ALL BLOG POSTS AND COMMENTS COPYRIGHT (C) 2003-2017 VOX DAY. ALL RIGHTS RESERVED. REPRODUCTION WITHOUT WRITTEN PERMISSION IS EXPRESSLY PROHIBITED.

Monday, April 03, 2017

Unserious about war

This is why the Western militaries are going to lose their next major war. They simply are no longer serious about warfighting; as the Z-man observes, they are more interested in posturing than victory:
Way back when the Bush administration launched the invasion of Iraq, the prevailing assumption among those who were in charge was that it would be a cakewalk. The people would embrace us as liberators. People who had some clue about how the world works knew it would be an ugly mess, as is the case with all wars. War is, by definition, the ugliest of human activities. It’s purpose is to kill and destroy.

Inevitably, stories turned up about abuses. One essential way to prepare soldiers for war is to dehumanize the enemy. Men, even trained killers, are not going to kill people they see as sympathetic. There’s no way to finely calibrate the mind of a soldier so in every war there are abuses, even when care is taken to avoid them. That’s why things like the Abu Ghraib prison incident happened. War is and always will be an ugly business.

That knowledge should lead Western governments to use their technological and economic advantages to avoid getting into wars with the barbarians on the edge of civilization. Instead, they start wars they never intend to win, so they can preen and pose about their virtue and morality, when something terrible inevitably happens. It means some guy in uniform gets to be strung up in order to please the vanity of our rulers.
Remember, most militaries that suffered catastrophic defeats had been previously successful. The US military can't even claim the same. As for the virtually nonexistent militaries of the Great Britain, France, and Spain, they can't even defend their own borders.

If the USA is foolish enough to go to war with North Korea, things may turn out very, very differently than everyone is expecting.

Labels:

115 Comments:

Anonymous 11B April 03, 2017 4:29 PM  

When will the Trump admin reverse the policy of letting women in the infantry? If they can't even do that maybe they are not as serious as we had hoped.

Blogger Chris Lutz April 03, 2017 4:30 PM  

I think the worst case scenario is it goes worse than expected with the Norks and the Chinese decide it's time to rule Asia.

Blogger Timmy3 April 03, 2017 4:32 PM  

Trump threatened to confront North Korea without China's support. The USA is already divided. Trump promised in the campaign to be against starting wars, but he seems to be running into it. This won't end well. World War II was a huge victory, but millions lost lives. We finished what was started. We need to finish the Iraq War, nearly 20 years after it started, and have an end to the war in Afghanistan. Let China handle North Korea.

Anonymous basementhomebrewer April 03, 2017 4:40 PM  

Timmy3 wrote:Trump threatened to confront North Korea without China's support. The USA is already divided. Trump promised in the campaign to be against starting wars, but he seems to be running into it. This won't end well. World War II was a huge victory, but millions lost lives. We finished what was started. We need to finish the Iraq War, nearly 20 years after it started, and have an end to the war in Afghanistan. Let China handle North Korea.

Agreed, Trump should be pressuring China to get their little brother in line. Use economic policy to apply the pressure to the Chinese and cut a deal. If China decided to get serious about shutting down North Korea they would collapse inside a week.

Anonymous Grayman April 03, 2017 4:41 PM  

This isn't really new news don't forget about the 2002 war game that the pentagon didn't care for...


It was part of Millennium Challenge ’02, a $250 million war game running from July–August, 2002. And the “Iranian” commander was very much an American — retired U.S. Marine Corps Lt. Gen. Paul Van Riper.....

19 U.S. ships were on the bottom when the smoke cleared. The carrier, the escorts, the amphibious ships, the lot of them. 20,000 sailors and Marines went with them....

“The whole thing was over in five, maybe 10 minutes,” the Iranian commander gloated.





https://dailyreckoning.com/iran-sinks-u-s-fleet/

Anonymous krymneth April 03, 2017 4:46 PM  

This probably is Trump pressuring China. There's more ways to "deal with" an issue than going to war with it.

I'm not ready to panic yet. Trump likes him the win-wins and actual military conflict is a lose-lose, and I bet he knows it.

Blogger S1AL April 03, 2017 4:47 PM  

Only if by "go to war with" you mean "invade" and not "bomb into the stone age".

Anonymous basementhomebrewer April 03, 2017 4:47 PM  

Grayman wrote:This isn't really new news don't forget about the 2002 war game that the pentagon didn't care for...

It was part of Millennium Challenge ’02, a $250 million war game running from July–August, 2002. And the “Iranian” commander was very much an American — retired U.S. Marine Corps Lt. Gen. Paul Van Riper.....

19 U.S. ships were on the bottom when the smoke cleared. The carrier, the escorts, the amphibious ships, the lot of them. 20,000 sailors and Marines went with them....

“The whole thing was over in five, maybe 10 minutes,” the Iranian commander gloated.





I remember reading about the war game but I thought the Opfor was an undisclosed ME country that was rumored to be a model of Israel, not the Iranians. I would suspect Israel would be more accurate because I don't think Iran's cruise missile tech was up to snuff at that time.

Blogger Lazarus April 03, 2017 4:49 PM  

War cucks.

Z-man says:

If the Afghans knew all along that helping Osama bin Laden was most likely going to mean their cities and large towns would be flattened, they would have chose differently.

As it was, Khalid Sheikh Mohammed, the alleged mastermind of 911, told his interrogator that they never expected "the cowboy" (Bush) to actually do anything about it as significant as going to war. The US had set precedents of not responding seriously since the Beirut bombing under Reagan. Maybe throw a few more cruise missiles into abandoned training camps like Clinton.

Anonymous Grayman April 03, 2017 4:50 PM  

The confrontation with NK should be very educational. There has been debate about how real the EMP threat is to modern society from a nuke detonation.
If NK is engaged we will probably get to see first hand. Even if they have a "primitive" nuke that they use in the area of North Korea the EMP effect would hypothetically be seen in South Korea too.
There are claims that the EMP effects on modern society would be more catastrophic than the actual blast effects. I'd guess that if NK is engaged militarily and has any thought it might not hold its own, that is uses it nuke/nukes, even on their own soil.
They may be able to pull of something akin to the Iranian war game I linked, especially if they are willing to toss out some nukes and go "all in". I dont see NK hesitating to sacrifice a majority of its population.
Heck, even if they only have 1 nuke capable of reacing the US, if they pull off a scenario similar to the Iranian wargame and fire off a large number of ballistic missiles with only one being a nuke, they might be able to get through US missile defenses.

Blogger Lazarus April 03, 2017 4:51 PM  

Timmy3 wrote:We finished what was started.

I think the Russians did most of the finishing part.

Blogger Karl April 03, 2017 4:52 PM  

If you like Larry Bond Red Phoenix Rising was alright. Korean war novel (although based in 1980s tech/politics). I may have to find my old paperback version if it is selling for $100+ on Amazon.

https://www.amazon.com/Red-Phoenix-Larry-Bond/dp/0446514330/

Blogger James Dixon April 03, 2017 4:53 PM  

> Only if by "go to war with" you mean "invade" and not "bomb into the stone age".

For all practical purposes, they're already in the stone age. Traditional bombing won't have much of an effect unless we can target the specific facilities needed to kill Kim and his entire leadership. That seems unlikely, though I would love to be wrong.

Anonymous Grayman April 03, 2017 4:56 PM  

@8 basement,

The Iranians have the Russian sunburn antiship missiles....

