Posted on 12/23/2002 10:59:27 AM PST by knak
Edited on 04/22/2004 12:35:20 AM PDT by Jim Robinson. [history]
I agree to a certain extent.
Bush Sr. almost had to comply with the drawdown after the collapes of the Soviet Union (thanks to historical buildups by Ronald Reagan).
I don't blame everything on Clunkton, most I lay the demoralization of the military most definitely at his feet. That along with the demasculation and gutting the pride and esprit' de corp right out of the heart of the military and replacing it with the rot of political correctness.
Base closures and the historical "peace is breaking out all over" years of the '90s started under Bush Sr. and both of Clunkton's tours enjoyed the huge surplus from the drawdowns when the money previously used to hold the "Bear" at bay then went back into what were largely public welfare programs.
As of "corrupt" polititians, we can only blame ourselves for letting them get in office.
Well, we are fortunate to have two classes of militias. Under Title 10 U.S.C. Section 311 (a) refers to the professional standing army and (b) those not of the professional standing class but able-bodied and armed individuals!
Most american citizens fall under the class b. In Switzerland it is the law that every citizen be armed!
The use of tunnels seems to be a convenient way of concealing the traffic of potential terrorist coming this way. Thank goodness for Glenn Spencer of www.americanpatrol.com
In essence relations between Pyongyang and Beijing have been more cordial in some respects in the past, but they are still presently quite cordial. And if you factor in the possibilityof a US led 'chastisement' of Pyongyang for the myriads of 'baddie' stuff N.Korea has been doing (eg from relatively 'small' stuff like being the number source for ballistic missile tech, albeit technologically obsolete tech, to more potent stuff like the resumption of unabated nuke research geared towards weapons that could easily find itself down the line directed to US military personell ...or even civilians) there is the chance that China would allign itself with N.Korea in the face of a US attack on Pyongyang.
And why would Beijing take such a stance?
Simply to throw mud in the face of America, plus (more importantly) reacting to an incident happening in the Chinese 'neighborhood.' China intends to keep its geo-political significance, and that would be negated if it just stood still as Washington authorised a strike on Pyongyang and the Chinese let the Americans run all over N.Korea (remember in the Korean war the Chinese were willing to send in their 'screaming hordes' in the millions to attack US GIs .....i was actually watching a documentary describing how the Chi-coms came screaming and were even literally pulling people from tanks. Some generals in the higher-up US echelons advocated the use of nukes ...even McArthur wanted nukes used against Beijing, but even then PC elements took over. I am not saying the decision would have been wise .....but that was the decision made and i am in no position to debate on it).
Anyways China would most certainly not stand still. They may not engage in a proxy war, but they surely would do something. (And do not expect backing from the UN 'yellows' since the only country that would support the US would be Britain alone)
And this obviously worries the South Koreans since their new president was talking today (Tuesday) to the Russians, the Chinese, and even the Japanese about the renewed N.Korean nuclear weaponization program. That is kind of ironical because the Russians have no reason whatsoever to involve themselves in such a messy conflagration (plus they provide virtually all of N.Korean military tech), the Chinese would rather support Pyongyang than Seoul due to ideological quirks (plus whatever weapons Moscow does not provide Beijing does), and as for Japan they themselves are terribly worried about N.Korea (the N.Koreans launched one of their newer ballistic missiles ...which can be armed with a nuke ....and it flew right over Japan before splashing into the ocean ...which was a way of telling Tokyo they were not that far away).
Anyways let me say here that if we wanted to take out the N.Koreans it would be done ....easily. However add the fact that we may be at war with Iraq, and such an action becomes much harder. Also add the x-factor of Chinese interference, and the fact that Pyongyang may launch ballistic missiles (armed with conventional warheads since S.Korea's capital Seoul is just around 30 miles away from N.Korea, and even a convetional ballistic missile attack would be still devastating even if we supplied them with Patriots) at Seoul, plus an implicit threat(it has to be implicit if they do not want American Trident SLBMs flying toward Pyongyang) to use nukes against Seoul or Tokyo (which would never happen since such an act would be veritable suicide ....but in politics a threat is as important as an actual act).
However personally i believe this whole nuclear stuff by N.Korea is just a way for them to maximize their gains ....eg they can develop their nukes in relative safety (hoping that the US will be tied in Iraq). Also they are using that development as blackmail (eg when they asked the US to sign some treaty saying they will not sell more weapons to S.Korea).
Basically it is simple unabated unambiguous blackmail ....meshed with the chance to develop valuable weapons tech at a time of relative security for them (or so they believe). And in many ways they are right. In some they are wrong. But they are more right than wrong (in my opinion).
