Gates Warns North Korea

WorldMay 2009 • Views: 4,589

Secretary of Defense Robert Gates is warning North Korea, and pointedly not taking the military option off the table.

SINGAPORE (AP) — U.S. Defense Secretary Robert Gates warned North Korea on Saturday that the United States would respond quickly if moves by the communist government threaten America or its Asian allies.

“We will not stand idly by as North Korea builds the capability to wreak destruction on any target in the region — or on us,” Gates told an annual international meeting of defense and security officials from Asia and the Pacific Rim.

Gates called North Korea’s nuclear program a “harbinger of a dark future” but said he does not consider it a direct military threat to the United States “at this point.”

Jump to bottom

146 comments

Sharmuta Sun, May 31, 2009 2:50:48pm

Arm Japan.

Fat Bastard Vegetarian Sun, May 31, 2009 2:51:19pm

Measuring words very carefully.

Kobalt Sun, May 31, 2009 2:53:12pm

"not a threat"

Unfortunately, nothing seems to be a threat to our government these days

brookly red Sun, May 31, 2009 2:54:07pm

I saw this before and wondered why one policy with NK & another with Iran?

Fat Bastard Vegetarian Sun, May 31, 2009 2:54:16pm

I could get behind the murder of KJI. Is that wrong?

zombie Sun, May 31, 2009 2:54:35pm

Same verbiage as during the Bush administration, and as during the Clinton administration before it.

'Round and 'round the empty words spin. Nothing ever changes.

Meanwhile, North Korea continues to build nukes and export the technology around the world.

I say enough already. Take out all their sites, and/or invade and topple the regime. Dare the Chinese to stop us.

There was unfinished business in 1953. Time to finish it.

Last Mohican Sun, May 31, 2009 2:55:02pm

re: #2 Fat Bastard Vegetarian

Measuring words very carefully.

That's for sure. He recently said that a nuclear-armed North Korea is "unacceptable" to the United States, without mentioning that North Korea already has nuclear weapons, and without specifying what he plans to do about it.

DEZes Sun, May 31, 2009 2:55:04pm

What was that axis of evil thing again?
Oh yeah, I was told repeatedly by the media it was nothing to worry about.

Racer X Sun, May 31, 2009 2:55:48pm

If anyone thinks 'Lil Kim isn't doing this as a sales pitch to terrorists think again. North Korea has no intention of launching an attack on America or it's allies. North Korea has every intention of selling these devices to the highest bidder.

laxmatt1984 Sun, May 31, 2009 2:56:02pm

Abe’s post (”Accepting the Unacceptable“) about Secretary Gates’s speech yesterday is a reminder that - as George Orwell warned us long ago - the debasement of language has both intellectual and political consequences.
When George W. Bush called Iranian nuclear weapons “unacceptable,” John Bolton said he was often asked what Bush meant by that, and always answered it meant they were unacceptable. By the end of Bush’s second term, Bolton said he no longer knew what Bush meant. Bush left office having denied Israel’s request for weapons to unaccept Iran’s program - although placing them in the hands of Iran’s intended first victim would have sent a credible signal to Iran to stop its program. Bush also called Russia’s invasion of Georgia “unacceptable,” but left office with Russian troops ensconced in Georgia and its territorial integrity gone.

[Link: www.commentarymagazine.com...]

KingKenrod Sun, May 31, 2009 2:56:03pm

I wonder if North Korea's actions would be different if Obama had ordered the interception of the first long range missle launch on Apr 4?

[Link: www.foxnews.com...]

They are supposedly readying another long range launch now.

HAL2010 Sun, May 31, 2009 2:56:07pm

re: #1 Sharmuta

Arm Japan.

Not that simple, they would have to change their constitution for that.

The problem with NK as I see it their own unpredictabilty. They work on their own logic. If it was a simple matter of negotiations it would have been solved a long time ago, as happened with Libya.

zombie Sun, May 31, 2009 2:57:10pm

Actually, it was worse during the Clinton era. At least Madeleine Albright's replacement, Hillary Clinton, isn't clinking champagne glasses with Kim Jong Il.

...

...Yet.

unrealizedviewpoint Sun, May 31, 2009 2:57:16pm

re: #9 Racer X

If anyone thinks 'Lil Kim isn't doing this as a sales pitch to terrorists think again. North Korea has no intention of launching an attack on America or it's allies. North Korea has every intention of selling these devices to the highest bidder.

I thought they sold em to us a couple times.
/oh yeah, they failed to deliver.

Fat Bastard Vegetarian Sun, May 31, 2009 2:57:54pm

re: #13 zombie

I think if our President would let her, she'd put that little fucker in a head-lock.

Last Mohican Sun, May 31, 2009 2:58:16pm

re: #6 zombie

The North Korean Army has a million soldiers. Achieving regime change by a conventional war would be very, very costly in terms of lives and money.

Not to mention that they have nuclear weapons, and I'm sure Il would be willing to use them.

DEZes Sun, May 31, 2009 2:58:23pm

re: #15 Fat Bastard Vegetarian

I think if our President would let her, she'd put that little fucker in a head-lock.

I would pay to see that. ;)

Dar ul Harbarian Sun, May 31, 2009 2:58:41pm

I am sure the U.S. won't do anything until there is an "imminent threat".

We will get an opportunity to see if that paradigm works better than Bush's policy of preemption.

Sharmuta Sun, May 31, 2009 2:59:09pm

re: #9 Racer X

If anyone thinks 'Lil Kim isn't doing this as a sales pitch to terrorists think again. North Korea has no intention of launching an attack on America or it's allies. North Korea has every intention of selling these devices to the highest bidder.

Life imitates Team America?

MacDuff Sun, May 31, 2009 2:59:10pm

Pardon my cynicism, but North Korea has been warned how many times? I think Gates is a good SecDef, but all past warnings have fallen on deaf ears.

re: #1 Sharmuta

Arm Japan.

I think a good first step!

Last Mohican Sun, May 31, 2009 2:59:51pm

re: #9 Racer X

If anyone thinks 'Lil Kim isn't doing this as a sales pitch to terrorists think again. North Korea has no intention of launching an attack on America or it's allies. North Korea has every intention of selling these devices to the highest bidder.

Well, there's also the fact that, when he fires off a few missiles, explodes some underground nukes, and shoots his mouth off a little bit, people tend to respond by giving him money as part of some sort of "agreement."

neocon hippie Sun, May 31, 2009 2:59:57pm

re: #8 DEZes

Bush's coinage of the Axis of Evil supposedly demonstrated how stupid he was.

