Just an Earth-Bound Misfit: The Rantings of an Aging, Armed, Pinko Chick

Words of Advice:

"If Something Seems To Be Too Good To Be True, It's Best To Shoot It, Just In Case." -- Fiona Glenanne

“The Mob takes the Fifth. If you’re innocent, why are you taking the Fifth Amendment?” -- The TOFF *

"Foreign Relations Boil Down to Two Things: Talking With People or Killing Them." -- Unknown

“Speed is a poor substitute for accuracy.” -- Real, no-shit, fortune from a fortune cookie

"Thou Shalt Get Sidetracked by Bullshit, Every Goddamned Time." -- The Ghoul

"If you believe that you are talking to G-d, you can justify anything.” — my Dad

"Colt .45s; putting bad guys in the ground since 1873." -- Unknown

"Stay Strapped or Get Clapped." -- probably not Mr. Rogers

"The Dildo of Karma rarely comes lubed." -- Unknown

"Eck!" -- George the Cat

* "TOFF" = Treasonous Orange Fat Fuck,
"FOFF" = Felonious Old Fat Fuck,
"COFF" = Convicted Old Felonious Fool,
A/K/A Commandante (or Cadet) Bone Spurs,
A/K/A El Caudillo de Mar-a-Lago, A/K/A the Asset,
A/K/A P01135809, A/K/A Dementia Donnie, A/K/A Felon^34,
A/K/A Dolt-45, A/K/A Don Snoreleone

Monday, September 4, 2017

North Korean Nukes

If anyone has a practical idea that is more workable than deterrence and sanctions, I haven't heard it.

Those blathering about going to war are beyond irresponsible.

9 comments:

3383 said...: Deterrence and sanctions haven't worked.
I suggest building up USAF assets, and prepare to strike CCC assets and counterattack the infamous artillery and army if they do attack without orders.
We have an opportunity to get the PRC to not intervene. A unified Korea governed from Seoul has to be a better neighbor than the Kims and their generals. Maybe a demilitarized northern half.
I'd be fine with a new province of China.

OF course, they aren't going to call me up. But sooner or later, the idiot North Koreans will have the capability to blow up my home.; 9/05/2017 12:07 AM
Comrade Misfit said...: While all of that building-up is going on, what do you suppose that the Norks are going to do? I don't imagine that they're just going to stand there with their thumbs up their asses and wait to be pounded by the Zoomies.

Besides that, remember that China has a mutual-defense treaty with North Korea. They might not take too kindly to the Air Froce carrying out preemptive strikes. The Chinese might take it as an opportunity to extend their influence over the region.

The more likely happening will be that no military action happens for now. But, given the untrustworthiness of the United States as an ally for now, I'd expect Japan and South Korea to quietly restart their nuclear programs. Japan, in particular, may have them a lot sooner than most believe.; 9/05/2017 8:26 AM
CenterPuke88 said...: Strike on artillery = millions dead in South Korea

Preemptive strike = China fighting on North Korea's side

Strike = Likely very heavy losses on strike aircraft or need to launch ballistic missiles at a target(s) within hundreds of miles of both Russia and China.

Unified Korea = Chinese hegemony in area, otherwise China will not accept.

Any attack on North Korea = End of American influence worldwide, imposition of American threats around the world to hold position. The start of the Chinese leadership of the world, competing with the Russians.

As I predicted before...Japan nuclear within 2 years, South Korea the same...Iran within a year of Donnie blowing up the treaty...Saudi Arabia within 3 years thereafter...German to join France and Britain within 5-10 years. As for the first war involving nuclear weapons, IDK, but with Donnie in office, I'm not sanguine we won't start one.; 9/05/2017 8:49 AM
B said...: CP: That's a pretty good call, really. I think you are right.; 9/05/2017 9:55 AM
3383 said...: A buildup is probably already happening, didn't we send a CVBG to the area? And if a buildup in reaction to heir threats and actual actions provokes an invasion by North Korea, then that one suboptimal solution to the problem. China would hopefully not intervene if the North starts (more) combat.
NK is irritating China on purpose, so we might be able to get them to not intervene if we move first, like I wrote above.
I don't want to make light of the situation, but "Millions of dead from artillery" is a meme. I am sure every emplacement in range of Seoul is mapped. If they open fire, it will not last long.
If we start offensive action- which we all hope can be avoided- the Desert Storm opening is a good template.
The decline of the USA in favor of China is not likely. China is a regional power with many internal issues and few overseas strengths.
I hope none of this comes to pass, but North Korea has a history of invading South Korea and killing and kidnapping it's citizens. Diplomacy and sanctions have, again, done little to stop them. I believe a credible military threat has a better chance of preventing a North Korean attack.
Or we should let them do whatever they want.; 9/05/2017 10:59 AM
Comrade Misfit said...: 3383, the difference between a "credible military threat" and "offensive action" is the difference between carrying a gun and walking down the street, shooting people.

