US OPTIONS TO STOP NORTH KOREA: A limited strike, full-scale invasion or pressure on China; BUT BEWARE FALSE FLAG RALLY AROUND THE PRESIDENT
- Donald Trump has vowed any threat to the U.S. will be met with 'fire and fury like the world has never seen'
- US officials believe Kim Jong-Un has built a miniaturized warhead and has an arsenal of 60 nuclear bombs
The war of threats between President Trump and the North Korean dictator, Kim Jong-Un, is setting global nerves on edge.
We’re used to blood curdling propaganda from Pyongyang, but an American president using the same kind of language – ‘fire and fury’ – is a new departure. The threat of nuclear war in East Asia is suddenly alarmingly close.
But before this hysterical rhetoric reaches a climax, Western leaders must consider what history and strategic analysis teaches us about how to avoid calamity – or how best to contain it.
The devastating nature of the first Korean War in 1950-53 is a warning of the huge costs of a second, which could also drag in countries as close as Japan, as remote as Britain or as reluctant as China.
The options Washington is considering, range from the tried-and-trusted – to the once unthinkable.
Option 1: A Limited Strike
In 1994, President Clinton considered using strategic bombers to attack North Korea’s nuclear facilities before an atomic weapon could be produced.
Then, as now, the US had a range of airbases in South Korea, Japan and Guam from which to strike, with B1 bombers and cruise missiles plus its fleet of nuclear aircraft carriers, each with more attack planes than the entire RAF.
President Donald Trump has vowed any threat to the U.S. will be met with 'fire and fury like the world has never seen'
Clinton decided against military action because of fears North Korea’s huge ground force would wreak havoc across the South Korean border. A major war would be needed to defeat it.
Today, North Korea is far better prepared to survive even a severe air attack by the US. Its nuclear forces are not sitting ducks. It has repeatedly deployed mobile launchers so it can move and hide missiles.
The newer North Korean solid-fuelled missiles can also be launched much more quickly than the older liquid-fuelled rockets. These developments make neutralising Kim’s atomic warheads by a massive airstrike far from fool-proof.
2: Full-Scale Invasion
The US military routed the North Koreans in the first Korean War, but the US had many more troops and landing craft at its disposal. The US navy facilitated the D-Day style landing on the coast behind the North Korean Army, trapping it in the South.
North Korea has no navy to speak of to protect its coastline, and it’s tempting to imagine US Marines pouring ashore and marching to Pyongyang, just as they did in October 1950. But this time the North Korean army – ill-equipped but vast in size – would be waiting. To win quickly and decisively the US would require the bulk of its military man power to be deployed to Korea.
North Korea said it is 'carefully examining' a plan to strike the U.S. Pacific territory of Guam with missiles. The strike plan will be 'put into practice in a multi-current and consecutive way any moment' once leader Kim Jong Un (file above) makes a decision
But Washington has other problems, from Afghanistan to Syria. War in Korea would tie down the army and marines – unless South Korea’s 650,000 troops also took part. However, South Korea is reluctant to engage in a pre-emptive war that would threaten Seoul and other cities with destruction from the North.
Then there is China. It is vehemently hostile to the US THAAD missile defence system that has recently been deployed in South Korea. Beijing’s fear is the real target of any US military action in the region is ultimately China. To act without being sure of Chinese neutrality runs the risk of a wider and far more perilous conflict – World War III in all probability.
Even if China was ready to accept the fall of Kim’s regime, a conventional invasion would not be quick enough to prevent Kim launching some kind of nuclear strike, as well as firing off his stockpile of chemical and biological weapons.
The North has as many as 60 nuclear bombs, according to US intelligence. If only a couple were successfully launched at South Korea, the scale of the casualties would be horrendous.
3: A Decapitation Strike
A successful set of airstrikes on North Korea’s nuclear stockpile will not halt Kim’s ambitions. As long as the regime survives, it will be attempt to rebuild. So knocking out the North Korean leadership in a so-called decapitation strike is being widely touted in Washington.
Smart bombs could surely locate and kill Kim and his key commanders before they could organise a deadly counter-attack?
Tens of thousands of North Koreans gathered for a rally at Kim Il Sung Square today carrying placards and propaganda slogans as a show of support for their rejection of the United Nations' latest round of sanctions
Unfortunately, a successful strike wouldn’t stop a barrage of a rockets being fired in instant retaliation.
In any case, assassinating foreign leaders is easier said than done. It would be a very lucky strike that took out Kim and his fellow leaders. If it failed, Kim’s revenge would be indiscriminate attacks aimed at South Korea, Japan and any US bases within range.
In practice, a decapitation strike would mean all-out war. And even if that was successful, a US-South Korean occupation of North Korea could face guerrilla resistance using Kim’s poison gas and bacteriological weapons.
Nor would China – faced with the prospect of millions of refugees – be pleased by a speedy collapse of Kim’s regime.
The Pentagon has a detailed plan for a military strike on North Korea, dispatching heavy bombers from Guam – the fortified U.S. territory that Pyongyang is threatening with missiles.
The plan would be to launch heavy B1-B bombers from Guam's Andersen Air Force Base, limiting the flight time.