HAL2010 Sun, May 31, 2009 3:00:22pm

re: #6 zombie

Same verbiage as during the Bush administration, and as during the Clinton administration before it.

'Round and 'round the empty words spin. Nothing ever changes.

Meanwhile, North Korea continues to build nukes and export the technology around the world.

I say enough already. Take out all their sites, and/or invade and topple the regime. Dare the Chinese to stop us.

There was unfinished business in 1953. Time to finish it.

Great idea. You want to tell South Korea their capital is about to be turned into a pile of dust, or shall Obama?

Or how about fighting that army of theirs. It's only about 1 million men, with a belief in Juche that makes Al quaeda look like atheists.

Or how about the fact that we dont know what chemical weapons they posses?

Or where all their nuclear weaponry is?

It's easy to go in all guns blazing. Its another to actually solve the problem.

Racer X Sun, May 31, 2009 3:00:32pm

There is only one solution. Ok three. Put pressure on those most affected - China, Japan, and South Korea. Real economic sanctions would be a start.

DEZes Sun, May 31, 2009 3:00:48pm

re: #22 neocon hippie

Bush's coinage of the Axis of Evil supposedly demonstrated how stupid he was.

And now?

debutaunt Sun, May 31, 2009 3:00:49pm

re: #22 neocon hippie

Bush's coinage of the Axis of Evil supposedly demonstrated how stupid he was.

Is there an Axis of Evil yet? How about now?

Shug Sun, May 31, 2009 3:01:08pm

We will not stand idly by

I'll believe it when I see it

Racer X Sun, May 31, 2009 3:01:08pm

re: #19 Sharmuta

Life imitates Team America?

One can only hope.

MacDuff Sun, May 31, 2009 3:02:06pm

re: #8 DEZes

What was that axis of evil thing again?
Oh yeah, I was told repeatedly by the media it was nothing to worry about.

Yeah, the "Axis of Evil" has proved to have been right on the money. Bush was prescient in a lot of areas.

Racer X Sun, May 31, 2009 3:02:26pm

re: #21 Last Mohican

Well, there's also the fact that, when he fires off a few missiles, explodes some underground nukes, and shoots his mouth off a little bit, people tend to respond by giving him money as part of some sort of "agreement."

Eggzactly!

Remove the incentive. Take money away whenever this little shit pulls this crap.

FurryOldGuyJeans Sun, May 31, 2009 3:02:34pm

re: #9 Racer X

If anyone thinks 'Lil Kim isn't doing this as a sales pitch to terrorists think again. North Korea has no intention of launching an attack on America or it's allies. North Korea has every intention of selling these devices to the highest bidder.

Nice to make money while letting some other group get the blame for nuking America or Israel.

The military option wasn't taken off the table regarding Saddam's Iraq, yet when that was exercised so much hyperventilating and gnashing of teeth happened. Too bad li'l Kim doesn't have oil.

/ is it sarcasm, or is it memorex?

laxmatt1984 Sun, May 31, 2009 3:02:37pm

re: #23 HAL2010

I would agree with most everything you wrote, except the part about the 1 million infantry posing a major problem.

1) It's hard for an army to fight when they are starving.

2) It's unimaginable North Korea can properly equip their army.

3) They would surrender the moment we threw food at them.

Other than that, I would agree that invading North Korea would be the most challenging military operating since WW2.

neocon hippie Sun, May 31, 2009 3:02:48pm

Bush was right on the money: Iraq under Saddam Hussein, and the current regimes of Iran and N. Korea.

zombie Sun, May 31, 2009 3:02:59pm

re: #16 Last Mohican

The North Korean Army has a million soldiers. Achieving regime change by a conventional war would be very, very costly in terms of lives and money.

Not to mention that they have nuclear weapons, and I'm sure Il would be willing to use them.

A million hungry, incompetent and ill-trained soldiers, posted at the extreme eastern end of the Maginot Line.

I have little doubt that 1/20th that number of U.S. military men would make handy work of them, mostly by avoiding their entrenched positions entirely.

98% of the North Korean military has never actually fought in a battle. Their command structure is delusional. They could easily be rolled up.

KingKenrod Sun, May 31, 2009 3:03:00pm

I wonder if a tactical nuclear response to a full-scale NK invasion of South Korea has been authorized? Something submarine launched. Would it be justified?

eon Sun, May 31, 2009 3:03:19pm

The biggest problem with North Korea is the same problem we have with Iran. Namely, that the "we're both sane men" equation that is the foundation of avoiding proliferation/escalation (as per Herman Kahn's theories) may not necessarily be applicable. Put simply, Kim Jong-Il may simply not believe we will do anything to stop him, on the grounds that if we were going to do anything at all, it would have been something like he would do (assassination, subversion, outright attack, etc.), and we would have done it a long time ago (say, when he had just taken over from his father, Kim Il-Sung, and was busy consolidating his power).

North Korea is called "The Hermit Kingdom" with good reason. Not only its people, but its government, have very limited contact with the outside world, because that's the way the Dear/Treasured/Beloved/etc. Leader wants it, and anyone who disagrees generally "disappears" rather swiftly. With a leader like either Kim, it is distinctly possible that he may have advisors who either are too scared to tell him that other nations (like the U.S.) are dead serious about the consequences if he continues on this course. Or, he may have advisors who are brave enough to tell him- and he may simply not believe them.

It is an unfortunate but important fact that what happens in that region in the near future very likely depends on the worldview- and mental stability- of a man whose parody in a satirical puppet show hit uncomfortably close to reality.

/Team America- World Police

cheers

eon

Shug Sun, May 31, 2009 3:03:36pm

This policy towards North Korea reminds me of that Monty Python scene

It's just a flesh wound

pingjockey Sun, May 31, 2009 3:04:11pm

BBL

Last Mohican Sun, May 31, 2009 3:04:17pm

re: #35 KingKenrod

I wonder if a tactical nuclear response to a full-scale NK invasion of South Korea has been authorized? Something submarine launched. Would it be justified?

No, in my opinion. No not if NK didn't use nuclear weapons first.

Another question is, would North Korea use nuclear weapons in response to a military move against them or their nuclear sites? I think the answer is yes.

Dar ul Harbarian Sun, May 31, 2009 3:04:19pm

How about calling N. Korea and Iran the "Axis of Dark Harbingers". Still poetic, but without that silly tone of quasi-religious moral judgment.

