Norks are being surly

[Hutch]

There seems to have been a bit of a tiff on the Peninsula, some artillery exchanged, a few casualties, that sort of thing.  http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/worldnews/asia/southkorea/8153291/South-Korea-warns-North-Korea-it-will-sternly-retaliate-to-any-further-provocation.html

Reckon what them boys is up to?  I mean, they have some dynastic succession issues, and they invite one of our nuclear scientists in to show off their centrifuge farm to enrich uranium.  I can't believe this makes sense, even to Dear Leader.  The Japanese are a little spooked, the Russians suggest there be no escalation, and the Chinese have threatened to frown.

[Jocassee]

Wonder if the Sorks are hiring...I know a few good men.

[De Selby]

Wonder if the Sorks are hiring...I know a few good men.

Do you know any willing martyrs? Because that's what they'd be in a real war between the asian North & South.

[Jamisjockey]

More than likely its just some standard extortion.  Rattle the cage, demand food for peace.

[longeyes]

"Can't we all just get along?"

Answer: No, we can't.

[seeker_two]

Don't we have some new cruise missle technology that we need to test?.....

[French G.]

Don't we have some new cruise missle technology that we need to test?.....

See y'alls fail in not electing me? That's been a cornerstone of my Nork diplomacy plan for several years. We have these really quiet new SSGNs that need a full scale test. Line all 5? of them up off one coast, launch every tomahawk on board, have them fly at treetop level through every sensitive military installation NK has and then destruct over deep international water on the opposite coast. Publicly deny everything, privately threaten to repeat with slightly different targeting instructions. Meanwhile by boats intentionally grounded unmanned, airdrop etc, carpetbomb the nork population centers with internet enabled phones, foreign money, and high calorie food. Maybe some guns too.

[seeker_two]

See y'alls fail in not electing me? That's been a cornerstone of my Nork diplomacy plan for several years. We have these really quiet new SSGNs that need a full scale test. Line all 5? of them up off one coast, launch every tomahawk on board, have them fly at treetop level through every sensitive military installation NK has and then destruct over deep international water on the opposite coast. Publicly deny everything, privately threaten to repeat with slightly different targeting instructions.

That would be a waste of missles....and craters make a better message than deniable fly-bys....

Meanwhile by boats intentionally grounded unmanned, airdrop etc, carpetbomb the nork population centers with internet enabled phones, foreign money, and high calorie food. Maybe some guns too.

Now that would be a great idea....in NK and in Mexico.....

[longeyes]

Win one for MacArthur.

[French G.]

That would be a waste of missles....and craters make a better message than deniable fly-bys....

Now that would be a great idea....in NK and in Mexico.....

Mexico knows the outside world exists, we just need to figure out how to give them an angry middle class. Not a waste of missiles, economic stimulus, 29 states selling more widgets to the gov't. :D

[Jamisjockey]

http://news.yahoo.com/s/yblog_thelookout/20101123/ts_yblog_thelookout/tensions-on-the-korean-peninsula-what-you-need-to-know

[Leatherneck]

Norks are being surly batshit crazy again

FTFY.

I hope the Good Guys don't go to war, although I'd understand if they did: enough is enough. But we don't need to be fighting three wars. They know that, of course.

Who's next? Venezuela? Iran?

TC

[French G.]

I always have jokes, but in a serious vein does anyone see any scenario where we are not militarily involved on that stupid peninsula? Those kooks have held on too, tight, too long. Even if they said to their people hey, we were wrong, *poof here's some Jeffersonian democracy for you, oh, BTW there's this thing called the internet, it was part of the 20th century package you didn't get. Even then there would be massive upheaval, what little infrastructure they had would be destroyed in a civil war and there we'd be cleaning up the mess.

But batcrap crazy dictatorships don't fade away quietly so we can expect worse. Probably acting sooner is better than later, another winter of innocent people starving, another winter closer to nuclear weapons that actually work.

[Lennyjoe]

Isn't the boy taking over soon?  Maybe Kim Jung Daddyo wanted to show his boy how to get the southerners spun up.

[Jamisjockey]

I always have jokes, but in a serious vein does anyone see any scenario where we are not militarily involved on that stupid peninsula? Those kooks have held on too, tight, too long. Even if they said to their people hey, we were wrong, *poof here's some Jeffersonian democracy for you, oh, BTW there's this thing called the internet, it was part of the 20th century package you didn't get. Even then there would be massive upheaval, what little infrastructure they had would be destroyed in a civil war and there we'd be cleaning up the mess.

But batcrap crazy dictatorships don't fade away quietly so we can expect worse. Probably acting sooner is better than later, another winter of innocent people starving, another winter closer to nuclear weapons that actually work.

The Norks are China's proxy.  China wants us out of the region so they can have Taiwan and a unified penisula. 
We
owe
shchloads
of
money
to
China.
I mean, unfathomable amounts.

I think that if we make any committed effort to prevent the unification when it comes, we're going to be quite sorry.

[MillCreek]

Popular Mechanics this month had a good story about how the PRC could invade Taiwan and take out an American carrier battle group in the process.  It really made me think about the survivability of a carrier in a saturation missile attack.

[longeyes]

Academic.  When carriers go down, everything will be a target.

[cassandra and sara's daddy]

Academic.  When carriers go down, everything will be a target.

if you are referring to north korean targets how do you think that can be done?

[longeyes]

I was talking about China, Taiwan, and us.  Okay, they can sink our carriers, destroy a full battle group.  But they and we know full well what that would mean. 

[De Selby]

Academic.  When carriers go down, everything will be a target.

Yeah, and what do you think is going to do the targeting if carriers can be sunk? 

If they can do it repeatedly, they can devastate America's ability to target anything, anywhere.  Of course they can't do it repeatedly.

[MicroBalrog]

Yeah, and what do you think is going to do the targeting if carriers can be sunk? 

If they can do it repeatedly, they can devastate America's ability to target anything, anywhere.  Of course they can't do it repeatedly.

I don't think you understand.

Of course they can do it repeatedly. Anybody who thinks that a war with China will not involve multiple aircraft carriers being lost is being... optimistics.

US Battleships were 'repeatedly' sunk in WW2 also. Remember who won that one?

[De Selby]

I don't think you understand.

Of course they can do it repeatedly. Anybody who thinks that a war with China will not involve multiple aircraft carriers being lost is being... optimistics.

US Battleships were 'repeatedly' sunk in WW2 also. Remember who won that one?

No aircraft carrier has ever been sunk - and they were central to the victory in WW2.  Losing multiple carriers would put an enormous dent in America's capacity to make war.

[MicroBalrog]

No aircraft carrier has ever been sunk - and they were central to the victory in WW2.  Losing multiple carriers would put an enormous dent in America's capacity to make war.

Several aircraft carriers have been sunk in WW2.

The Yorktown, Bismarck Sea, Hornet,  and Wasp[/yrl] are but a few.

[seeker_two]

If they can do it repeatedly, they can devastate America's ability to target anything, anywhere.  Of course they can't do it repeatedly.

Not after an ICBM attack, they can't....

[MicroBalrog]

Fact:

If the Chinese sank 60% of America's aircraft carriers [which is impossible], the remaining aircraft carriers in America's possession [not counting mothballed and reserve ships], would, on their own, not counting escorts, have more tonnage than the entire Chinese Navy. All of it. All. Said carriers would also have more aircraft on board than the Chinese Navy has at its disposal.