conducting military exercises together.
This constant mistranslated rhetoric and literally putting of words into foreign leaders mouths is of course one aspect of the western propaganda arm. Even when the headline or text of the article is updated, corrected or removed the meat of it remains in social media like Facebook.
I have friends who use Facebook, I don't, who constantly say the oddest, incorrect things to me that could only have been fomented there.
@ oneoffposterjfl | Apr 15, 2017 10:29:41 AM | 171Yes, when the arm twisting doesn't suffice they remove you, that's part of what the NSA and CIA do. Smear, blackmail and gather corruption evidence, whether real, perceived or planted to keep US puppets in line.
@161 oop,Monolycus | Apr 15, 2017 10:32:57 AM | 172yes, somebody's link had the china-south korea trade at 300 billion, whereas the numbers in the link i found were at ~220 billion. but the the china-south korea trade at 220 billion was just about twice the us-south korea trade in that period. i imagine it ratio was higher, if anything, up until thaad.
@162, sb,
maybe the trade value lost due to the thaad deal will make everyone 'notice' its illegality ... now that they're starting to bleed. money speaks louder than the law, in most countries these days.
@167 curtis
they'd set the peninsula on fire if they thought it would bring them closer to world domination. the us ruling class cares not a whit for humans of any 'brand', americans included. certainly not for koreans, north or south.
@170 gravatomic
i have no proof but that's exactly the thought that ran through my head when park went down : she wasn't 'on board' the thaad train. i suppose it was the memory of the pictures with xi ... and of the vile cia's past actions, all over the world.
@bdh | Apr 15, 2017 10:33:07 AM | 173I saw your response earlier about how no writer can represent both sides equally, and I agree. I still lurk here and find no fault with your insights 99% of the time. You know perfectly well that in most situations, I am a staunch non-interventionist. I simply disagree (strongly) on this particular issue. Anyway, I apologize for sounding so hostile--especially at you. This situation just has my nerves pretty frayed right now.
I don't want to be dragged into a giant tu quoque match, so I won't respond to much more here, except to address George Smiley @155, above. I'm not sure where you read that the anti-THAAD movement is "growing," but that certainly doesn't seem to be the case from here on the ground. I am about 20 minutes from Seongju, and have spoken to many of the anti-THAAD people about their concerns. There's very, very little going on there politically; Seongju is a very poor area which is economically dependent on a particular melon crop they are famous for. Most of the anti-THAAD demonstrators were local farmers who had gotten the idea that the EM radiation coming from the THAAD radar would hurt their crops. In the wake of China's economic retaliation against THAAD, however, a good many of the locals have reversed their opinion and now support it. When the deployment was first announced, there was a lot of buzz about it (nobody wanted it here in their backyard,) but now when the subject is brought up at all (increasingly rarely,) it's usually digging in their heels about how China deserves it for kicking out their K-pop stars and shutting down the Lotteria fast food restaurants unfairly. Public opinion might change again if Moon Jae-in declares a firm position about it instead of waffling back and forth, but at this moment it's only a small but vocal minority that are opposed to it.
@158 The US armada will be off to Pattaya soon for some well deserved R&R.jfl | Apr 15, 2017 10:47:18 AM | 174The BBC coverage is worth a watch BTW for those who like to read between the lines. Lots of spin of course but the commentator does admit at one point that NK needs its nukes to avoid going the way of Iraq and Libya.
@168 anondenk | Apr 15, 2017 11:03:02 AM | 175was there ever an 'official' announcement of a nuclear test planned for saturday? or was it just an 'expectation' ... if the latter, maybe the cia fostered it, knowing it wasn't going to happen, so they could thwack tee-rump's rump and have him take a 'victory lap' when it didn't? if they're serious about nukes ... and they should be as long as the us has them in its sights ... the north koreans have got to test more at some point.
it's really hard for me to imagine any good excuse for a us battle group to be between china and korea in the yellow sea without an invitation. what would the us position be if a chinese - not to mention a russian - battle group showed up in the caribbean, or hudson's bay, concerned about the rogue american state and it's mad leader ?
jfl 137denk | Apr 15, 2017 11:09:48 AM | 176
here's the oft derided 'unelected' ccp partial plan for 2017,
'to lift another 10-20m people outta poverty and step up the anti corruption battle'.
thats in addition to the 70m already bailed out , cited by UN as a text book case of social development.whats the vaunted 'elected' leaders of murkka plan for 2017,
to do 'syria, nk, iran, china, russia.... '?