Mike McDaniel Sun, May 31, 2009 3:04:31pm

re: #1 Sharmuta

Arm Japan.

The Japanese are quite well armed. Giving them a lot more will cause a lot of unintended consequences. Memories of World War 2 are long and painful in East Asia.

Sharmuta Sun, May 31, 2009 3:05:30pm

re: #12 HAL2010

Not that simple, they would have to change their constitution for that.

The problem with NK as I see it their own unpredictabilty. They work on their own logic. If it was a simple matter of negotiations it would have been solved a long time ago, as happened with Libya.

I think we should begin to discuss this seriously. China and Russia seem to not care about NK, but I think a serious discussion on arming Japan might get their attention. They either want to be players in their neighborhood, or they don't. They surely don't want a strong Japan. It would also serve American interests that other allies would know we're not going to abandon our friends.

avanti Sun, May 31, 2009 3:05:43pm

re: #17 DEZes

I would pay to see that. ;)

Say what you want about Hillary, she does have a set of balls, and I mean that as compliment.

Last Mohican Sun, May 31, 2009 3:06:01pm

re: #29 MacDuff

Yeah, the "Axis of Evil" has proved to have been right on the money.

I don't think it was a useful term. Sure, the leaders of Iraq, Iran, and North Korea were all evil men. But it's not like they were the only three evil leaders in the world. And calling them an "axis" implies that they were somehow allied in their evildoing ways. They weren't. Indeed, Iraq and Iran were historically bitter enemies.

Sharmuta Sun, May 31, 2009 3:06:07pm

re: #41 Mike McDaniel

The Japanese are quite well armed. Giving them a lot more will cause a lot of unintended consequences. Memories of World War 2 are long and painful in East Asia.

That's why I think we should make some folks nervous.

zombie Sun, May 31, 2009 3:06:34pm

re: #23 HAL2010

Great idea. You want to tell South Korea their capital is about to be turned into a pile of dust, or shall Obama?

Or how about fighting that army of theirs. It's only about 1 million men, with a belief in Juche that makes Al quaeda look like atheists.

Or how about the fact that we dont know what chemical weapons they posses?

Or where all their nuclear weaponry is?

It's easy to go in all guns blazing. Its another to actually solve the problem.

That is the only real problem: Would they actually use nukes on their own homeland? Keep in mind that North Korea still does not accept the division of the peninsula, and still regards South Korea as its rightful territory.

What good would it do them to nuke Seoul? It wouldn't stop the regime from being toppled even faster.

Dar ul Harbarian Sun, May 31, 2009 3:06:37pm

re: #41 Mike McDaniel

The Japanese are quite well armed. Giving them a lot more will cause a lot of unintended consequences. Memories of World War 2 are long and painful in East Asia.

Maybe threatening to arm Japan will work just as well as arming them, then.

Racer X Sun, May 31, 2009 3:06:38pm

He's just so Ronery

loppyd Sun, May 31, 2009 3:06:47pm

Thanks for the memories.....cheers!

DEZes Sun, May 31, 2009 3:07:11pm

re: #43 avanti

Say what you want about Hillary, she does have a set of balls, and I mean that as compliment.

Those. I don't wish to see. ;)

HAL2010 Sun, May 31, 2009 3:07:16pm

re: #32 laxmatt1984

I would agree with most everything you wrote, except the part about the 1 million infantry posing a major problem.

1) It's hard for an army to fight when they are starving.

2) It's unimaginable North Korea can properly equip their army.

3) They would surrender the moment we threw food at them.

Other than that, I would agree that invading North Korea would be the most challenging military operating since WW2.

I am not worried about out-and-out combat. I am worried about 1 million men who have spent 13 years in the NK army to wage guerilla warfare in the whole of Korea. It will make Iraq before the surge and awakening like a stroll in the park.
Not to mention the fact that Seoul will be utterly hammered by NK batteries in the first days of any war. As we dont know exactly what missiles they posses they might even hit Japan with missiles.

wiffersnapper Sun, May 31, 2009 3:07:20pm

Go Gates Go.

laxmatt1984 Sun, May 31, 2009 3:07:34pm

re: #46 zombie

That is the only real problem: Would they actually use nukes on their own homeland?

Yes. These are the same people who built nukes while over 3 million starved.

Fat Bastard Vegetarian Sun, May 31, 2009 3:07:56pm

I hope that I am not being obtuse here, but I'm wondering if Il is running things anymore. Is it possible a few nutjobs have assumed control and KJI is propped up, drooling at his desk?

Racer X Sun, May 31, 2009 3:08:21pm

re: #45 Sharmuta

That's why I think we should make some folks nervous.

Boy you bring up an interesting point. What if we started having serious discussions with Japan about arming them with nukes? That would certainly get Russia and China's attention.

MacDuff Sun, May 31, 2009 3:09:31pm

re: #44 Last Mohican

I don't think it was a useful term. Sure, the leaders of Iraq, Iran, and North Korea were all evil men. But it's not like they were the only three evil leaders in the world. And calling them an "axis" implies that they were somehow allied in their evildoing ways. They weren't. Indeed, Iraq and Iran were historically bitter enemies.

Certainly, they weren't the only evil in the world, but just as certainly they were (and still are) the most dangerous. An evil dictator is one thing, a destabilizing dictator with nukes is another.

Racer X Sun, May 31, 2009 3:10:05pm

re: #48 Racer X

He's just so Ronery

Why that song didn't win the oscar I just don't understand.

HAL2010 Sun, May 31, 2009 3:11:08pm

re: #46 zombie

They dont have to nuke Seoul. They have enought conventional weapons near the boarder to take care of that. Its only 30 odd miles from the border.

The biggest danger for South Korea is that its capital, Seoul, is only 30 miles from the border with the North. This means that some 20 million South Koreans live within range of Mr Kim's heavy artillery. North Korea's army deploys 17,900 artillery pieces, many of them aimed at Seoul. In the event of war, these guns could fire between 300,000 and 500,000 high explosive shells at Seoul every hour.

From the London Telegraph.

gunslingah Sun, May 31, 2009 3:11:28pm

re: #6 zombie

Same verbiage as during the Bush administration, and as during the Clinton administration before it.

'Round and 'round the empty words spin. Nothing ever changes.

Meanwhile, North Korea continues to build nukes and export the technology around the world.

I say enough already. Take out all their sites, and/or invade and topple the regime. Dare the Chinese to stop us.

There was unfinished business in 1953. Time to finish it.