Given current missile tech the US navy is no where near as invincible as it likes to pretend. I wouldn't be shocked to hear that NK had picked up a few sunburn or Chinese knock-off sunburns.
Even at a few million $ a piece (the price range of cruise missiles) most modern adversaries can easily mass fire supersonic cruise missiles and overwhelm naval defenses.

Blogger James Dixon April 03, 2017 4:57 PM  

The broader issue than just North Korea is that nuclear weapons are now within the reach of pretty much anyone who wants them, and there's not a lot we can do about it. We live in interesting times.

Blogger Bob Loblaw April 03, 2017 5:00 PM  

Way back when the Bush administration launched the invasion of Iraq, the prevailing assumption among those who were in charge was that it would be a cakewalk.

They were right, too. It took all of, what, two weeks between the time the invasion started and when Baghdad fell?

The problem in Iraq wasn't the ability of the military to conduct a successful war. The problem was the US military is designed to fight wars and not pacify large groups of people. The changes they made to be a more effective occupying force have to be reversed before it can go back to being good at its purpose: breaking things and killing people.

Also, the SJW stuff is a tax on effectiveness. How high that tax is remains to be seen, since a lot of the foolishness you have the extra "bandwidth" for in peacetime can kill you in the opening days of a shooting war.

Blogger Bob Loblaw April 03, 2017 5:04 PM  

Even at a few million $ a piece (the price range of cruise missiles) most modern adversaries can easily mass fire supersonic cruise missiles and overwhelm naval defenses.

It's not that easy. For one thing, you need working fire control radars, and there's no way to hide them. For another, unless the navy is dumb enough to come right up to your shore, you need launching platforms. Those missiles are big, and they have a shorter range than carrier aircraft.

Anonymous Grayman April 03, 2017 5:11 PM  

@17 Bob,

yes, and while not easy, its also a real threat, look at the Iranian war game I linked, hubris is death in war.
There is also the threat of them leveling Soul and whether or not we could really stop them from doing so.
I'm not a guru on NK wargames but they have options to inflict serious pain, more so than Saddam did since I think they are willing to go 100% from the outset. They have had a long time to consider how to engage the US an other superior forces. They will lose, but they can inflict a huge price for that "victory".

Anonymous Silly but True April 03, 2017 5:23 PM  

It's never not a good time for Van Riper's 2002 interview:
https://www.theguardian.com/world/2002/sep/06/usa.iraq

Blogger Frank Brady April 03, 2017 5:24 PM  

@Basementhomebrewer

Nope, it was Iran.

Blogger Salt April 03, 2017 5:29 PM  

North Korea is Pyongyang. One nuke, not even a big one, sub fired from close in during a Dear Leader celebration.

Blogger Anon416 April 03, 2017 5:31 PM  

@Grayman

Millennium Challange was inter-US forces. No Iranians involved.

However I do agree that NK could massively damage Seoul if it came to it.

Anonymous Airman Snuffy April 03, 2017 5:31 PM  

The Iraqi conflict war portion WAS a cakewalk. The Iraqi military defeat was almost totally one-sided.

The occupation, not so much, because it involved fighting Iranian proxies and being unwilling to admit it. We needed a wall with Iran. Despite that overall casualties in a decade were less than most single battles in WW2--mostly we just sapped our treasury.

Having done strategic planning for a NK conflict, it would be expensive in terms of munitions spent and would have quite a few more casualities on our side (especially for the ROKs) but it is also a pretty certain win for the US coalition, and only the uncertanties of war make it not a complete slam dunk. It won't happen anyways. A second Korean war is the last thing any of the sides in that mess want. The ROK doesn't want the expense of reunification/rebuilding, or the risk of losing; China doesn't want millions of refugees flooding in nor US allied bases on their border; the US doesn't want the cost or the opportunity cost involved in committing to that war; and NK doesn't want the risk/likely loss as long as the regime is stable.

Anonymous Mark Auld April 03, 2017 5:31 PM  

O T ,finally at 5:00 pm news,Fox is reporting that Susan Rice was the Obama official who unmasked Trump team...anyone else?...I hear silence to my left...

Blogger Francis Parker Yockey April 03, 2017 5:35 PM  

@18
"There is also the threat of them leveling Soul and whether or not we could really stop them from doing so."

Yeah, it's kind of unfortunate that Seoul is within artillery range of NK.

Anonymous instasetting April 03, 2017 5:36 PM  

Cakewalk....Liberators.....and nonsense. Hard to take a guy seriously when he starts out spewing insanity.

As to the Western militaries losing the next war, I'd say 'what Western militaries?" There is the US and GB, and I don't know about Australia.

This article is 'we're punks so we should focus on moolah'.

As to our winning, it will depend on who is in charge. We have the means, we just need the savagery and the focus on breaking things and destroying enemies.

Blogger Robert What? April 03, 2017 5:38 PM  

North Korea is not a threat to us. Why is Trump fixated on them?

Anonymous Grayman April 03, 2017 5:38 PM  

Anon416,

I was referring to the Iranians being the hypothetical OPFOR.

Blogger Johnny April 03, 2017 5:42 PM  

It depends on what is meant by war with North Korea. The problem is that the country could be used as a proxy for China going to war. A question I would raise with the Chinese is whether or not they support the nuclear program that North Korea has, and if they do support it, should a nuclear attack from North Korea be regarded as an attack by China, with of course the possibility of an appropriate response.

Other than the missiles and nukes, North Korea should be regarded as a regional problem and burden their near neighbors with dealing with it. War with the North, maybe. Us in a ground war in the North, crazy stupid.

Anonymous Grayman April 03, 2017 5:46 PM  

OT,

WINNING#

In the wake of an announcement by U.S. Attorney General Jeff Sessions that he would cut off funding if so-called sanctuary cities did not begin cooperating with the federal government regarding illegal aliens, it has been reported that the NYPD alerts ICE agents if immigrants facing deportation are due to appear in Criminal Court, thereby making it easier for them to be detained by the federal government.

Blogger bob kek mando ( Death To The Boor-geois, Keks To The Lol-etariat ) April 03, 2017 5:49 PM  

VD
If the USA is foolish enough to go to war with North Korea, things may turn out very, very differently than everyone is expecting.


everyone is NOT expecting the Chinese main army?

why not? that's what happened last time. that's why we've got a North Korea in the first place.

Anonymous Looking Glass April 03, 2017 5:52 PM  

NK loses any engagement. Parts of SK are actually spoiling for a fight. The 2+ million causalities in Seoul alone is part of the reason it hasn't happened since the end of the USSR. The other issue is that the last time any US-aligned forces were on China's border, they invaded.

Which might partially explain the movement of heavier forces into Manchuria. (The other reason is that China has its own local minority group who works to suppress the dominant group. That just happens to be their homeland.)

But it's also noticeable that a lot of people still aren't getting how Trump operates. He's not rattling sabers at NK; he's directing them at China via trade. China neither wants NK to collapse nor for SK + US forces to be right on their border. Trump knows this, and it's a huge leverage point.

Blogger Cail Corishev April 03, 2017 5:54 PM  

Why is Trump fixated on them?

Who says he is? Is this a NeverTrump talking point, or a Democrat one?