350 ships for the 'depleted' USN ?
'star war' redux ?
by the guy who got 'elected' on his 'anti deep state' and 'populist' platform --
Anon1 | Apr 15, 2017 11:27:54 AM | 177lots of people say mdm park is a murkkan stooge and she's been removed by people power.
well like i say many times before, park is a very reluctant 'stooge',
first off she is a known sinophile who's well versed in chinese culture,
she had been dragging her feet over the thaad installation for years and china is sk's largest market.
hence antagonising china must be the last thing on her mind.anyone of the above is enough reason for a regime change.
the last straw was most likely when she defied washington's dictat and join putin in china's ww2 memorial ceremony in 2015.
mind you, she's the only leader from the murkkan camp with 'cojones'to attend. [1]
i guess her fate was sealed from that moment.so is her ouster yet another color rev masqueraded as 'people power',like the 'arab spring' etc ?
some observers think so.
we shall see.
[1]
Xi extended a particularly warm welcome to Park, who attended the ceremony over the objections of Japan and the U.S.
http://asia.nikkei.com/Politics-Economy/International-Relations/Ties-between-Park-Xi-shape-East-Asia-diplomacyjfl / 174juliania | Apr 15, 2017 12:13:45 PM | 178Re: US provocations
Yes you are of course right, as usual when US does it themselves, it is apparently the fault of the other party (North Korea) according to the useless MSM in the west.
There are some rumours that NK will test its nuclear tech. again soon and then US will strike.
China is getting nervous somehow, apparently dont understand what they effectively have giving a green light to:China : "We call on all parties to refrain from provoking and threatening each other, whether in words or actions, and not let the situation get to an irreversible and unmanageable stage."
https://www.wsws.org/en/articles/2017/04/15/nkor-a15.htmlThe chinese cant even condemn the foreign aggressor anymore.
Thank you very much for this important and critical posting, b. I wish for you and all who come here a joyful and rich Springtime holy season to assuage our fears and give us hope for the future.Rick | Apr 15, 2017 2:37:35 PM | 179Peace to all.
Sure would be nice to find the original of the comments attributed to MacArthur. I've looked at the references in "Napalm: an American biography" by Robert M. Neer but can't find any original sources online. The footnote for this passage is jumbled, citing seven sources for this passage.mauisurfer | Apr 15, 2017 3:14:19 PM | 180I did find that at the time MacArthur was advocating far more attacks in Korea, not less, which makes such comments suspect. Why would someone who was losing their job, and likely their career, due to their stance advocating more military action make such comments?
George Smiley | Apr 15, 2017 4:50:38 PM | 181It's Time for America to Cut South Korea Loose
From Foreign Policy Magazine (behind the paywall)
The first step to solving the North Korean problem is removing U.S. troops from the middle of it.
By Doug Bandow
April 13, 2017It's Time for America to Cut South Korea Loose
Asia contains the world's two most populous nations, the country with the largest Muslim population, the two largest economies after America, and the next superpower and peer competitor to the United States. But when U.S. Secretary of State Rex Tillerson visited the continent recently, small, impoverished North Korea nearly monopolized his attention.
Why is the United States, which dominates the globe militarily, politically, and economically, fixated on this poor, isolated, and distant nation? Because America has gotten entangled where it does not belong.
Washington has been deeply involved in the Korean Peninsula since the end of World War II. Subsequently, the Cold War gave a zero-sum quality to international relations, with Washington's loss being the Soviet Union's gain. Having invested some 37,000 lives to save South Korea during the Korean War, America's credibility was also at stake. And with the "loss" of China to communism fresh on Americans' minds, nobody was willing to see another Asian nation go red.
But that world disappeared long ago.