Unfortunately, the military option here isn't very attractive. The Nork military isn't very good in most regards--they don't have enough fuel, ammo, or spare parts to sustain a credible ground campaign for long, and our Air Force (think: F-22 Raptors vs. 40-year-old MiG-21s) would establish air dominance in no time. What they do have, however, is a whole hell of a lot of artillery, and the ability to make downtown Seoul into a wasteland and kill a lot of innocent civilians. War should definitely be a last resort, although Gates is wise to make clear that no option is off the table.

debutaunt Sun, May 31, 2009 3:11:45pm

re: #43 avanti

Say what you want about Hillary, she does have a set of balls, and I mean that as compliment.

I haven't noticed that at all.

laxmatt1984 Sun, May 31, 2009 3:12:21pm

re: #51 HAL2010

Have you read Bradley Martin's Under the Loving Care of the Fatherly Leader?

Anyway, he interviews some soldiers who defected. According to the soldiers, morale in the regular army is incredibly low (as can be expected) and scarcity is such a problem that enlisted men are never trained how to use a weapon.

There is, however, an elite unit of soldiers trained in guerrilla tactics (North Korea supposedly has a to-scale mock up of Seoul in an underground bunker - yes it's that big) which would certainly pose a huge problem if they remained loyal to the regime.

But yes, North Korea's artillery battery pointed at Seoul, their chemical and biological weapons programs, and potential missile stockpile would mean any invasion of North Korea would probably mean hundreds of thousands dead, if not more.

Sharmuta Sun, May 31, 2009 3:12:26pm

re: #34 zombie

A million hungry, incompetent and ill-trained soldiers, posted at the extreme eastern end of the Maginot Line.

I have little doubt that 1/20th that number of U.S. military men would make handy work of them, mostly by avoiding their entrenched positions entirely.

98% of the North Korean military has never actually fought in a battle. Their command structure is delusional. They could easily be rolled up.

Not necessarily. A half starved, broken population is easier to manipulate with propaganda- ripe for zealotry in the defense of their homeland.

Racer X Sun, May 31, 2009 3:12:50pm

re: #60 debutaunt

I haven't noticed that at all.

I haven't been looking.

MacDuff Sun, May 31, 2009 3:13:47pm

re: #60 debutaunt

I haven't noticed that at all.

Perhaps Obama's trying them on for size....

DEZes Sun, May 31, 2009 3:13:52pm

re: #63 Racer X

I haven't been looking.

Neither has Bill.

FurryOldGuyJeans Sun, May 31, 2009 3:14:01pm

re: #62 Sharmuta

Not necessarily. A half starved, broken population is easier to manipulate with propaganda- ripe for zealotry in the defense of their homeland.

I am reminded of the Iranians during the Iran-Iraq war, and the insurgents after the Iraq invasion.

Hengineer Sun, May 31, 2009 3:14:13pm

re: #19 Sharmuta

Life imitates Team America?

I'm so....ronry...

///

razorbacker Sun, May 31, 2009 3:14:56pm

There is one major difference between Korea circa 1950 and Korea circa 2009. China.

Let us say for a moment that NK does start a hot war with SK. Do you believe that the Chinese armies will cross the Yula to sopport the NKs like in the Korean War? I have my doubts.

They might. But how will that affect the Chinese markets in America? Will Wal-Mart, Target, Lowes, Home Depot and all the rest continue pouring Chinese goods onto their shelves during a hot war with Chinese troops battling SK and American forces? I have more doubts.

It would not be a cakewalk. People will die, and at least one of the affected countries will cease to exist.

HAL2010 Sun, May 31, 2009 3:15:16pm

re: #61 laxmatt1984

Its on the to-do list. Reading Khomeini's ghost and Torture and Democracy at the moment.

The South would never allow the US army to deploy from their border, as Seoul would get hammered. My theory.

KingKenrod Sun, May 31, 2009 3:15:26pm

Mitt Romney will be on Fox News Sunday in a few minutes. He talks about North Korea and missile defense. Romney is giving a speech tomorrow on Obama's failure to support missile defense.

The video is here:

[Link: www.foxnews.com...]

laxmatt1984 Sun, May 31, 2009 3:16:10pm

re: #69 HAL2010

The South would never allow the US army to deploy from their border, as Seoul would get hammered. My theory.

Probably correct

Shiplord Kirel Sun, May 31, 2009 3:16:13pm

re: #58 HAL2010

They dont have to nuke Seoul. They have enought conventional weapons near the boarder to take care of that. Its only 30 odd miles from the border.

From the London Telegraph.

The Telegraph story is disinformation. Most of Kim's artillery, tube and mlrs alike, is ancient and will not reach that far. It can't be deployed right on the line of the DMZ in any case. Only their ballistic missiles can reach Seoul and they have a limited supply of those. They can do a lot of damage but nothing like the level claimed, even if they are not reserved for other targets like allied airfields. Half a million rounds an hour is an especially hysterical piece of nonsense.

Racer X Sun, May 31, 2009 3:16:36pm

The U.S. announces the deployment of nukes to Japan. Russia and China scream in unison "You can't do that!". Japan's response - "Yes we can. We have to - your little puppet in NK is an asshole and we need a deterrent". Then China will put pressure on Lil Kim.

MacDuff Sun, May 31, 2009 3:16:46pm

re: #70 KingKenrod

Mitt Romney will be on Fox News Sunday in a few minutes. He talks about North Korea and missile defense. Romney is giving a speech tomorrow on Obama's failure to support missile defense.

The video is here:

[Link: www.foxnews.com...]

The 2012 election has begun.

Fluffster Sun, May 31, 2009 3:17:28pm

re: #72 Shiplord Kirel

Really? Thats good to hear.

zombie Sun, May 31, 2009 3:17:29pm

re: #51 HAL2010

I am not worried about out-and-out combat. I am worried about 1 million men who have spent 13 years in the NK army to wage guerilla warfare in the whole of Korea. It will make Iraq before the surge and awakening like a stroll in the park.
Not to mention the fact that Seoul will be utterly hammered by NK batteries in the first days of any war. As we dont know exactly what missiles they posses they might even hit Japan with missiles.

Who will be authorizing the strikes on Seoul? In the scenario I'm speaking of, the North Korean leadership is taken out in the first hour or two, by ordnance dropped/fired from high altitude bombers. The very first target would be Kim Jong Il himself. Once he's gone, the whole system disintegrates.

Also, We wouldn't have a full-frontal assault across the DMZ. We'd infiltrate upcountry with as many teams as possible coming in off of ships, submarines, and helicopters.