U.S. forces have conducted practice maneuvers as recently as Monday, NBC News reported – and have done 11 sets of exercises.
The bombers would get an escort from fighter jets providing protection. Satellites and drones would aide in the effort.
The Pentagon has a detailed plan for a military strike on North Korea, dispatching heavy bombers from Guam to take out missile launch facilities
The planes would not carry nuclear payload, but would likely be armed with precision weapons designed to take out North Korea's array of missiles and missile launch sites.
'Of all the military options … [Trump] could consider, this would be one of the two or three that would at least have the possibility of not escalating the situation," retired Adm. James Stavridis told the network.
He added: 'A single long-range strike against against the nuclear program, a cyber offensive would be the second. Those are the only two military options that ought to be in serious consideration.'
The military has six of the powerful bombers already in position on Guam.
They would go after about two dozen missile targets in North Korea
Bomber air crews would fly to North Korea from Guam, assisted by fighters, satellites, and drones
Each B-1B aircraft can carry up to 168 bombs, NBC reported
One downside: the attack would almost certainly draw a response, and North Korea has already threatened to fire missiles off the coast of Guam.
Since Guam is more than 2,000 miles away from North Korea, the attack plan would require a complex refueling exercise that the military constantly practices.
As for munitions, each bomber is equipped to carry 168 bombs.
In this Tuesday, Aug. 8, 2017 image released by the Joint Staff Office of the Defense Ministry of Japan, Japanese fighter jets, foreground, and U.S. Air Force B-1B Lancer bombers, background, fly over Japan's southern island of Kyushu during their joint exercise
The Pentagon has a plan for a preemptive strike on North Korea
A top plan on the shelf would rely on B-1B bombers based at Andersen Air Force Base
The bombers would get a fighter escort
Bomber crews have been practicing the refueling exercise that would be required
One weapon of choice would be the JASSM-ER. Manufacturer Lockheed-Martin describes it as: 'a long-range, conventional, air-to-ground, precision standoff missile for the U.S. and allied forces.'
'Designed to destroy high-value, well-defended, fixed and relocatable targets, JASSM’s significant standoff range keeps aircrews well out of danger from hostile air defense systems,' according to the description.
If the bombers used the JASSM-ER, they could conduct strikes without ever having to enter North Korean air space, protecting themselves from air defenses.
The planes do not carry a nuclear payload
Two U.S. officials told NBC the use of the bombers was among the options available. The Pentagon produces war plans for numerous, even highly improbable scenarios.
A military strike – long feared by the reclusive regime in Pyongyang – would almost certainly draw a response.
"Kim Jong Un would be compelled to respond. He would lash out militarily, at a minimum against South Korea, and potentially at long-range targets, perhaps including Guam. … That's a bad set of outcomes from where we sit now,'
4: A US nuclear strike
Hotheads in Washington talk about using America’s massive nuclear superiority to ‘eliminate’ North Korea as a threat once and for all.
But such an attack would kill millions of Kim’s long-suffering subjects, making a mushroom-cloud sized mockery of America’s moral case against the regime. The fall-out from a US first-strike would shatter alliances and trigger massively increased defence spending by China and Russia.
BEWARE FALSE FLAG RALLY AROUND THE PRESIDENT
Trump’s presidency is in deep trouble, any fool or Trump voter can see that clearly now, it is only a matter of time before someone in a position of authority delves into Trump’s financial history and opens up the whole can of worms, the money laundering for the Russian mafia, the election interference by the Israelis, US-Israeli traitors and perhaps the Russians too on behalf of that mafia, all of it is going to come out eventually.
While the rats are scrambling to get off the sinking ship of Trump, the fat cats who own Trump will no doubt have been thinking of ways to save the orange buffoon’s ass and prolong the control over the White House that they enjoy as long as Trump is in residence.
The obvious solution is to rely on the traditional ‘rallying round the flag’ that a large portion of the American sheeple can be relied upon to perform whenever their nation goes to war, all that is needed is to supply a suitable war.
B-52s parked at Andersen AFB, Guam
Such wars have usually been manufactured by carrying out false flag attacks, and it looks to me like Guam and it’s US military base are a prime candidate for such an attack – base goes boom, a load of US servicemen die, North Korea is blamed and Trump gets to act like the avenging angel as he sends the bombers and missiles towards Pyongyang.
Don’t think they would slaughter US servicemen just to try to save Trump’s ailing presidency? They killed 261 US marines in their Beirut barracks back in the early 80s, to name just one prior instance….
Another factor to consider is that the US has been out of the war business for a decade now, which hurts the profits of the billionaires that own the big defence contractors, those billionaires all contributed significant sums to Trump’s election campaign, so they will be pushing their pussy grabbing buddy to do something to boost their bottom lines, preferably something that requires lots of expensive aircraft, bombs and missiles….
The ‘Trump Effect’ is already visible – Lockheed-Martin stocks are up in the wake of the orange buffoon’s ‘Fire and Fury’ response to Pyongyang’s threat to hit Guam:
Ian]
__________
CNN
North Korea’s military is “examining the operational plan” to strike areas around the US territory of Guam with medium-to-long-range strategic ballistic missiles, state-run news agency KCNA said early Wednesday local time.
