Comments on: MUST READ: Clinton advisors call for U.S. strike on N.K. missile pad

By: Remort

Remort — Fri, 23 Jun 2006 22:09:07 +0000

If we’re going to go through the trouble of engaging an enemy with force, we might as well go to war officially and topple its government too.

–Remort

By: MUST READ: Would N. Korea respond to U.S. strike? at The Marmot’s Hole

MUST READ: Would N. Korea respond to U.S. strike? at The Marmot’s Hole — Fri, 23 Jun 2006 14:16:57 +0000

[...] In their bombshell op-ed to the Washington Post (discussed here), Ashton Carter and Bill Perry suggest that if the U.S. were to launch a surgical strike on North Korea’s missile/rocket launch facility, Pyongyang would have little choice but to suck it up and take it. Frankly, I’m inclined to agree, although I think I’ve made it fairly clear that I do not support attacking North Korea over something like this. [...]

By: Max Watson

Max Watson — Fri, 23 Jun 2006 13:52:07 +0000

Dropping bombs on the launch pad missile would be an insane demonstration of US aggression towards NK. Kim Jung-Il would throw a tissy and turn Seoul into swiss chesse as a response. He knows that he’d be taken out for this, but being such an avid fan of American movies he’d be sure to go out in a flurry of destruction just like Pachino in Scar Face.

However, a mid-air interception would be exceptionally good theatre and a a great demonstration of the US’s technical prowess–that is if the interception actually works.

By: baduk

baduk — Fri, 23 Jun 2006 11:21:50 +0000

railwaycharm,

NKs has no justification. It was the US, not SK, who attacked them. They have no reason to attack SK.

However, if they do, that is great. Korean Unification time!

By: Richardson

Richardson — Fri, 23 Jun 2006 10:03:09 +0000

Perry is a hypocrite. His 1999 report made our-way-or-hiway recommendations is NK did not choose the right “path,” but when the Bush admin actually began playing hard - and after it was clear what path NK had taken, he was criticial of some of his own suggestions.

Now he is suggesting something that a) he never would have done as SecDef, and b) he knows (or should) that the Bush admin won’t do. I wonder if he is actually being sincere or not. I rather think not.

By: railwaycharm

railwaycharm — Fri, 23 Jun 2006 07:59:07 +0000

What happens when we blow up their missile and then the Michinome lights off the 15,000 artillery pipes on Seoul? Remember the Sea of fire statement?

By: railwaycharm

railwaycharm — Fri, 23 Jun 2006 07:56:35 +0000

You don’t need a B2, you could use a F/A 18. B2 is over kill.

By: Landros

Landros — Fri, 23 Jun 2006 06:15:51 +0000

I mean the North Koreans and Iranians would stop mouthing off about America if Bush blew their toys up. Saddam seems to be in a different mood compared to 10 years ago.

By: Robert Koehler

Robert Koehler — Fri, 23 Jun 2006 04:37:01 +0000

Missles talk Bullshit walks.

I’m not sure what exactly you mean there. Cheney was simply stating the obvious, something people forget when they get all excited about the North Koreans—unless Pyongyang is able to take out with a first strike enough of the U.S. nuclear arsenal to have a reasonable chance of surviving a U.S. retaliatory strike, missiles don’t talk. They sit in their silos and do a whole lot of nothing.

By: Sperwer

Sperwer — Fri, 23 Jun 2006 04:29:59 +0000

I think the move is unnecessary, although I have to admit it could be emotionally gratifying

The interesting thing, though, is that coming as it does from Perry and Ashton Carter this is a decidely unemotional response, and a politically counter-intuitive one as well. Coupled with Cheney’s remarks, there should be no confusion in the NORK’s heads about the nature of US resolve in this matter and it’s wide-ranging support over a very broad spectrum of the US political elite.

Not that any such realization will make any difference to how the NORKS behave.