I've read and even heard in person descriptions from people who have been to PyongYang what it is like there. Most of the facilities are guarded by skinny bored late-teenage soldiers who wouldn't have the slightest clue what to do in a real crisis, nor know how to resist a professional squad of Army Rangers or whatever.

The government seats of power could be taken very rapidly, paralyzing everyone lower down in the command structure.

KingKenrod Sun, May 31, 2009 3:18:13pm

re: #73 Racer X

The U.S. announces the deployment of nukes to Japan. Russia and China scream in unison "You can't do that!". Japan's response - "Yes we can. We have to - your little puppet in NK is an asshole and we need a deterrent". Then China will put pressure on Lil Kim.

That's probably what Lil' Kim wants - to be bribed into good behavior.

laxmatt1984 Sun, May 31, 2009 3:18:24pm

re: #72 Shiplord Kirel

Artillery that can travel 20 odd miles is not that sophisticated - even by North Korea standards.

Are you willing to be the guy who bets the millions of people of Seoul cannot be struck by NK artillery?

razorbacker Sun, May 31, 2009 3:18:29pm

re: #73 Racer X

The US cannot unilaterally announce that Japan will get nukes. There is a strong anti-nuke weapon stance in Japan. They remember.

Sharmuta Sun, May 31, 2009 3:19:24pm

re: #73 Racer X

The U.S. announces the deployment of nukes to Japan. Russia and China scream in unison "You can't do that!". Japan's response - "Yes we can. We have to - your little puppet in NK is an asshole and we need a deterrent". Then China will put pressure on Lil Kim.

Let them call our bluff. The last thing Russia and China want is a nuclear Japan.

Racer X Sun, May 31, 2009 3:19:30pm

re: #77 KingKenrod

That's probably what Lil' Kim wants - to be bribed into good behavior.

Fine. Let China pay the bribe.

laxmatt1984 Sun, May 31, 2009 3:19:57pm

re: #76 zombie

The very first target would be Kim Jong Il himself. Once he's gone, the whole system disintegrates.

Kim Jong-il supposedly never travels above ground. Yes, the country is that thoroughly tunneled. Remember it took almost 9 months to find Saddam Hussein.

Racer X Sun, May 31, 2009 3:20:29pm

re: #79 razorbacker

The US cannot unilaterally announce that Japan will get nukes. There is a strong anti-nuke weapon stance in Japan. They remember.

I fully understand that. But Japan is not stupid either. They know that North Korea is a serious threat.

Shiplord Kirel Sun, May 31, 2009 3:20:35pm

re: #75 Fluffster

Really? Thats good to hear.

This is a good starting point.

Ojoe Sun, May 31, 2009 3:21:44pm

Only force will be understood by the North Koreans.

Hengineer Sun, May 31, 2009 3:21:44pm

re: #82 laxmatt1984

re: #76 zombie

Kim Jong-il supposedly never travels above ground. Yes, the country is that thoroughly tunneled. Remember it took almost 9 months to find Saddam Hussein.

Get a shitload of New York Rats to clear out them tunnels.

Hengineer Sun, May 31, 2009 3:22:41pm

re: #85 Ojoe

Only force will be understood by the North Koreans.

Force, and "Strongly worded letters from the U.N."

/Team America Moment

Sharmuta Sun, May 31, 2009 3:22:48pm

Look at the zealotry of the Japanese during WWII- they willingly died for their Emperor. Why would we think the North Koreans would lack this sort of zealotry? How long has Lil Kim had to brainwash his people?

DEZes Sun, May 31, 2009 3:23:07pm

re: #86 Hengineer

Get a shitload of New York Rats to clear out them tunnels.

Kim Jong might just put a saddle on one. ;)

Dar ul Harb Sun, May 31, 2009 3:23:08pm

How much counterbattery bombing and/or cruise missile attack would it take to make that artillery unusable, I wonder?

Hengineer Sun, May 31, 2009 3:27:05pm

re: #88 Sharmuta

Look at the zealotry of the Japanese during WWII- they willingly died for their Emperor. Why would we think the North Koreans would lack this sort of zealotry? How long has Lil Kim had to brainwash his people?

Technologically, the Japanese could at least hold their own against the US. The Pacific war was a HARD fought war.

We're talking about an Army that is probably very poorly provisioned with probably very little actual training. They may be brainwashed, but no amount of brainwashing can stand up to our modern military. Even the average American soldier has enough technology to not even see the person he's killing.

danrudy Sun, May 31, 2009 3:28:34pm

CHARLES can you point out to me where Gates POINTEDLY does NOT take the military option off the table. I read it but didnt notice this referenced.

respond quickly

That means they will place a phone call to protest or send a letter via Fedex instead of normal post mail.

Gates called for "genuinely tough sanctions" against both countries "that bring home real pain for their failure to adhere to international norms."
Gates offered no specifics on how the U.S. might respond to North Korea, militarily or otherwise, and has said there are no current plans to deploy more U.S. forces to the region.

Despite his warning (ed. to respond quickly), he appeared to take care in the half-hour speech to avoid ratcheting up the rhetoric in the weeklong war of words between North Korea and nations alarmed by its show of weaponry.

From the linked article....doesnt sound like they are "pointedly NOT taking the military option off the table. In fact, sounds like he was apologizing to them for past actions.

In talking about the Obama administration's commitment to the region, Gates appeared to voice a veiled general apology for previous U.S. military decisions, but he avoided detailing them.

"In our efforts to protect our own freedom — and that of others — we have from time to time made mistakes, including at times being arrogant in dealing with others," he said. "But we always correct course. Our willingness to do so is one of our enduring strengths."

(I await the reflexive downding)

Racer X Sun, May 31, 2009 3:28:52pm

Everyone said Iran's Revolutionary Guard was tough - twice. We rolled over them in less than a week.

Dar ul Harb Sun, May 31, 2009 3:29:02pm

I think I hear Stinky heading downstairs...

zombie Sun, May 31, 2009 3:29:05pm

re: #90 Dar ul Harb

How much counterbattery bombing and/or cruise missile attack would it take to make that artillery unusable, I wonder?

Not much I wager.

We have air bases all over Japan and South Korea. And we have a very very large number of combat aircraft and bombers.

A sudden juddering flash mass attack knocking out the leadership, most of the artillery near the border, and the radar/targetting/communications systems would leave the army in chaos in under a day.

Seize governmental buildings, announce to the North Korean people that the war is over and that they are free, and make sure the soldiers are included in this. Before the war has even begun, the legs will be kicked out from under the North Korean military. No one to give commands, no front to fight on, doubt and chaos as the only morale.