Anonymous VFM #7916 April 03, 2017 5:59 PM  

https://gab.ai/VFM_7916/posts/5927732

I put out a 5-6 gab series on an idea I had long ago, called "China for World Domination."

North Korea plays a rather central role. Read the series.

OpenID aew51183 April 03, 2017 6:03 PM  

Regarding China:

Their population is set to invert pretty soon, making their ability to dump "boxes of men" into Korea or anywhere else much more of an issue.

They'll soon have as few fighting aged men as the USA.

http://globaleconomicanalysis.blogspot.com/2012/05/chinas-population-poised-to-crash-in.html

Blogger Ingot9455 April 03, 2017 6:04 PM  

Looks like that recent Red Dawn movie remake, where they had to digitally rework the chinese uniforms into north korean uniforms, may have been more prophetic that it knew.

But no, NK is a problem because they are rattling their tin cup against their bars looking for money and Trump isn't going to play their negotiation game. So we'll have to find out if their gradual escalation in making trouble extends to nuking us before it's okay for us to nuke back; or if something else happens first.

Anonymous A Deplorable Paradigm Is More Than Twenty Cents April 03, 2017 6:04 PM  

President of China is due to meet Trump in Florida. Perhaps the secure room in Largo is more secure than the secure room in DC?

What Trump said essentially was "North Korea is behaving very badly, scaring the east Asian neighborhood. Someone's going to have to do something. I'll be talking to the Chinese soon".

Seems pretty obvious to me, likely Xi will get the point also.

Blogger pnq8787 April 03, 2017 6:06 PM  

Why do whites still have patriotic feelings for the United States when the United States is clearly no longer their country? Why would whites still sacrifice their lives as a tool for a government that actively works to destroy them and everything they love? If the U.S. gets into a major war which requires a great sacrifice of lives, will whites be guillible enough to join in? Based on past evidence and recent online comments I suspect so. It's sad because the U.S. is always on the wrong side of every war. Now the U.S. is the arm of globalism. I actually saw a documentary on N.K. and what struck me was that for all the evils of the N.K. government, at least the people of N.K. haven't been polluted by the poz'ed culture of America. Actually all these so called "Axis of Evil" countries stand as a bulwark against globalism. With the demise of Manifest Destiny and The White Man's Burden does the U.S. have the psychological reserve to fight a great globalist war to poz the rest of the world? More importantly, which side will you be rooting for?

Blogger ZhukovG April 03, 2017 6:10 PM  

It is a matter of national pride for the People's Republic of China that they 'defeated' the United States in the Korean War. Allowing North Korea to fall would be a humiliating loss of face for the communist government. It's easy to see where this leads.

Fortunately, South Korea doesn't want war. Many South Koreans don't even think of North Koreans as their ethnic kin anymore.

Anonymous A Deplorable Paradigm Is More Than Twenty Cents April 03, 2017 6:11 PM  

@36
But no, NK is a problem because they are rattling their tin cup against their bars looking for money and Trump isn't going to play their negotiation game.

Yeah, it's like watching the dog nosing an empty dish across the floor. The various Kims have been playing this for years. They've played the Clintons, GW Bush, 0bama.

Launch some rockets, make some threats, test what is supposed to be a new weapon, scare the Japanese and rail at the Americans. Get attention from the world, get some aging pimp like Bill Richardson or some dementia victim like Jimmy Carter to fly over to Pyong Yang for a while, make some empty promises in exchange for food.

North Korea is a useful thing for China. It keeps South Korea busy, US forces tied down and is a stick to threaten Japan with. Fallout from any nuclear blasts in Korea would surely drop at least partly on Japan.

But the Chinese won't let the Norks go too far. The problem is, the newest Kim looks to be even more of a pathological narcissist than his daddy and granddaddy, so he acts up more and differently. Like the assassination of his brother in Malaysia, apparently with nerve toxin. It's not clear if the North Korean dog is fully on the Chinese leash anymore. That could be the real problem.

Blogger Kona Commuter April 03, 2017 6:15 PM  

I read an article the other day which said that with one nuke DPRK could send the US back to the stone age via EMP destroying electronics.

Which reminds me, I should look into how to protect my electronic preps (UHF radio, GPS, torches etc) (from memory inside a microwave)

OpenID aew51183 April 03, 2017 6:15 PM  

"Fallout from any nuclear blasts in Korea would surely drop at least partly on Japan"

The US and russia have both been investing heavy R&D into thermobarics to avoid that problem.

Anonymous A Deplorable Paradigm Is More Than Twenty Cents April 03, 2017 6:19 PM  

@41
I read an article the other day which said that with one nuke DPRK could send the US back to the stone age via EMP destroying electronics.

A link would be handy. Especially for those who are skeptical.

Anonymous A Deplorable Paradigm Is More Than Twenty Cents April 03, 2017 6:21 PM  

@42
Thermobarics don't solve that problem. The Norks have nukes.

OpenID aew51183 April 03, 2017 6:22 PM  

@43 blast at high altitude (the figure I keep reading is ~250km) would affect half of north america.

Replacement of major substations would take years, and I don't think our AMD systems were designed to counter this threat.

Blogger Mr.MantraMan April 03, 2017 6:23 PM  

Calling Tom Kratman to explain "tigers fighting."

Maybe the SKs are buying a war from America because they are scared of a NK nuke, maybe it is time that the Global Triparte come together and exert their combined power on the whack a doo inYong Yang

Blogger dc.sunsets April 03, 2017 6:25 PM  

This comment has been removed by the author.

Anonymous JAG April 03, 2017 6:25 PM  

Mark Auld wrote:O T ,finally at 5:00 pm news,Fox is reporting that Susan Rice was the Obama official who unmasked Trump team...anyone else?...I hear silence to my left...

60 Minutes tries to make Cernovich look like a "fake news" conspiracy nut, and then he breaks the Susan Rice story.

Well played, Cernovich. Well played.

Blogger Azimus April 03, 2017 6:32 PM  

41. Kona Commuter April 03, 2017 6:15 PM
I read an article the other day which said that with one nuke DPRK could send the US back to the stone age via EMP destroying electronics.


Typical Heritage Foundation Doomsday BS. There are some very good army reports written in the 80's on the practical, scientific effects of EMP. I read them and I stopped taking the EMP threat seriously.

Which reminds me, I should look into how to protect my electronic preps (UHF radio, GPS, torches etc) (from memory inside a microwave)

To protect from an EMP blast, two words: Faraday cage. EMP can't penetrate anywhere radio can't penetrate. You just need a conducting metal cube, insulated on the inside. The more complete the box the better it protects. Aluminum foil around a cardboard box should be effective - you can check by putting your cell phone in and calling it. If the signal doesn't get through - voila, EMP shielding. Unfortunately this only helps for storage. I think that's where the microwave thing comes in.

Anonymous A Deplorable Paradigm Is More Than Twenty Cents April 03, 2017 6:32 PM  

@45
@43 blast at high altitude (the figure I keep reading is ~250km) would affect half of north america.

I'm familiar with the concept and the physics.
Please point to your source so we all can see it.