The Korean Peninsula has lost its geopolitical significance, South Korea its helplessness, and America's Korea commitment its purpose.
The Korean Peninsula has lost its geopolitical significance, South Korea its helplessness, and America's Korea commitment its purpose. While there is much to criticize in the approach of Donald Trump's administration to the rest of the world, the president correctly sees the need for a foreign policy that more effectively protects America's interests. A good place to start shifting course is the region home to the world's newest and least responsible nuclear power.
The Koreas are no longer a proxy battleground between superpowers. There was a time when U.S. withdrawal from a confrontation with a Soviet ally in Asia would have, analysts believed, signaled weakness a continent away in Europe. But the Soviets are long gone and the cause for American commitment with them. An inter-Korean war would be tragic and the body count enormous, but absent American involvement the fighting would largely be confined to the peninsula. The continued presence of U.S. forces, by contrast, virtually guarantees the spread of conflict.
South Korea's defense no longer requires Washington's presence. The South's economy began racing past its northern antagonist during the 1960s. Democracy arrived in the late 1980s. By the 1990s, when mass starvation stalked Pyongyang as Seoul's economy boomed, the gap between the two Koreas was already huge and growing. The South's military potential is correspondingly great though as yet unrealized - in part because dependence on the U.S. presence has affected strategic choices.
Yet America's military presence has remained sacrosanct. Jimmy Carter's plan to bring home U.S. troops was opposed even by his own appointees. Ronald Reagan pushed a more muscular confrontation with the Soviet Union and other communist states. With the end of the Cold War, his successors expanded alliance commitments, particularly in Europe, but also in Asia. Today, 28,500 troops remain in South Korea, backed up by U.S. forces in Okinawa and other Asian-Pacific bases, and highlighted by periodic decisions to overfly the North with bombers or send aircraft carriers to nearby waters whenever Washington wants to demonstrate "resolve" to Pyongyang.
So why is America still there?
One argument, advanced by analyst Robert E. McCoy, is moral, "since it was American ignorance that facilitated the division of the Korean Peninsula in the concluding days of World War II." Some Koreans malign America for this division. But this is the wisdom of hindsight; in the chaotic aftermath of global conflict, no U.S. official wanted to push the Soviets over a faraway peninsula. The alternative was pure inaction, which would have resulted in South Koreans joining their northern neighbors in the Kim dynasty's new Dark Age. Perhaps inadvertently, Washington did a very good deed. For that it deserves praise, not criticism and claims that it must forever police the peninsula.
More practical is the contention of analysts such as the Heritage Foundation's Bruce Klingner that U.S. backing is "necessary to defend" the South. Yet, in contrast to 1950, there is no reason the South cannot protect itself - if properly motivated to do so by the departure of U.S. conventional forces. With a bigger economy, larger population, and significant technological edge, as well as greater international support, Seoul could construct armed forces capable of deterring and defeating the North. Doing so would be expensive and take serious effort, but so what? The South Korean government's most important duty is to protect its people.
Taking on that responsibility also would force Seoul to treat Pyongyang more consistently. The "Sunshine Policy" begun under former South Korean President Kim Dae-jung resulted in the transfer of some $10 billion in cash and assistance to the North, even as the latter was developing missiles and nuclear weapons. That approach was viable only because Washington provided a military backstop (and if the new South Korean president, to be elected in May, revives the Sunshine Policy, as some have suggested, there's no telling if the Trump administration would be so forgiving). The South needs to bear both the costs and benefits of whatever approach it takes.
But even if South Korea couldn't defend itself, the argument would still fall short.
American soldiers shouldn't be treated as defenders of the earth, deployed here, there, and everywhere.
American soldiers shouldn't be treated as defenders of the earth, deployed here, there, and everywhere. The United States should go to war only when its most important interests are at stake.
South Korea's prosperity is not one of those vital interests, at least in security terms. A renewed conflict confined to the two Koreas would be horrific, but the consequences for the United States would be primarily humanitarian and economic, not security. The cost would be high but fall primarily on the region. In contrast, direct U.S. involvement in another Korean War would be much more expensive than the Afghan and Iraqi conflicts, which have cost America thousands of lives and trillions of dollars.