As for Rumy's words about being able to wage war, conventional war, on both Iraq, N.Korea, and terror .....unless we have the clone army in StarWars that is not possible. After Reagan left that ability atrophied and went the way of the Dodo.
Now if he was implying nuclear war then the US can virtually wage nuclear war with every single country in the world technically ....however conventional war that is a no-no.
We are still trying to manufacture more JDAM kits (that are attached to 'dumb' bombs to make them 'smart' JDAMs) since during the Afghan offensive the supply of JDAMs went down since so many were dropped in an attempt to kill that varmint Usama and his murderous cronies!
However this N.Korean thing is less than it seems (in that Pyongyang is not suicidal enough to try anything ...they are just using a perfect opportunity in the manner that the Us would if the US was some backwater communist 3rd world cesspool trying to gain some muscle). However it is also bigger than it seems because congiscenti are concuring that N.Korea bodes a big future threat (even James Woosely, for all his faults, was elucidating how the North could bode ill in the future)
Anyways that's that!
Here's a little lesson that most don't understand. We have troops/planes stationed all over the world just incase we need them. The troops/planes in japan aren't to protect Japan. Troops/planes in Alaska aren't there to protect iceburgs. Hawaii, Guam, Atol islands etc.. are staging areas.
If the North koreans came over the DMC we would have thousands of planes there within hours. We can land on highways in the south and we can launch hundreds of cruise missles from subs and ships in the area. The South koreans have several million reserves !
All this isn't anything the North korean leader doesn't already know !
Actually, we can withstand it a lot better than the Chicoms could, because the Chicoms would have ZERO access to capital markets after that.
The US response would be pretty simple: impound all Chinese monies in the US, and then tell the G-7 to choose between not doing business with China, or seeing all of THEIR American assets nationalized.
And the US submarine force is not going to be in use for Iraq, so they can be used to close the maritime approaches to China.
Within a week, China will be saying "Just kidding, guys! Now, would you be so kind as to let us buy some oil?"
The US response would destroy China.
Now, now, now, Stavka2, enough about the Russian Far East Command.
They wouldn't be able to commit more than a small fraction of that force--too much of it is needed to maintain government control of their population (think of it not so much as an army as a heavily armed police force).
They almost won last time, it was an armestice, might I remind you and the US had total air dominance and killed 10 chinese per american.
The kill ratio is likely to be higher this time. In 1950, the Chicom military was roughly five years behind us in technology. After 50 years of unremitting effort, they're 30 years behind us in technology and 40 years behind in doctrine.
Sorry, no where near those odds anymore, the Chinese have spent 50 years making sure of that so that the replay will be different.
So have we. And in terms of recent performance, China has one benchmark: their invasion of Vietnam. The Vietnamese kicked the snot out of the PLA. The US, by comparison, has Iraq, Afghanistan, and possibly Iraq II by the time this comes to fruition. That sort of comparative performance ought to give anyone pause.
IF the PLA enters it will quickly become a very ugly affair and the US casualties may well be a lot higher then anyone in the US will accept.
If the PLA enters, and they fail, the casualties in Beijing will be most of the Politburo. They know this, and that makes them remarkably risk-averse.
Good job!
Quite a thorough relection of the "powder keg" that the "Land of The Morning Sun."
You covered quite a bit of ground, and I'm glad to see that.
You are right, China is definately the "X" factor here. They have always been the shadow overhanging the Korean Peninsuala.
We killed god knows how many of them conventionally during the Korean War - thousands of times more than they killed us.
Their two major threats are us and Russia (but mainly us).
To understand the Korean and Chinese strategy against the U.S., you really need to understand the Chinese philosophy of life.
True, they are idealistacally communist, but they still are shaped by thousands of years of Chinese mindset.
They look at the world far differently than we do and their sense of time is different from ours.
For example, we think it has been eons since 9/11 and that we should retaliate immediately.
The Chinese concept of invasion is much more prolonged.
And make no mistake, the term "invasion" is not a misnomer here - they do plan to "invade."
Their strategy has much more patience to it. They are using as much time (in years) as they can to build up their infrastructure and military might and technology.
They are doing so very largely by using the money they earn through the horrendous trade imablance with the United States.
China is run by the military - grasp that and you will get a picture of China's motivations.
They are "circling the wagon" over Tiawan and yes - even South Korea.
I was in Korea once and asked a S. Korean acquanintance what they would do if U.S. forces were suddenly overrun by China.
His reply: "Throw a BIG PARTY for them."
You see, the S. Koreans know their real threat comes from China - via N. Korea.
China is the one to watch. And they will move when they discern the U.S. is at it's weakest (which conventionally, we are as weak as we were on Dec 7, 1941).
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.