Blogger Kona Commuter April 03, 2017 6:32 PM  

Apologies for the lack of link from my previous post


How North Korea could kill 90 percent of Americans http://thehill.com/blogs/pundits-blog/defense/326094-how-north-korea-could-kill-up-to-90-percent-of-americans-at-any

Experts Warn A Single North Korean Nuke Could Blackout National Electric Grid And Kill 90% Of Americans

http://www.zerohedge.com/news/2017-04-02/experts-warn-single-north-korean-nuke-could-blackout-national-electric-grid-and-kill

No they couldn't says Popular Mechanics http://www.popularmechanics.com/military/weapons/a25883/north-korea-cant-kill-ninety-percent-of-americans/

Anonymous Grayman April 03, 2017 6:34 PM  

The genetics/eugenics outcome could be intetesting. The NK and SK populations have been isolated and put in very different environments for 50+ years.
It would be interesting to see a detailed comparison of the 2 populations characteristics from intelligence, personality, to stature etc.

Blogger Kona Commuter April 03, 2017 6:36 PM  

@49 - Thanks for that information. You've saved me quite a bit of time with the "call your cell phone" advice.

My intention is to protect my electronic preps. If we were hit by a EMP that does fry electronics whilst I'm out an about with my electronic preps. Well, them's the breaks I'm afraid. Whilst I do try and build redundancy in the preps I'm not a doomsday prepper nor am I a wealthy man that can afford that sort of expenditure.

Blogger Azimus April 03, 2017 6:38 PM  

VD:
If the USA is foolish enough to go to war with North Korea, things may turn out very, very differently than everyone is expecting.


I wonder if $1.0 billion bounty on his head wouldn't take care of all this before it's necessary to start a war. What does it cost to move 2 carrier groups to the Sea of Japan? What do we risk that way? What do we risk by putting a price on him? Worth every penny. Hell HE might even off himself for that kind of bread...

Anonymous glosoli April 03, 2017 6:39 PM  

@27,

'North Korea is not a threat to us. Why is Trump fixated on them?'

China is the threat, he's just throwing his weight around ahead of the Xi meeting. China/Russia hold all the good cards, the US has bugger all, Trump's bluffs will be called, every time. War is coming, but the (((plan))) is for it to be in the Middle East.

Blogger Wolfman at Large April 03, 2017 6:42 PM  

Pretty much the only thing that could save the Communists in North Korea is a foreign invasion. That whole que bono thing does come to mind here.

Anonymous JAG April 03, 2017 6:43 PM  

Kona Commuter wrote:@49 - Thanks for that information. You've saved me quite a bit of time with the "call your cell phone" advice.

My intention is to protect my electronic preps. If we were hit by a EMP that does fry electronics whilst I'm out an about with my electronic preps. Well, them's the breaks I'm afraid. Whilst I do try and build redundancy in the preps I'm not a doomsday prepper nor am I a wealthy man that can afford that sort of expenditure.


If you are trying to save electronics such as a phone, laptop, tablet, external hard drives, and the like from EMP you can get Faraday Bags pretty cheap. You can even have them in the bag on the go with you for the best bet of saving them in case of disaster.

Blogger Bob Loblaw April 03, 2017 6:47 PM  

Airman Snuffy wrote:The Iraqi conflict war portion WAS a cakewalk. The Iraqi military defeat was almost totally one-sided.

The occupation, not so much, because it involved fighting Iranian proxies and being unwilling to admit it. We needed a wall with Iran. Despite that overall casualties in a decade were less than most single battles in WW2--mostly we just sapped our treasury.

Having done strategic planning for a NK conflict, it would be expensive in terms of munitions spent and would have quite a few more casualities on our side (especially for the ROKs) but it is also a pretty certain win for the US coalition, and only the uncertanties of war make it not a complete slam dunk. It won't happen anyways. A second Korean war is the last thing any of the sides in that mess want. The ROK doesn't want the expense of reunification/rebuilding, or the risk of losing; China doesn't want millions of refugees flooding in nor US allied bases on their border; the US doesn't want the cost or the opportunity cost involved in committing to that war; and NK doesn't want the risk/likely loss as long as the regime is stable.


This. Much of the Nork leverage over the last few decades springs from the fact that they can credibly

China has finally come to the realization they're going to need to do something to put a damper on things. But they don't want 25 million refugees pouring over the border if the NK state collapses, which is why they've been sponsoring coup attempts. But Kim and his people know what's going on, which is why we've seen one brutal purge after another since he took over.

Anonymous A Deplorable Paradigm Is More Than Twenty Cents April 03, 2017 6:49 PM  

@52 Kona commuter

I'm skeptical of the Norks ability to carry out an EMP attack against the continental US. Only the Russians and possibly the Chinese have that capability. Although if the Norks continue to improve their ballistic missiles they might be able to hit Oahu with a single warhead. Something that stupid would likely bring the PLA right across the Yalu, too.

Dude, in case of an actual EMP attack your cell phone is the least of your worries.

Anonymous A Deplorable Paradigm Is More Than Twenty Cents April 03, 2017 6:53 PM  

@60

Who cares?

Blogger Cail Corishev April 03, 2017 6:58 PM  

I read an article the other day which said that with one nuke DPRK could send the US back to the stone age via EMP destroying electronics.

Ten years later, we'd be back out of the stone age, and North Korea would still be a smoking crater.

My generation grew up half-expecting to see mushroom clouds on the horizon one day and die within seconds or days from the blast or the fallout, unless we were lucky enough to be too close to a target to see it coming. It's hard to get really worked up about the possibility of an attack that means my hand tools and skills will suddenly be in high demand.

Blogger Steve Moss April 03, 2017 7:00 PM  

We are already at war with North Korea. We're just in a prolonged period of truce, not peace.

I don't think President Trump wants a war. If nothing else, we need time to rebuild considering the wide scale readiness problems our forces are currently suffering from thanks to Obama.

That said, criticism of the USA Marines, Army, etc. as war-fighters may be legitimate in part (if looked at a readiness viewpoint), but we have an awful lot of combat veterans as compared to many countries. The issue is readiness and the rules of engagement, not the individual effectiveness of our military personnel. Heck, if we can figure out where the round the clock air conditioning and heat usage occurs in North Korea, the targets self-identify (and there aren't that many of them).

But as a practical matter, there is more downside than upside to fighting North Korea at present. That could change if they begin to seriously threaten South Korea and Japan, but right now its only bellicose posturing (I hope). We'll know we're about to get serious with North Korea when President Trump allows Japan and the South Koreans to have nukes as a deterrent to North Korea's program. And if we're at that point, I'd bet dollars to donuts that China will yank North Korea's chain hard. That's serous leverage President Trump has, and I suspect he knows it, the Chinese know it and the only question is whether the crazy fat kid with a bad haircut in Pyongyang knows it.

Blogger Bob Loblaw April 03, 2017 7:12 PM  

A Deplorable Paradigm Is More Than Twenty Cents wrote:@52 Kona commuter

I'm skeptical of the Norks ability to carry out an EMP attack against the continental US. Only the Russians and possibly the Chinese have that capability. Although if the Norks continue to improve their ballistic missiles they might be able to hit Oahu with a single warhead. Something that stupid would likely bring the PLA right across the Yalu, too.

Dude, in case of an actual EMP attack your cell phone is the least of your worries.


Even more so because even if you keep it from frying there won't be a cell network for it to talk to.

Anonymous Zed, Lord of the Brutals April 03, 2017 7:14 PM  

Aby Ghraib was due to a bunch of naggers, weak whites and chicks being left alone without manly adult supervision. MP(gestapo/NKVD without the masculinity) unit, probably all aggro because some infantry guys constantly made fun of them or something. All of those pogues rightfully should have burned for gross incompetence and aggravated faggotry. There were some good MP units, doing LOC patrol/internal security missions, like the guys down at Kalsu with the M1117's. They earned their pay. So don't think this is just me bagging on MP's.