Of course, the North's possession of what we assume to be a growing and at some point deliverable nuclear arsenal skews the peninsula's balance of power. However, this doesn't create a need for a conventional American military presence on the peninsula. Washington could still guarantee massive retaliation against any North Korean use of nuclear weapons, providing a deterrent against the North's threats.
But it is worth contemplating whether it would be better to allow South Korea to construct its own deterrent. In the late 1970s, South Korean President Park Chung-hee worried about Washington's reliability and began work on a Korean bomb - only to stop under U.S. pressure. Since then, support for reviving such work has periodically surfaced in South Korea. Encouraging such efforts might actually be in the best interests of the United States, even if America has to maintain its nuclear umbrella while the Korean bomb is developed.
Yes, encouraging nuclear proliferation is a risky path. But the United States would gain from staying out of Northeast Asia's nuclear quarrels. China, fearful that Japan would join the nuclear parade, might take tougher action against Pyongyang in an attempt to forestall Seoul's efforts. The South could feel confident in its own defense, rather than remaining reliant upon U.S. willingness to act.
A potpourri of broader claims is also made for maintaining U.S. forces. America's presence supposedly constrains China, promotes regional stability, and deters an arms race. Let's consider those claims in order. What sort of constraint is allegedly being posed to China? If the idea is to coerce it into assuming responsibility for North Korea in the event of its collapse, Beijing has shown no interest in attempting to swallow a Korean population likely to prove indigestible. And if the calculation is rather that Washington can persuade South Korea to pressure China on non-Korean matters, it's easy to predict the unfriendly response Seoul's Blue House would give if invited by the White House to join it in warring against China to, say, save an independent Taiwan, counter Chinese moves in the South China Sea - or, horror of horrors, defend Japan. Indeed, absent U.S. protection, South Korea and Japan might feel greater pressure to finally settle historical disputes so often misused by their nationalist politicians.
As for the idea that the U.S. presence deters a regional arms race, building weapons so others don't have to is not the sort of charity America should engage in. Alliances can deter. But, as dramatically demonstrated by World War I, they also can act as transmission belts of war. Moreover, small nations often act irresponsibly - such as underinvesting in defense - when protected by big powers.
The U.S. security presence in South Korea is an expensive and dangerous commitment that America can no longer afford. Nor has it ever brought the United States much popularity in the country, where U.S. soldiers are a constant irritant to nationalists. The South is no longer a poor nation in need of protection from the specter of global communism but one more than capable of standing on its own two feet.
@172 That makes me sad to hear. I appreciate a perspective that comes from first hand experience. Its hard to get a proper outloom I feel outside of speaking with Koreans or even knowing the language.Kalen | Apr 15, 2017 5:01:37 PM | 182Perhaps reading articles published by journalists opposed to THAAD has distorted my handle of the situation. Sad the movement doesn't have more traction.
I do know more than a few Koreans firsthand pissed off at US army personnel behaviour though. Perhaps that can be channelled into meaningful change. They tell me that the impunity from judicial retribution plays a big role in the anger. Certain bases in Japan have had similar problems (I get the sense it cause more anger there though unfortunately). Perhaps this is just the views of a few people I talk to in SK though.
Any thoughts? I appreciate your response greatly.
What is real Russian position on this WWIII POTENTIAL STANDOFF. NK only one condemned attack on Syria while if what I hear is true, they want NK disarmed even in face of open US aggression. Also China if awfully quiet while repeating thirty year old equitable solution rejected by US that never looked for any solutions but domination. What's going on?karlof1 | Apr 15, 2017 5:19:16 PM | 183Rick @179--Outraged | Apr 15, 2017 5:21:08 PM | 184I wanted to see the footnotes for that section, too, but I don't have a paper copy of the book. However, based upon other readings of same testimony, I believe they were made during Congressional testimony.
Perhaps the most important element to learn from the aggression waged against the peoples of Korea, Indochina, and Iraq by the Outlaw US Empire is their Genocidal nature, and the additional fact that in their post-war environment the killing and maiming continues unabated: All casualty categories combined add up to well over 10 million and rising, far outperforming Hitler's genocide of jews, gypsies and others.