I don't know what the butcher's bill will be for a war. But a Desert Storm scenario is betting that the North Korean army will fold after firing a few shots. I suspect that's whistling past the graveyard. The Norks have had decades to prepare for a war that they believe will happen when the US reopens the war.

If there is anything that we should have learned in the last 16 years, it is that there is no such thing as a cheap and easy war.; 9/05/2017 12:08 PM
CenterPuke88 said...: CVBG = Target. The ugly reality is that a strike from a carrier or two would be a bloodbath. The North Koreans have a very well meshed air defense network with a huge number of unknowns. Navy aircraft are not well suited for this kind of strike, and it would also result in the carriers being exposed to North Korean subs. Diesel subs have proved to be able to get within torpedo range of U.S. carriers in any number of exercises, the question would be do the North Koreans have any crews able to duplicate that feat.

Mapping the emplacements...OK, here's the problem. Most of the tube artillery that you would map is not the threat. The threat to Seoul main (vs. northern suburbs) is more concentrated on the Koksan-170mm SP units and the 240mm and 300mm rockets. These units can deliver roughly 350 metric tons of HE per volley (call it 11 B-52 loads), and are mobile. They will shoot and scoot, and be within the primary range of every bit of AA the North Koreans can dig in. The emplacements are better suited to defend vs troop movements and attacks, and just because you have them "mapped", doesn't mean you can kill them easily.

Next you have about 1000 theater tactical missile systems, all mobile as well, hidden well back within the AA belts.

Desert Storm as a model is a fantasy. Integrated radar systems have been sucesssfully detecting "stealth" aircraft for over a decade by taking data from multiple sensors and meshing it, and low frequency systems are also superior at detecting such aircraft. Let's say a Spirit successfully penetrates and bombs a facility in central North Korea, then what. You have a subsonic bomber, with known performance, attempting to escape from the airspace. If they flood the known radius area with aircraft, they are quite likely to find that bomber, and destroy it. So, what now? Ballistic attack? You launch a ballistic missile(s) at North Korea, they will return fire without waiting for impact, and the Chinese and Russians will be mighty antsy too. Cruise missiles? With what, nuclear warheads? Then we have fallout over the area (China/Russia/Japan/Philippines/Sout Korea and more) and the North Koreans will justifiably fire anything they have back at whomever is in range. Conventional warheads on cruise missiles are too small to achieve our goals!

Mahan's Seapower was well before current transport capacity. China can operate on interior lines of supply across Asia and into the Middle East, and from there they can access Africa and so resolve their only real supply issues without concerns about the U.S. Navy. The concept of China as a "regional power" is rather '90's, as they have continued to develop/steal their technology and capabilities for the past 20 years. In a one-on-one battle, I am dubious that the U.S. could defeat China without a commitment that would leave the U.S. exhausted like Great Britain after WWI.; 9/05/2017 1:41 PM
3383 said...: There are some differing opinions here, unsurprisingly. For one, I still don't think NK's abilities match their image. Like diesel submarines in a real shooting war.
China, though, cannot project force beyond it's bordering neighbors. The most they have done is their concrete islands in the SCS.; 9/05/2017 2:29 PM
CenterPuke88 said...: 3383, and China's new military base in Djibouti has no power projection potential? Remember, it takes time to get set up, but you can see it coming. Chinese spending in Africa is vast, do you think that's not deliberate? Believe it or not, I truely believe China has already written off the U.S. as a true threat and is maneuvering to contain India. The U.S. is a power in decline unless we figure this crap out quick.; 9/05/2017 4:08 PM