Much more indicative of witch hunting was when they went after Andrew Greyson and the Marines at Haditha.

Anonymous Hooch April 03, 2017 7:14 PM  

Good stuff

Blogger Theproductofafineeduction April 03, 2017 7:20 PM  

@63

I think the issue is more fundamentally with the leadership, and to extent the rear line support depending on how far from the tip it is, than the actual fighting units. The US hasn't had to fight an enemy that posed an equal risk in quiet some time. Sure the Islamic insurgents have fighters that are competent but at any point was there ever even an inkling that a large sized US military unit could be overwhelmed like in Vietnam, Korea, WWII and heavy losses incurred? I think that's the fundamental issue, we haven't had to face a fight like this in a long time and we don't know how well prepared our military leadership (or civilian leadership) is to handle a blood bath and due to over confidence stumble into a blood bath. Even worse they could stumble into a blood bath and lose.

Blogger Thucydides April 03, 2017 7:33 PM  

The real issue is while Western military forces are literally unbeatable in the field in tactical engagements, there is a total lack of understanding of operational art (stringing battles and actions together to achieve a wider aim) or strategy, especially at the political level where the idea of unleashing military forces resides.

This is pretty longstanding. What were the strategic aims of the Korean war, the Viet-Nam war(s), various actions in Central and South America, Africa, the Middle East etc. etc.? The politicians turn to war for short term tactical aims just as much as the Generals, and have no appreciation for the desired end state, or even if they do (think of the idea of Democratizing the Middle East by overthrowing the Hussein regime, or supporting the Arab Spring), they don't have the depth of understanding of the culture, economy or social structures of the region (to bend them to our will and achieve the end state) or the clear commitment of time and resources to achieve the strategic aim.

So we may end up in a shooting war in North Korea or the South China Sea for the short term aim of "supporting" our allies (O.K., we should honour our commitments), but no clear war aims beyond that, no end game or desired long term outcomes that mean we won't be forced into that position again.

I suspect that President Trump has a different long term view and set of desired outcomes for Korea and other places, the trick is articulating the desired ends and herding the Deep State and the Military in the correct direction so resources can actually be applied to achieve these goals. The real enemy is right here.....

Anonymous VFM #7916 April 03, 2017 7:37 PM  

@51

Yeah, I've long wondered if that first satellite they launched was actually a FOBS.

Blogger Gapeseed April 03, 2017 7:50 PM  

Offer him and his inner circle complete amnesty, lifetime security, a billion dollars, and ownership of an NBA franchise (the Knicks!) in exchange for abdication and reunification a la East Germany. In the long run, it would be well worth it for all involved, particularly Knicks fans.

Anonymous a deplorable rubberducky April 03, 2017 7:50 PM  

I think George Kennan's "Long Telegram" was the last widely understood expression of American military policy. And it worked, too, even considering the tragedy of Vietnam. We've been falling about the place ever since George H.W. Bush's "New World Order". Nobody has a clear idea what that entails. Perhaps that's purposeful, but either way amorphous and poorly articulated goals are bound to bring you scattershot results. It's "the vision thing" all over again.

Yet through it all, both the Cold War and the New World Order travails, morale and fighting spirit remained pretty high in the trenches of America's armed forces. That's not true these days. The Obama years have been an absolute disaster in this key regard in addition to the toll they took on equipment, training and upgrades. Do you really want to be a guinea pig for leftist social experiments over and above your neighbors today? Go enlist. There's a warm seat in classroom covering transgender sensitivities in the foxhole.

I would be amazed if most units fielded for combat today didn't underperform. Too much peacetime stress.

Blogger Sam April 03, 2017 7:54 PM  

F/ The Small Wars Journal:
"Changing the “Macho” Male Culture of the US Military"
http://smallwarsjournal.com/jrnl/art/changing-the-%E2%80%9Cmacho%E2%80%9D-male-culture-of-the-us-military

Excerpt:

This means that the Ranger School “experiment” was an experiment in name only. It was guaranteed from the beginning to graduate a woman and that graduation would be used as proof that the combat exclusion rule needed to go. This, of course, matches what every Army Command Sergeant Major (9) in 2011-2013 told me was said to them by high-level CSMs and General Officers while attending their pre-command courses: “women will be in combat arms and women will graduate Ranger School, if any of you has a problem with that, you need to get out of the military.” They reported that the Ranger Instructors at Ranger School were told the same thing.

This same message was a similar one that was being told to people who had friends who were Ranger Instructors. The message: “women will graduate, we will guarantee it, and so if you can’t handle that fact, you need to move on out of Ranger School.” When I personally talked to R.I.s I got rolled eyes and lots of depressing comments. “It’s turned political, sir,” they told me one morning at Fort Benning during the Maneuver Center Conference a few years ago. “We are being told to get on-board, or get out.”

Early this year I talked to another military buddy who had just left the Pentagon. His comments were even more troubling. “I used to think the Pentagon was divorced from the reality of the combat arms side of the military- that it was so out of touch with the average infantryman that it made me sick to work there,” he let on. “But that was when I first got there,” he continued. “Today it is times a hundred. The advocates of the women in combat arms are basically part of a larger effort to change the military culture- which they call a “rape culture”- and these folks are really linked close to the wider effort to change American culture.”

I couldn’t believe what I was hearing. Since I’m quick to suspect things that sound conspiratorialist, my BS-ometer started to go off. But, then I heard the same from two other friends of mine. In essence, the idea of many of these advocates is that the American male is a, mostly unconscious, misogynist, and that it comes from our culture: movies that hype physicality, combat, aggressiveness, and the treatment of women as objects. It also comes from our military: males dominate the services, are the only ones allowed in combat arms, and thus make up most of the higher ranks. The cure for all of this is simple: change the culture.

The “change the culture” movement has manifested itself in many ways and has taken on different efforts as well as groups that are loosely aligned towards fundamental change. On college campuses it has largely taken on the shape of the movement to end sexual harassment and sexual assault. As one professor from a prominent campus told me recently, “It isn’t really about ending sexual assault; it’s about controlling people and changing behavior. Men have the advantage in almost every way, so we have to find ways to cut into that advantage. Making traditional male behavior something that is socially unacceptable will cut their advantage. We have to make it unacceptable for men to talk the way they talk now, act the way they act now, and interact the way they do with women now, and have traditionally.” Hyping sexual assault statistics, making women fearful of men, and building a system that finds men guilty until proven innocent are simply means to the greater end of “cutting male advantage.”

Blogger Vikki Wilson April 03, 2017 8:13 PM  

The West at this point seems incapable of waging war full stop. Militaries cannot be dominated by human rightists and remain effective.

Anonymous Lawyer Guy April 03, 2017 8:16 PM  

The prison happened because they put guardsmen in charge under a chain of command who were lazy and stupid, including the one star who had a hobby of shoplifting. Add in a CIA who told them to get tougher, and guess what happened?

One single tough active duty Master Sgt or CW-2 on site could have stopped all that mess.

Anonymous Grayman April 03, 2017 8:21 PM  

@75 san....

That's funny, you more or less just described how the might of Rome fell. The legions became legion in name only as the Roman version of SJWs softened the legions over several generations...