@ b 150dh | Apr 15, 2017 5:22:19 PM | 185Apologies. Understood. Will comply.
Re b @ 152 & post update
Heres an 8min38Sec Youtube of the military personnel & 'hardware' portion only:
North Korea Holds Massive Military Parade 'Day of the Sun Parade' in Pyongyang ( Show Case Missile )@182 Don't know about Russia but I have some thoughts re. China. Xi made it clear to Donald that China would support Kim if NK is attacked i.e WW3.Outraged | Apr 15, 2017 5:42:46 PM | 186At the same time Xi told Kim not to provoke Donald i.e. no nuclear test. Let them think they've won.
@ Posted by: dh | Apr 15, 2017 5:22:19 PM | 185jfl | Apr 15, 2017 6:26:20 PM | 187Fully concur. And the Chinese are 'civilized' re public discourse, just because the are not openly bellicose and full of aggressive rhetoric, does not mean they are push over pussies, exactly the opposite behind the agreeable, diplomatic, ' face '. Talk softly, yet have a big stick ready, just in case.
@180 mauisurfersmuks | Apr 15, 2017 7:05:05 PM | 188the foreign policy article extends tee-tump's 'pay for a native implementation of us policy' a la nato to south korea ... and wouldn't it be a good idea if south korea had nukes, too. their summary of us 'involvement' in korea post-wwii is shameful ...
The alternative was pure inaction, which would have resulted in South Koreans joining their northern neighbors in the Kim dynasty's new Dark Age. Perhaps inadvertently, Washington did a very good deed. For that it deserves praise, not criticism ...Depraved foreign policy recommendations from the us foreign policy establishment might as well stay in their echo chamber, behind their paywall, as far as i'm concerned. news of the us foreign policy establishment's depravity is dog bites man.@ Anon1 168Peter AU | Apr 15, 2017 7:11:02 PM | 189Why should that happen, if no side is willing to fire the first shot? There's been 'increased tensions' many times before, missile and nuclear tests, naval drills...so far it's all just scaremongering to me, and I don't quite see why it should be heating up *now*.
Looks like NK may have done a missile test. Failed apparently.jfl | Apr 15, 2017 8:10:03 PM | 190http://www.reuters.com/article/us-northkorea-usa-missile-idUSKBN17H0NL
https://sputniknews.com/asia/201704161052679707-north-korea-fails-misile-launch/there's a brief summary at the nation of the most germane us-north korean history by Burce Cumings, on 23 March This Is What's Really Behind North Korea's Nuclear Provocations .Hoarsewhisperer | Apr 16, 2017 1:21:37 AM | 191Other authors sympathetic to the plight of Korea are...Mr Reynard | Apr 16, 2017 2:44:06 AM | 192
Gavan NcCormack
Gregory Elich
Desaix Anderson, who delivered an address on the US monstrous and systematic betrayal of NK to the Nautilus Institute called Crisis In North Korea. Anderson was the CEO of the Korean Peninsula Energy Development Organisation (KEDO).
I can no longer find the article on the www but one of the sleuths here may be able to track it down.Actually, all the problems started with the demands that Kim Jong Un made to USA --b | Apr 16, 2017 10:11:11 AM | 194
First, he has demanded that USA give up all of its nuclear weapons, that USA stop all nuclear research, that there should be a "regime change" in Washington, plus he had the chutzpah to send assassins to USA to kill the POTUS !! So I'm not surprised at the reaction of D Trump to this provocation ??Had forgotten this when I wrote the post above:JMiller | Apr 16, 2017 10:26:08 AM | 195Wikileaks, Podesta email about the Hillary Clinton speech for Goldman Sachs "We don't want a unified Korean Peninsula" because China, not the U.S., would naturally dominate it. The U.S. will do everything it can to prevent reunification.
The NK offer says that they "MAY suspend its nuclear and missile activities in exchange for the suspension of large-scale U.S.-Republic of Korea (ROK) military exercises"Outraged | Apr 16, 2017 10:32:20 AM | 196It does not say that they WILL suspend its nuclear and missile activities.