Shiplord Kirel Sun, May 31, 2009 3:29:31pm

re: #78 laxmatt1984

Artillery that can travel 20 odd miles is not that sophisticated - even by North Korea standards.

Are you willing to be the guy who bets the millions of people of Seoul cannot be struck by NK artillery?

Artillery is my specialty. Our longest range field piece is the M-109A6 Paladin, which can reach about 40 kilometers with some very special ammunition that the Norks are extremely unlikely to be able to match. The longest ranged artillery in the Nork army is the M-1978 170mm gun, which is credited by some sources with a range of 40 or allegedly 60 km with the rocket assisted round, which are probably in short supply and which lack hitting power in the urban context. Again, it is ridiculous to suppose that these can fire from right on the demarcation line or anywhere near it.

aboo-Hoo-Hoo Sun, May 31, 2009 3:29:40pm

Charles,

This is another AP article on Gates speech: Gates: NKorea nuke progress sign of `dark future'

[...]
"As the expression goes in the United States, `I am tired of buying the same horse twice.' I think this notion that we buy our way back to the status quo ante is an approach that I personally at least think we ought to think very hard about. There are perhaps other ways to try and get the North Koreans to change their approach," he said.
[...]
"President Obama has offered an open hand to tyrannies that unclench their fists. He is hopeful, but he is not naive," Gates said in his speech.
"Likewise, the United States and our allies are open to dialogue, but we will not bend to pressure or provocation. And on this count, North Korea's latest reply to our overtures is not exactly something we would characterize as helpful or constructive. We will not stand idly by as North Korea builds the capability to wreak destruction on any target in Asia — or on us. At the end of the day, the choice to continue as a destitute, international pariah is North Korea's alone to make. The world is waiting."

The world is waiting? For North Korea? Fer' lil' Kim?

Open hand and all.

rightside Sun, May 31, 2009 3:30:22pm

re: #88 Sharmuta

They say an army travels on it's stomach. I don't think there's enough food for them all for a prolonged battle. Maybe only if he starved everyone else but the military completely.

HAL2010 Sun, May 31, 2009 3:30:32pm

Its an interesting discussion, and I wager not the last on LGF. However, it is late, and I am going to bed.

Goodnight Lizards

100

PSGInfinity Sun, May 31, 2009 3:31:53pm

Q: How messed up is it that confronting a madman-armed-with-nukes is (or could be considered) an improvement on the day's news?!

(Sheesh)

101

Bloodnok Sun, May 31, 2009 3:32:56pm

re: #92 danrudy

(I await the reflexive downding)

How 'bout we just ignore you?

102

PSGInfinity Sun, May 31, 2009 3:34:11pm

re: #4 brookly red

I saw this before and wondered why one policy with NK & another with Iran?

Could it be spelled "j.e.w.s"?
/ Not diggin it, man.
/ Vile, scary times

103

Shiplord Kirel Sun, May 31, 2009 3:34:23pm

We can't base our policy on the supposition that the Norks have magically developed and deployed an artillery system that can fire millions of round across 60+ kilometers to flatten Seoul. We can base it on the fact that they are developing a nuclear capability that will easily do that.

104

callahan23 Sun, May 31, 2009 3:35:06pm

re: #37 Shug

This policy towards North Korea reminds me of that Monty Python scene

It's just a flesh wound

And I thought you'd be referencing the 'One sock too many' scene from ~~Glasgow~~ Natal. ;-)

105

eon Sun, May 31, 2009 3:35:15pm

re: #58 HAL2010

They dont have to nuke Seoul. They have enought conventional weapons near the boarder to take care of that. Its only 30 odd miles from the border.

From the London Telegraph.

The more probable target for a NK fission weapon would be the port of Incheon (Inchon) on the western coast of the peninsula near Seoul. By "neutralizing" the port (In the Space Viking sense of the word) they could make resupply of the Seoul defense very difficult, as the other two major ports capable of supporting same logistically, Makpo and Pusan, are at the extreme southern end of the peninsula and the roads and rail lines could be interdicted (by sabotage teams if nothing else, blowing tracks and bridges). Also, Inch(e)on has tremendous "symbolic" significance to Lil 'Kim, as it was the September 1950 landing there which began the counterattack that forced his father's army back to the Chinese border, and nearly cost the elder Kim not only the war but his country as well (if not for the intervention of the Chinese PLA). So for Lil 'Kim, Inch(e)on is an attractive target from several standpoints, both tactically and "philosophically".

As for the Russians and Chinese not taking this seriously, last week the Russians put their regional command in that area on alert, according to AP. People forget that Russia has a border with NK (which made resupplying them in 1950-53 rather easy from their POV), and that while Lil' Kim may have no weapon delivery systems capable of striking Moscow any more than he can hit Washington, the same cannot be said for Vladivostok, their major Pacific coast port/shipyard/HQ/etc., which is well within the range of the delivery systems he's already demonstrated. (Assuming he just doesn't have a suicide team in a fishing smack sail into the harbor and push the button- under Juche, it cannot be ruled out.)

The possible ramifications of a second Korean War (more exactly, the continuation of the original) have been "gamed" many times, both in and out of Operations & Planning. The outcome is usually a NK defeat- but it's generally costly to the South and her allies.

cheers

eon

106

callahan23 Sun, May 31, 2009 3:36:27pm

re: #99 HAL2010

Goodnight HAL2010.

107

Fluffster Sun, May 31, 2009 3:36:53pm

re: #91 Hengineer

Technologically, the Japanese could at least hold their own against the US. The Pacific war was a HARD fought war.

We're talking about an Army that is probably very poorly provisioned with probably very little actual training. They may be brainwashed, but no amount of brainwashing can stand up to our modern military. Even the average American soldier has enough technology to not even see the person he's killing.

It is also worth remembering that the Japanese Army had been fighting for a decade before Pearl Harbor. My Japanese grandfather went to war in Manchuria in '31.

108

Hengineer Sun, May 31, 2009 3:37:19pm

re: #101 Bloodnok

How 'bout we just ignore you?

Ignore who?

;)

/////

109

DEZes Sun, May 31, 2009 3:38:03pm

re: #108 Hengineer

Ignore who?

;)

/////

Huh, what.... Oh back to my nap.

110

Bloodnok Sun, May 31, 2009 3:38:03pm

re: #108 Hengineer

Ignore who?

;)

/////

Yes.