I guess we know how this ends. Anyone seen the visigoths lately?

Anonymous A Deplorable Paradigm Is More Than Twenty Cents April 03, 2017 8:23 PM  

I guess we know how this ends. Anyone seen the visigoths lately?

Nearest mirror.

Anonymous Grayman April 03, 2017 8:24 PM  

If history rhymes then the next time we face a competant opponent who has more than a surplus AK and ragged sandles it could be very messy

Blogger roundeye April 03, 2017 8:53 PM  

Koreans like being Korean. About 40% of the South Korean population like the North Korean regime because they think the Norks do not race mix.

Koreans are a martial race and love to fight (unlike Arabs). If we get in that fight we better use everything, since they may be a lot tougher than us.

Blogger Pteronarcyd April 03, 2017 9:07 PM  

North Korea is so backward that I do not think it would be necessary to occupy the country to defeat it and overthrow their regime. Take out their nuclear reasearch and production facilities and destroy their missile launching facilities and they are effectively defanged.

Anonymous a deplorable rubberducky April 03, 2017 9:14 PM  

roundeye wrote:Koreans like being Korean. About 40% of the South Korean population like the North Korean regime because they think the Norks do not race mix.

Koreans are a martial race and love to fight (unlike Arabs). If we get in that fight we better use everything, since they may be a lot tougher than us.


I can confirm - when a Korean thinks you wronged him, rightly or wrongly, he's going to call you on it. And he won't be happy.

Then you've got to come up with a way to defuse it where you both don't lose face. You must.

Blogger Gospace April 03, 2017 9:24 PM  

The genetics/eugenics outcome could be intetesting. The NK and SK populations have been isolated and put in very different environments for 50+ years.
It would be interesting to see a detailed comparison of the 2 populations characteristics from intelligence, personality, to stature etc.


I've been to South Korea twice, 10 years apart. First time, all the cars on the streets were Toyotas, Fords, etc., nothing made in Korea. Second time the vast majority were Hyundais and Daewoos. In 10 years. That's a fast rate of change. First time, all the heavy equipment and busses were American, German, or Japanese. Second time, a lot was local. Heavy equipment lasts longer. First time, riding on the train, walking the streets, I was at 5'9" a head taller then almost everyone else. Second time, I wasn't. First time was in 1978, second time in 1989. Big changes in South Korea during that time.

Those changes haven't happened in North Korea. There's not a lot available from there, but if you look here or here at photos smuggled out of North Korea, note something as you look at crowd photos. I glanced, but didn't spot anyone that appeared to be the least bit overweight, much less obese. And a lot of people whose appearance could simply be described as emaciated.

North Koreas threat comes from advanced delivery systems and nukes. Both of which we can probably thank Presidents Carter and Clinton for. As vaunted as Koreans are as a fighting force, the Norks caloric intake has probably diminished their effectiveness somewhat.

Blogger Gospace April 03, 2017 9:26 PM  

Forgot to add. In 1978, IMHO, the Philippines was a s---hole. Ten years later, they still were. Today, they probably still are.

Anonymous A.B. Prosper April 03, 2017 9:39 PM  

roundeye wrote:Koreans like being Korean. About 40% of the South Korean population like the North Korean regime because they think the Norks do not race mix.

Koreans are a martial race and love to fight (unlike Arabs). If we get in that fight we better use everything, since they may be a lot tougher than us.


Korean, Koreans do though there are quite a lot of mixed race White / Korean people here in California . I don't believe in mixing myself or much immigration but in terms of positive traits , the Koreans have them in abundance. They are a very admirable people

That said if we go to war with the Norks we will strongly regret it , we can win but the cost may be enough to break us and the chemical weapons, germ warfare they certainly do have and the useful nukes will wreak havoc all over the region.

The US military is a wreck right now

I will say though re: Europe/UK . The problem they face are internal and while the military would be good for removing kebab and cans and the like, its not as essential as we in the US think.

Baring a war in Turkey or the Globalists somehow managing to start WW3 there aren't a lot of threats in Europe that require cold war style armies to deal with

Europeans aren't going to have another fratricide as far as I can tell and can get by with a small military increase and a very solid border patrol after they remove the problems they have inside the borders.

Blogger DonReynolds April 03, 2017 9:45 PM  

In 1973, the Pentagon banned use of the flamethrower by the US military....because it was a inhumane weapon.
There is no estimate of the number of American lives that were saved up to 1973 by use of the flamethrower. Yes, it was used in Vietnam and Korea and WWII, in all theaters.
That simple ban convinced me that the officer corps we have these days are completely unfit to lead other Americans.
No, it does not matter how many pushups they can do or how far they can run. Refusing your own men effective weapons simply because you believe they are inhumane is unacceptable.

Blogger justaguy April 03, 2017 10:03 PM  

The real "Trump" to North Korea and the line the Chinese keep running up to but not crossing is the line where South Korea and Japan threaten to go nuclear. We are currently in the posturing stage, nothing new, nothing spectacular as long as all sides remain relatively calm (or for the Norks, only relatively insane).

Trump seems to know this and tossed out a line earlier to pull the Chinese back into the box.

Anonymous Stochastic Persiflage April 03, 2017 10:19 PM  

"It was part of Millennium Challenge ’02, a $250 million war game running from July–August, 2002. And the “Iranian” commander was very much an American — retired U.S. Marine Corps Lt. Gen. Paul Van Riper..... 19 U.S. ships were on the bottom when the smoke cleared. The carrier, the escorts, the amphibious ships, the lot of them. 20,000 sailors and Marines went with them...."

That's why they do war simulations. They learn from the results, analyze the hell out of every move, and make whatever changes they need to try to make sure it doesn't happen in real life.

Anonymous Stochastic Persiflage April 03, 2017 10:22 PM  

"If the Afghans knew all along that helping Osama bin Laden was most likely going to mean their cities and large towns would be flattened, they would have chose differently."

Except that a) they were already in the middle of (or just finished) one of their many civil wars and b) already went through the wringer with the Soviet invasion in the '80s.

Anonymous 11B April 03, 2017 10:45 PM  

@ comment 75

Why aren't Trump and Mattis correcting this? I doubt they need congressional approval. It's probably an executive prerogative that the previous admin put in.

I just can't believe real military guys like Mattis would allow this to stand.

OpenID thetroll April 03, 2017 11:27 PM  

Well, having just had a fairly thorough visit to the DPRK and moderately acquainted with the South, let me give you a little on the ground perspective

The way the Nork citizens/lower level army sees it, World War II isn't over; the USSR and the USA split up Korea at Yalta, Good Ol' Grandpa Kim kicked the Russkies out of their part, and it is _their religious mission_ to liberate their subjugated Southern kin from the yoke of the US's continued oppression. And by "liberate" I do _not_ mean "conquer", everyone quite honestly believes that they're aiming at a federal state keeping the current systems separate, just kicking the US out of the new Republique du Koryo.

No idea how much of that is brainwashing and how much the elites actually believe, but I assure you that's what everybody on the sharp end thinks. If you have ANY thoughts that attacking the morale of the North Korean people would ever end a war with them, STOP thinking that NOW. The history of Korea is mostly managing to keep China on the one side and Japan on the other out of their peninsula for the last 3000 years. These people do. not. give. up.

(By the end of my visit I was like "Thank god there's two Koreas. If you ganged up the rest of the world wouldn't have a CHANCE.")