Specifically, the statement mentioned a potential strike on Andersen Air Force Base designed “to send a serious warning signal to the US.”
The base is one of two on the Pacific island, which are the closest bases on US soil to North Korea, and represent the westernmost tip of the country’s military might.
The North Korea comments were published after US President Donald Trump warned Pyongyang that if it continued to threaten the US, it would “face fire and fury like the world has never seen.”
‘No threat to our island’
Guam’s governor, Eddie Baza Calvo, released a video address Wednesday, reassuring the island’s residents that there was no change in the threat level resulting from North Korea.
“I want to reassure the people of Guam that currently there is no threat to our island or the Marianas,” he said.
“I also want to remind national media that Guam is American soil and we have 200,000 Americans in Guam and the Marianas. We are not just a military installation,” he added.
Speaking from Guam, journalist Robert Santos said local reaction to the threats was mixed.
“Some people are who are confident we are safe with the US bases here and others who are not so sure,” he said.
“Some people believe (Trump and Kim) are clashing personalities and they speak recklessly. But here are some people who believe… that we are completely safe regardless of what happens.”
However, he added that an attack on Guam “won’t just be against the US military, it will be against the people.”
Key military installation
Dubbed the “tip of the spear,” Guam is a key to the US military’s forward deployed presence in the Pacific and is home to thousands of American service members and their families.
Its importance has declined since the Second World War, given the creation of military bases in Japan and South Korea, says Carl Schuster, a Hawaii Pacific University professor and former director of operations at the US Pacific Command’s Joint Intelligence Center. Now it is essentially a staging area, which sees rotations of bomber groups coming through.
“Guam is the western most US territory that has major military bases. If you (were to) pull (the US) out of Japan and South Korea it’s the next best location in the Pacific,” says Schuster.
While it is around 1,500 miles further out from the Korean peninsula than its next closest base in Japan, it’s “still strategic because of its location” and its ability to host long-range bombers.
There are, however, political complications in launching attacks from US bases hosted by allies closer to Pyongyang, should the US retaliate to Kim’s latest threats.
Should US allies refuse to let the military to launch strikes from their territory, Guam would be the most likely place from which to launch airstrikes on North Korea, Schuster says, adding that this is how Kim will regard it.
A US attack using its bases on Japan’s main islands or Okinawa, for example, would bring Japan into any conflict, says Schuster.
However, “Guam’s importance is reliant on the behavior of our allies. If South Korea and Japan say we could (launch attacks) out of there, taking out Guam becomes almost meaningless.”
North Korea’s Hwasong ballistic missiles can hit Guam.
Defensive shield
Guam’s Homeland Security Advisor George Charfauros told CNN that despite Guam’s strategic importance and the North Korean threats to strike it, he remains confident of the island’s defenses.
“They’ve slowly developed their capabilities but we stand in high confidence with the US (Defense Department’s) ability to not only defend Guam and the surrounding areas but also the continental US… There are several layers of ballistic missile defense.”
One of these systems, he said, is THAAD, the Terminal High Altitude Area Defense system, which is designed to shoot down short, medium and intermediate ballistic missiles.
“Two years ago a permanent deployment of that missile system was placed on Guam,” he said.
He added that the US “routinely uses” Aegis-equipped warships around the island chain of the Marianas, of which Guam is the largest.
The US Department of Defense reiterated its capability to counter North Korean aggression.
“We always maintain a high state of readiness and have the capabilities to counter any threat, to include those from North Korea,” spokesman Johnny Michael told CNN.
Escalating tensions
North Korea ramped up the rhetoric in a new statement issued Wednesday, sourced to a spokesman for the General Staff of the Korean People’s Army (KPA), which said a “preemptive strike is no longer the monopoly of the US.”
Pyongyang’s initial threat to Guam came after the US flew two B-1B bombers over the Korean peninsula on Tuesday local time.
Two U.S. Air Force B-1B Lancers flew from Andersen Air Force Base, Guam, for a 10-hour mission near Japan, the East China Sea and the Korean peninsula, August 7.
The bombers flew out of Andersen Air Force Base in Guam as part of the US Air Force’s “continuous bomber presence,” according to an Pacific Air Forces spokesman. The bombers were joined by Japanese and South Korean aircraft during their mission.
“In the morning of August 8 the air pirates of Guam again appeared in the sky above South Korea to stage a mad-cap drill simulating an actual war,” the KCNA statement read.
The flights with Japan and South Korea were designed to demonstrate solidarity between the nations, the US said.
Pyongyang did not develop its nuclear capability to be the aggressor in a war with the US, says CNN Military Analyst Rick Francona.
However, its most recent statements suggest that North Korea is taking a more aggressive stance — suggesting that it might attack before the US has a chance to strike.
“The North Koreans did not develop their nuclear weapons to drop on the US,” Francona told CNN. “They developed these weapons to prevent an attack from the US. Or at least that’s the rhetoric coming from Pyongyang.
“Now you’re looking at a possible strike on American territory (like) Guam, and also the mainland of the US.”
No comments:
Post a Comment