111

Perplexed Sun, May 31, 2009 3:38:07pm

So Gates, what do you propose? Open a third front? Arm Japan? You've got a tiger by the tail and are damned if you hold on and damned if you let go.

112

Shr_Nfr Sun, May 31, 2009 3:38:53pm

Boy it did not take every two bit dictator to take Obammy's temperature and figure out he is all hot air and no action did it?

113

Hengineer Sun, May 31, 2009 3:38:55pm

re: #107 Fluffster

It is also worth remembering that the Japanese Army had been fighting for a decade before Pearl Harbor. My Japanese grandfather went to war in Manchuria in '31.

Yep, fighting China.

114

Macker Sun, May 31, 2009 3:39:10pm

re: #6 zombie

Same verbiage as during the Bush administration, and as during the Clinton administration before it.

'Round and 'round the empty words spin. Nothing ever changes.

Meanwhile, North Korea continues to build nukes and export the technology around the world.

I say enough already. Take out all their sites, and/or invade and topple the regime. Dare the Chinese to stop us.

There was unfinished business in 1953. Time to finish it.

If I could give you ONE MILLION updings I would!

115

Shug Sun, May 31, 2009 3:39:47pm

re: #92 danrudy

(I await the reflexive downding)

I found your comment to be Ok, until the last line.

so the downding , though not reflexive on my part, is heading your way

116

Gus Sun, May 31, 2009 3:40:15pm

By the time we wait for North Korea to become fully nuke capable and finally admit that it is a threat to our allies it will be too late. At that point any military action taken against North Korea would come under threat of nuclear strike from North Korea to either Japan or South Korea. Once they obtain that stalemate they will be able to further expand their nuclear arsenal.

117

danrudy Sun, May 31, 2009 3:40:29pm

re: #101 Bloodnok

How 'bout we just ignore you?

Cute... But do you see any evidence of the Obama administation taking a tough stance and "pointedly not taking military options off the table" or is Charles reading to much intot he article.
If I have misread the article, I apologize. BUt the article seems to say everything is on the table (discussion, sanction, warning) but not military.

118

Shr_Nfr Sun, May 31, 2009 3:40:51pm

re: #112 Shr_Nfr

take long (sorry but I dropped the word) Charles, any chance we can ever get an edit feature to go back and change these kind of typos? I know there has to be be a record of the original someplace so that people can't be caught waffling, but I would love to fix this kind of mistake easily.

119

Hengineer Sun, May 31, 2009 3:41:38pm

re: #112 Shr_Nfr

Boy it did not take every two bit dictator to take Obammy's temperature and figure out he is all hot air and no action did it?

The weird one is that Iran is speaking out publicly against NK.

whiskey tango foxtrot, over?

120

danrudy Sun, May 31, 2009 3:41:45pm

re: #115 Shug

I found your comment to be Ok, until the last line.

so the downding , though not reflexive on my part, is heading your way

Thats just me getting frustrated that no matter what I seem to say (seems to merit a ding) Even, if the point is not controversial.

In the above post, I am disagreeing so I expect a ding)

121

Gus Sun, May 31, 2009 3:42:16pm

Looks like this was also a micro-apology tour as well but this time from Secretary Gates:

In talking about the Obama administration's commitment to the region, Gates appeared to voice a veiled general apology for previous U.S. military decisions, but he avoided detailing them.

"In our efforts to protect our own freedom — and that of others — we have from time to time made mistakes, including at times being arrogant in dealing with others," he said. "But we always correct course. Our willingness to do so is one of our enduring strengths."

122

David IV of Georgia Sun, May 31, 2009 3:42:17pm

Mr. Kim's million man army is probably not a good match for one undermanned American division. However, it would be stupid to be overconfident and dismissive of this threat. A million men storming a border is difficult to deal with regardless of their equipment, skill and preparedness.

The biggest problem is the short distances such a war would involve. Much of South Korea lies easily within range of NK's conventional weapons. By the time a counterattack is begun, NK would have already done significant damage to SK.

The US is unlikely to even consider nukes unless Kim uses them first.

Lastly, would China side with her comrades or her source of money?

123

Racer X Sun, May 31, 2009 3:42:20pm

re: #117 danrudy

Cute... But do you see any evidence of the Obama administation taking a tough stance and "pointedly not taking military options off the table" or is Charles reading to much intot he article.
If I have misread the article, I apologize. BUt the article seems to say everything is on the table (discussion, sanction, warning) but not military.

And you could have made that point without the snarky "downding me!" comment.

124

Perplexed Sun, May 31, 2009 3:42:25pm

re: #76 zombie

Remember the axe murders on the DMZ a few years back?

125

Sharmuta Sun, May 31, 2009 3:43:59pm

re: #91 Hengineer

Technologically, the Japanese could at least hold their own against the US. The Pacific war was a HARD fought war.

We're talking about an Army that is probably very poorly provisioned with probably very little actual training. They may be brainwashed, but no amount of brainwashing can stand up to our modern military. Even the average American soldier has enough technology to not even see the person he's killing.

But we don't know that as a certainty, do we? That they have no provisions? I just don't want to assume the North Korean army isn't capable of putting up a fight. They very well could be.

126

dapperdave Sun, May 31, 2009 3:44:04pm

Maybe Obama should from a blue ribbon panel that will from a committee to devise a focus group that will address this North Korea issue, in no time at all we should have this resolved hmmm by 2120 perhaps? /

127

John Neverbend Sun, May 31, 2009 3:47:05pm

re: #4 brookly red

I saw this before and wondered why one policy with NK & another with Iran?

I'm guessing here, but do you remember the line in Doctor Strangelove where General Turgidson describes the Russian Premier as a degenerate atheist Commie? Well, the same cannot be said of the Iranian leadership.

128

Hengineer Sun, May 31, 2009 3:47:46pm

re: #125 Sharmuta

But we don't know that as a certainty, do we? That they have no provisions? I just don't want to assume the North Korean army isn't capable of putting up a fight. They very well could be.

Good point. The average soldier probably is fed better then the average peasant.

129

Maui Girl Sun, May 31, 2009 3:50:06pm

Gates=El Baradei=useful idiots=inaction until it's too late

130

eon Sun, May 31, 2009 3:59:20pm

re: #128 Hengineer

Good point. The average soldier probably is fed better then the average peasant.