So yeah. What'll happen if the balloon goes up is, every US installation within range will have every nuke the Norks have suprise launched at them, and a million screaming messianic Norks will follow, going full jihad sacrificing themselves to liberate their Southern cousins from the US, just finishing up getting rid of the Empire of The Rising Sun and all the rest of the WWII unfinished business, that's all. And attacking said cousins only as they must to get at the Americans. How seriously the South will fight them, eh I don't know. I kinda suspect it will not be _quite_ as enthusiastically as our side is counting on. And DEFINITELY not as enthusiastic as the Norks will be.

One other observation, about those thinking the Nork is hopelessly backward: Er, not so much as you'd think, actually. There's actually some seriously impressive native technology developed like natural graphite anodes for refining that kind of thing -- it's just _pointless_ technology because if you're not walled off behind sanctions from all the rest of the world's resources there's much better ways. The place is a weirder form of dystopian steampunk society than anything anybody has ever imagined in actual science fiction. Seriously, it's like 1984 crossed with that last Butcher novel or something.

Anyway. Yeah, war with the Norks, that's not going to go well for the US. Put a _lot_ of money on that, I would.


Anonymous Zed, Lord of the Brutals April 03, 2017 11:30 PM  

Millennium Challenge...like a lot of "exercises" has canned assumptions and other "rules." Van Riper just said "fuck it" and did what he wanted. It's kinda like cheating. Yeah, it made a point, but anyone who ever met Van Riper will tell you what a prick he is. No, I haven't, however I did witness him yelling at some Marine from a distance at CLNC in the 90's.

VanRiper is also notorious for "fixing" the USMC intelligence system in the post DS/DS world. That still pisses off some old hands. Since I was not part of the pre-DS/DS USMC, I can't comment on the effectiveness of the changes, I will say that USMC intelligence has the same issues regarding making the product relevant to the user as any other single source, non-profit driven organization.

Anonymous james@wpc April 03, 2017 11:42 PM  

A different take on the Korean War from James Perloff being interviewed by James Corbett. James Perloff Explodes the Korean War Lies

All is not what it seems, it seems.

OpenID thetroll April 04, 2017 12:09 AM  

> All is not what it seems, it seems.

Yeah, that was the seriously weird part. There was a whole lot of places where I was like y'know your propaganda is _curiously specific_ in what would seem to be provably wrong ways about how this whole post-Yalta thing went, and I go look in Western sources, and ... can't refute their version. Not completely sure what I actually think now, but I'm sure a hell of a lot less certain of history than I was before I visited the DPRK, that's for sure.

Blogger Doom April 04, 2017 12:11 AM  

Right? But when was the last time the US HAD to take war seriously? My guess is the War of 1812? Even WWI or WWII? If we lost, over there, it was still just over there. Through time our government just, sort of, stopped caring. It's too difficult, expensive, and unpopular, to fight a foreign war, even with fewer casualties than general population demographic death rates, more so in certain urban areas. And, yet, never fighting is worse, truly. Still, Dems started wars, Republicans pulled us out, and both fucked our allies and destroyed many nations... often ending up helping the wrong side or just handing everything over to the enemy.

It's not like there is going to be a change, unless there needs to be one. Toss in that now we, and several other nations, have nukes, and... Just don't expect much from war, political leadership in the field, or even a great deal of care in the military upper echelon. Everybody knows they will be tossed in and yanked back, just as likely for a bad reason, if one is really even there other than to tax the military (if that has some justification, in real terms). Generals aren't willing to put their hearts into something they know they won't be allowed to win, and pretty much on purpose. Dems truly hate them, even if they are the ones who will more likely employ them. Ingrates!

As to what is going on now? Dog and pony show of an old Western. Every major player or tool is hitching up their belt, glaring at their enemies, and talking dirt. Don't mean nothing. As to America losing? Pftft. Even if he took out a few major cities, most of us would Cheer. Can't lose. Only globalists, the government, the really rich, and some others, can actually lose. We've been getting pissed on for decades, and told it's rain. Don't care. Burn it down.

Blogger Resident Moron™ April 04, 2017 12:28 AM  

"Even more so because even if you keep it from frying there won't be a cell network for it to talk to."

There'll still be a GPS network

Regarding the Iranian enemy in that infamous naval exercise, the point is the unserious nature of the Admiralty. They went "no, they'd never do that", replaced the winner with a yes-man careerist, exiled the winner to bumfuck, Arizona, and had a do over using more conventional tactics.

But of you want an icon of the unserious idiocy of the Pentagon today, you only need three words:

Joint Strike Fighter.

aka F35 Death Trap Boondoggle

Anonymous Silly but True April 04, 2017 12:56 AM  

Interesting, for shitzengrins, I checked the fate of Vice-Admiral Cutler Dawson - the loser of the Millennium Challenge '02.

He was shitcanned about a year later: http://www.navy.mil/submit/display.asp?story_id=16048

Funny, they mention the pinnacle of his career as being the Strong Resolve exercise from early 2002.

They don't happen to mention his stunning success in the later '02 exercise at all; neither was his novel approach to order the entire fleet to dive to the bottom of the sea during the enemy's initial strike summarized in the event descriptions of the time: http://www.navy.mil/submit/display.asp?story_id=3278

Blogger liberranter April 04, 2017 1:27 AM  

Way back when the Bush administration launched the invasion of Iraq, the prevailing assumption among those who were in charge was that it would be a cakewalk.

An assumption equal to ten of the stupidest ever made, for those who could even so much as point to Iraq on a map (more than a few of the dolts who planned and ordered that debacle didn't qualify for that category either).

If the U.S. is foolish enough to go to war with North Korea, things may turn out very, very differently than everyone is expecting.

The U.S. military is doubly screwed. It can no longer fight a conventional Second Generation war (picture the guy who was a middleweight boxing champion in college decades ago, but who is today an obese, beer-bloated slob who can't even get up out of his recliner without risking a heart attack, but who still talks smack to younger guys in their fighting prime), and has NEVER been able to fight a Fourth Generation asymmetric war (the military being too bureaucratic, too centralized, too formal,and too command-structured, something that will NEVER change).

Yes, those who rule us truly ARE foolish enough to write a check with their mouths that their asses (and We the People saddled with mopping up their mess) can't cash. The good news at the prospect of such is that it might just prompt a long-overdue mutiny within the military.

Blogger Resident Moron™ April 04, 2017 1:50 AM  

The CIA is actually pretty good at fomenting 4G warfare, which is its real function.

The Pentagon sends patriots and losers to die vainly attempting to clean up the mess, or "defending your freedom" if you prefer, while its real function is to hoover up your tax dollars and distribute them to politically connected suppliers.

Your job is to provide the money and the meat in this shit sandwich.

And you've been slacking on both parts so the War machine has had to borrow money on your account to keep the party going a bit longer.

Anonymous War (good God y'all) is good April 04, 2017 2:18 AM  

If you think climate scientists are snake oil salesmen, you should try comparing them to military experts.

Both believe their interpretation of data from past events is gospel. Both like to suggest past performance is indicative of future results. Both dislike being questioned and are quick to resort to credentialism.

That said, my armchair analysis of a war with North Korea is this: it will go badly. The US could win, easily, and quickly. Even if won, the DPRK is the DKNY of China. (Imagine the French launching ICBMs into California to defeat McDonald's.)