@ JMillerHoarsewhisperer | Apr 16, 2017 12:28:22 PM | 197Would that be Judith Miller, perhaps, or possibly just a hero/role model ? ;) One perfectly reasonable phrase comes to mind, ' Subsequent to good faith negotiations & actual, guarantees '.
Link to Desaix Anderson's Nautilus Institute address Crisis In North Korea.JMiller | Apr 16, 2017 2:39:37 PM | 198
http://oldsite.nautilus.org/fora/security/0325A_Anderson.htmlThe NK offer says that they "MAY suspend its nuclear and missile activities in exchange for the suspension of large-scale U.S.-Republic of Korea (ROK) military exercises".Anon1 | Apr 16, 2017 3:08:42 PM | 199It does not say that they WILL suspend its nuclear and missile activities, just that they may. It is not surprising that the U.S. turned down the offer since it did not guarantee that NK would do anything.
JimillerYeah how dare NK offer peaceful ways to solve problems in this world. Yeah no wonder US not accepted it, go figure.
Markey: Trump's "gambling" with nuke war in North Korea by Laurel J. Sweet April 30, 2017
Trump's North Korea sabre-rattling has a flaw: Kim Jong-un has nothing to lose by Tom Phillips in Beijing and Justin McCurry April 16, 2017
US Saber-Rattling Over North Korea Aims to Cripple China's Global Economic Plans (Podcast) by Sputnik News April 28, 2017
Senator Markey Expresses Concern about Tillerson Saber-Rattling on North Korea March 17, 2017
Saber rattling: China and US at a dangerous military tipping point by Clay Dillow Was saber-rattling a smoke scree for deployment of anti-missile systems that threaten China. 9 Mar 2017
THAAD deployment begins in South KoreaChina is lashing out at South Korea and Washington for the deployment of a powerful missile defense system known as the Terminal High Altitude Area Defense system, or THAAD, deposited at the Osan Air Base in South Korea on Monday evening.
Classic books:
The Peter Principle : Parkinson Law : 1984 : The Mythical Man-Month : How to Solve It by George Polya : The Art of Computer Programming : The Elements of Programming Style : The Unix Hater’s Handbook : The Jargon file : The True Believer : Programming Pearls : The Good Soldier Svejk : The Power Elite
The Last but not Least Technology is dominated by two types of people: those who understand what they do not manage and those who manage what they do not understand ~Archibald Putt. Ph.D
Copyright © 1996-2021 by Softpanorama Society. www.softpanorama.org was initially created as a service to the (now defunct) UN Sustainable Development Networking Programme (SDNP) in the author free time and without any remuneration. This document is an industrial compilation designed and created exclusively for educational use and is distributed under the Softpanorama Content License. Original materials copyright belong to respective owners. Quotes are made for educational purposes only in compliance with the fair use doctrine.
FAIR USE NOTICE This site contains copyrighted material the use of which has not always been specifically authorized by the copyright owner. We are making such material available to advance understanding of computer science, IT technology, economic, scientific, and social issues. We believe this constitutes a 'fair use' of any such copyrighted material as provided by section 107 of the US Copyright Law according to which such material can be distributed without profit exclusively for research and educational purposes.
This is a Spartan WHYFF (We Help You For Free) site written by people for whom English is not a native language. Grammar and spelling errors should be expected. The site contain some broken links as it develops like a living tree...
|
You can use PayPal to make a contribution, supporting development of this site and speed up access. In case softpanorama.org is down you can use the at softpanorama.info |
Disclaimer:
The statements, views and opinions presented on this web page are those of the author (or referenced source) and are not endorsed by, nor do they necessarily reflect, the opinions of the author present and former employers, SDNP or any other organization the author may be associated with. We do not warrant the correctness of the information provided or its fitness for any purpose.
The site uses AdSense so you need to be aware of Google privacy policy. You you do not want to be tracked by Google please disable Javascript for this site. This site is perfectly usable without Javascript.
Last modified: October, 11, 2020