I distinctly remember a decade or so ago, when a NKPAF pilot defected to the ROK with his MiG-29 Fulcrum, that they put his flight gear on display. The newsies made a big thing about how old his flight suit was, how many times it had been patched, etc., the age of his helmet, and so on. While they were doing that, I was noticing;

1. His demand oxygen mask, while an old model, was in perfect condition.

2. His goggles and helmet, while equally antique, were also in well-maintained shape.

3. His survival knife was nearly new, well-sharpened, and oiled.

4. And while his pistol holster was old, the pistol in it was a brand-new CZ-75 9x19mm. I learned later that the NK military had bought a job lot of them specifically to arm their pilots with, because the ROK army had changed from .45 ACP to 9mm NATO when the U.S. did, and they wanted their frontline pilots to be able to us captured ammo if forced down over ROK territory.

It must also be noted that, regardless of the overall financial state of the North, if Lil' Kim wants something for his military, he gets it, and usually pays on delivery, often in gold. (Where he gets it is a good question.)

In short, if the NK military needs something to fulfill Lil 'Kim's plans, odds are they'll get it. Or already have it, carefully salted away in one of their underground warehouses near the DMZ, waiting for The Big Day.

cheers

eon

131

Shiplord Kirel Sun, May 31, 2009 4:00:01pm

re: #122 David IV of Georgia

Mr. Kim's million man army is probably not a good match for one undermanned American division. However, it would be stupid to be overconfident and dismissive of this threat. A million men storming a border is difficult to deal with regardless of their equipment, skill and preparedness.

The biggest problem is the short distances such a war would involve. Much of South Korea lies easily within range of NK's conventional weapons. By the time a counterattack is begun, NK would have already done significant damage to SK.

The US is unlikely to even consider nukes unless Kim uses them first.

Lastly, would China side with her comrades or her source of money?

It would be a mistake as well to underestimate the ROK (South Korean) forces, which the media seem determined to do when they aren't ignoring ROK capability altogether. The ROK forces are actually larger when reserves are counted (which is also the case with "million man" figure for the Norks) and they are far better equipped and probably better trained.
Among other things:

...the Republic of Korea Armed Forces is one of the largest standing armed forces in the world with a reported personnel strength of 3,785,000 in 2008 (735,000 active force and 3,050,000 regular reserve).[

132

Maui Girl Sun, May 31, 2009 4:05:52pm

re: #79 razorbacker

And there's the rath of Godzilla to consider too!

133

PSGInfinity Sun, May 31, 2009 4:08:47pm

re: #132 Maui Girl

And there's the rath of Godzilla to consider too!

Not to mention Sharmuta...

134

[deleted] Sun, May 31, 2009 4:15:13pm

135

[deleted] Sun, May 31, 2009 4:22:32pm

136

[deleted] Sun, May 31, 2009 4:24:52pm

137

Cato the Elder Sun, May 31, 2009 4:32:23pm

re: #92 danrudy

(I await the reflexive downding)

Granted.

138

capt26thga Sun, May 31, 2009 4:50:41pm

The only problem with war is politicians. Korea, Viet Nam and now the Middle East are prime examples. Yet the bastards still think they can do a better job than the ones that have trained all their lives for it. When the Great War of Northern Aggression was at its peak Gen Sherman told Mr Lincoln that if our enemy wants war then that is what we should give them. Total war!
That is the trouble with war really since WW1. WW2 got to political. Gen Patton was sidelined for slapping a coward. You gear up, turn your meanest and baddest loose and God help the bastards that get in the way. Ask no quarter and give no quarter. Look at Gitmo, what a mess. Dont take any prisoners.
As far as N Korea is concerned, they have the fourth largest army in the world. Now where did I hear that before. Hmmmmm! 1991 Iraq- fourth largest army in the world- red brigade- good at murdering unarmed civilians not so good against our Air Force. We almost didnt need the Army. S Korea has a military about the same size but with much better equipment. I think its more like that little dog on the other side of the fence that barks and growls like its gonna tear you apart.

139

Dominic Yeso Sun, May 31, 2009 4:51:38pm

Hmm .. where would we get the money to launch a military mission in NK? Let's face it we're broke and are only able to operate at the good graces of the printing press and those who buy our debt.

140

AFVetWife Sun, May 31, 2009 6:21:50pm

re: #9 Racer X
We cannot let them disabuse the 1953 treaty! Too many Americans gave their lives for that!

141

Perplexed Sun, May 31, 2009 6:22:56pm

Fighting in Korea? Hot in the summer and brutally cold in the winter (google Chosin reservoir). It wouldn't be a cake walk and when the ROK blows the canyon walls down onto the highways leading south, our forces and the ROK forces stationed on the DMZ would have a long walk home. We could do it if the press and politicians stayed the hell out of the war. Would expect to have lots of casualties (civilian and military) and refugees streaming both north into China and south into ROK.

142

AFVetWife Sun, May 31, 2009 6:24:51pm

To all: It's (;23 pm EDT, and I must get to bed. The alarm goes off at 5:30 am. So, good night to all. Hope to see you all tomorrow.

143

Mr Spiffy Sun, May 31, 2009 6:44:28pm

re: #142 AFVetWife

To all: It's (;23 pm EDT, and I must get to bed. The alarm goes off at 5:30 am. So, good night to all. Hope to see you all tomorrow.

Oh No!
My clock stopped at ?:15
Better have it fixed.

144

Wild Knight Mon, Jun 1, 2009 4:49:33am

Thanks Charles for updating us on North Korea. The NORKs are giving me a bad case of jitters.

145

Pupdawg Mon, Jun 1, 2009 7:12:54am

I bet, that'll have KJI shaking in his PJs. It is a pathetic irony how with President Obama and his administration talk is so cheap and yet they think words alone hold value and will solve everything.

1. talk
2. ?
3. problem solved

Step 2. is the 'down and dirty' phase about which Democrats remain clueless.

146

AZDave Mon, Jun 1, 2009 12:47:27pm

re: #34 zombie

A million hungry, incompetent and ill-trained soldiers, posted at the extreme eastern end of the Maginot Line.

I have little doubt that 1/20th that number of U.S. military men would make handy work of them, mostly by avoiding their entrenched positions entirely.

98% of the North Korean military has never actually fought in a battle. Their command structure is delusional. They could easily be rolled up.

That all might be true but consider one million men flowing over the DMZ. Shooting fish in a barrel? Yes, but still hard to stop.

Spy Mode Auto

This article has been archived.
Comments are closed.

Jump to top

Gates Warns North Korea

► LGF Headlines

► Top 10 Comments

► Bottom Comments

► Recent Comments

► Tools/Info

► Tag Cloud