Anyway, according to the memes about Saxons full of hate, in the end the West will be fine. Literally dozens of Twitter accounts have been banned for being too aggressive for social media. That translates into millions of angry Saxons (most Saxons aren't on Twitter, but you can run a statistical regression analysis) and Kipling said that Saxons are good for, easily, Bruce Lee-like numbers. All the Saxons in Saxon countries will probably come out okay.

Blogger JP April 04, 2017 4:45 AM  

Stochastic Persiflage wrote:"It was part of Millennium Challenge ’02, a $250 million war game running from July–August, 2002. And the “Iranian” commander was very much an American — retired U.S. Marine Corps Lt. Gen. Paul Van Riper..... 19 U.S. ships were on the bottom when the smoke cleared. The carrier, the escorts, the amphibious ships, the lot of them. 20,000 sailors and Marines went with them...."

That's why they do war simulations. They learn from the results, analyze the hell out of every move, and make whatever changes they need to try to make sure it doesn't happen in real life.


That's cool and all, but we don't yet have the technology to make our ships float a couple feet above the water to eliminate the submarine threat.

Blogger Shimshon April 04, 2017 6:25 AM  

This comment has been removed by the author.

Anonymous Anonymous April 04, 2017 7:00 AM  

Hopefully it will be undeclared, these undeclared wars are freaking awesome. Lot's of our finest young men and women go off to die in some shithole for a pipeline or some bankers. Smedley's turning in his grave. To our troops who have suffered much on foreign soil, I am sorry for not having had the balls to hang the fuckers who sent you there to fight for God knows what. Sincerely Pissed off American.

Blogger Elder Son April 04, 2017 8:21 AM  

Globalists. All of ya. Nukes. Kim is crazy. Nukes. Nukes. Electromagnetic pulse. Kim is crazy. 90 percent of the schizophrenic salad bowl will die. Kim is crazy. Nukes.

Repeat often (from the fake news CIA outlets) and make it a dinner time conversation until the globalists have set the hook into your noses.

Now, talk war-war. And more nuke-nukes-war-war. And we-have-to-do-something. And Kim is crazy. And Kim will do it.

So frikking predictable.

See? The globalists aren't going anywhere out the door anytime soon. Why should they? They have all of you, and it's easy to set the hook in your noses.

South Korea: Why should we take responsibility for beefing up our own military on par, or better than North Korea, when we have America and American blood?

Blogger pyrrhus April 04, 2017 8:32 AM  

No country in history has intentionally committed suicide by attacking a vastly more powerful country, let alone one several thousand miles away. So North Korea is not going to be the first....

Blogger Dirk Manly April 04, 2017 9:07 AM  

20 years? The Iraq war started in 1991. It's already year 26.

Blogger Dirk Manly April 04, 2017 9:21 AM  

20 years? The Iraq war started in 1991. It's already year 26.

Anonymous genericviews April 04, 2017 9:36 AM  

How to win against North Korea...
https://genericviews.wordpress.com/2017/02/06/how-to-conquer-north-korea/

Of course, we won't do it that way.

Anonymous Slowpoke April 04, 2017 10:28 AM  

How serious do you expect politicians to be about a war that is been going on for over sixty years. The ear is still got, it's just had a truce called but no treaty ended it.

Blogger TM Lutas April 04, 2017 11:34 AM  

I don't know if you'll be willing to go this deep down the rabbit hole but here's my contribution.

During the Obama administration, I called up the DoD press office and asked for their official definition of war. No adjectives, nothing complicated.

They didn't have one. My best guess is that they still don't have one.

If the DoD can't define war, it has deep issues, deeper than anything discussed so far in this thread.

Anonymous Han Solo April 04, 2017 11:52 AM  

>EMP effect

Theories that were suggested in the early Nuclear days (1950s-60s) which have been totally thrown out the window.

But preppers still hang on to these ideas which are now science fiction.

Anonymous BBGKB April 04, 2017 12:10 PM  

That’s why things like the Abu Ghraib prison incident happened

I thought it happened because we let Israeli contractors interrogate them, torture is legal in Israel

When will the Trump admin reverse the policy of letting women in the infantry?

He will have to stop trannies from serving openly first.

This isn't really new news don't forget about the 2002 war game that the pentagon didn't care for

I don't know what bothered me more about every disaster drill I ever participated in, the amount of care/resupply expected to happen by magic, the amount of people that have to be explained that real world patients take priority over fake patients, or that they changed the name of the "leave them to die" mass triage category from Expectant to Comfort.

yes, and while not easy, its also a real threat, look at the Iranian war game I linked,

A moslem sailor on a carrier could easily kill more US soldiers than John McCain.

Why would whites still sacrifice their lives as a tool for a government that actively works to destroy them and everything they love?

While a niglet that's barely able to spell it's name/address correctly can get a free ride to Harvard many Whites join the military to pay for schooling.

I'm skeptical of the Norks ability to carry out an EMP attack against the continental US

A strong solar storm could do the same. 200 years ago the Carrington Event was strong enough to set telegraphs on fire, no electronics we have today are as robust as telegraphs. In the 80s a solar storm shut down power in most of the NW, & our infrastructure is weaker now, in fact a black smoking crack just took out an interstate bridge in Atlanta

Blogger Robert What? April 04, 2017 9:39 PM  

@Cail

"Who says he is? Is this a NeverTrump talking point, or a Democrat one?"

I am a Trump supporter but he recently said something like "if China don't take care of North Korea the US would."

Blogger Cail Corishev April 04, 2017 9:50 PM  

@109, Wow, that's "fixated" alright.

Anonymous Luke April 04, 2017 10:44 PM  

101. pyrrhus April 04, 2017 8:32 AM
"No country in history has intentionally committed suicide by attacking a vastly more powerful country, let alone one several thousand miles away. So North Korea is not going to be the first...."

What do you call Charles XII of Sweden's 1706 invasion of Russia? The Kurds in Iraq repeatedly attacking Turkey and Pakistanis attacking India also come to mind. Stretching the definition of "attacked" some, Mexico's deluge of illegals entering the U.S. (more to breed here, use social services, commit crimes, etc., than to work) also counts as a counterexample IMO.

Anonymous Clay April 04, 2017 10:57 PM  

N.Korea is volatile, but not a threat. They can build all the nuclear weapons they choose. That barn door is closed.

We know if they, or anyone, launches a missile, we know where it came from. It's sorta NOT rocket science.

Until, they build a stealth missile...the US has nothing to be afraid of the NORKS.

Blogger Avni Singh April 05, 2017 3:04 AM  

thanku share this information..


Independent Escort in Bhopal

Bhopal Escorts

Escorts services in Bhopal.

Blogger Stephen St. Onge April 07, 2017 9:09 PM  

@72 Vikki Wilson

        I wouldn't say the U.S. is 'incapable' of waging war, so much as 'unwilling.'  Fairly early in the Korean War, the U.S. decided it would not attempt to win, for fear of provoking war with the Soviet Union.

        That decision has continued in every administration since.  War consists of doing horrible things to the enemy, till they give up and decide to do what you want rather than continue to oppose you.  Doing things that are horrible enough to break the enemies will is no longer politically acceptable.

Post a Comment

Rules of the blog
Please do not comment as "Anonymous". Comments by "Anonymous" will be spammed.

<< Home

Newer Posts Older Posts