Connect with us

Military

Fast and furious: Korea edition

Published

on

Fast and furious Korea edition

A few weeks ago I wrote about my opposition to continuing the war in Afghanistan. I explained why. My opposition to remaining in Afghanistan was based on personal experience and a firm understanding that continued fighting is useless. It doesn’t mean I’m a libertarian or a liberal who thinks if we just try to get along with everyone all war can be avoided.

Korea is a whole other ball of wax. Kim Jong-un is directly threatening the United States, not to mention the rest of the world, with hydrogen warheads on his ICBMs, which may or may not be able to hit something other than the Sea of Japan.

North Korea’s current leader is far more confrontational than even his father and grandfather were, and it seems that things may be coming to a head after more than 65 years of stalemate on the Korean Peninsula.

Korea is an interesting socio-political example. You have the Republic of Korea (ROK) in the south which is capitalist, free, prosperous. They have successful trading relationships with much of the world.

Then you have the deceptively named Democratic People’s Republic of Korea (DPRK) in the north. Communist, totalitarian, with people living in abject poverty, and what little the country does have used for their military, largely coming from their communist patron, China. North Korea’s military is formidable, but it’s really all they have, making it inevitable that they will eventually want to use it to conquer their southern brothers, and conquer the wealth they’ve accumulated.

When the North comes across the DMZ it will be with the coiled energy of six decades of military buildup. Their artillery will rip apart the massive minefields we’ve laid in wait for them. North Korean commando units will likely infiltrate the South prior to any invasion and wreak havoc. Tanks will enter Seoul in a matter of days, at best. More likely, hours. Maybe we beat them back, at which point Kim Jong Un launches ICBMs carrying nuclear weapons at Tokyo and Washington DC.

That’s the nightmare scenario, of course. There is another option. We could hit them first.

Many on the American Left have expressed displeasure at President Trump’s rhetoric regarding this particular portion of what President George W. Bush called the “Axis of Evil.” Personally, I hope his rhetoric matches the action we actually take.

This country is struggling through difficult times. We’re in serious debt, radical groups of every stripe are rising to create chaos, and this hurricane season is making up for the fact that we have not had a serious hurricane problem since Katrina. The last thing we need is a lunatic running around the Far East with nuclear weapons. What we need second least is to get into yet another protracted war.

President Trump’s rhetoric is not dissimilar to Secretary of Defense James Mattis’ own rhetoric on the matter. Mattis is someone who has much more credibility than Trump on these matters, having served his entire adult life as a Marine officer and is one of the most respected generals in a generation. There is little doubt that he has a plan for every contingency, and I’m sure he is telling Trump exactly what I would tell him, which is this is not a war like we’ve seen in the last half century.

This will not be about politics, or making sure the people of the DPRK like us. Should another open conflict with North Korea come, this will be about the complete annihilation of Kim Jong Un’s military forces, in the air, on the ground, and at sea.

North Korea’s naval forces will be of little concern to our Navy, but as we’ve seen with recent collisions at sea, there is always the possibility of terrorist attacks causing significant damage to our ships. Their air forces are older, and our Air Force, Navy, Marine Corps, not to mention the ROK’s very competent Air Force, should have no problem handling them. However, the DPRK has a robust anti-air defense network, including plentiful modernized radars, missiles and anti-aircraft guns. Our pilots would face the densest anti-air network possibly in history.

The B-2 Spirit stealth bomber and the fifth generation F-22 Raptor would no doubt find themselves gainfully employed. B-1Bs and F-15Es, some of them flown by old friends of mine, would likely shoulder the bulk of the strike duties. Mobile surface-to-air missile (SAM) batteries would still be a threat even after the stealth aircraft had whittled the stationary SAMs down to size.

Establishing air supremacy very quickly would be vital. The Korean Penninsula doesn’t have a lot of land to trade for time, and Seoul, the capital and home to a quarter of the population of the ROK, isn’t far from the DMZ.

The ground war will be messy. We can move soldiers fairly quickly by air, but moving M-1A2 Abrams tanks, Strykers, and Bradleys is much more difficult and time consuming. Equipment prepositioned at various locations cuts down on the time, but as I mentioned already, time is at a premium. The armies of the US and ROK will need to slow the advance of the DPRK until the Air Force and Navy can start to cut off their supply routes and then kill the advancing units.

I have no doubt we will win, but the casualties will be high, and we have to make certain we hit the DPRKs nuclear capabilities very early on to prevent a scorched earth retaliation. The war will be fast and furious, but if it comes, I hope it will be one trouble spot we can finally leave behind and allow the ROK to integrate what is left of the DPRK into their society with a minimum of help from us. We don’t need more mouths to feed. I’ve already pointed out we have enough problems already.

Advertisement

0

Conspiracy Theory

US Navy confirms multiple UFO videos are real

Published

on

US Navy confirms multiple UFO videos are real

The truth is out there. We’re just not being told what that truth is.

The United States Navy confirmed yesterday that footage published two years ago by the NY Times allegedly leaked by naval aviators is, indeed, real footage. They also said that these “unidentified aerial phenomena” are inexplicable at this time.

Whether that’s the truth or not, we won’t be told. Some stick to the usual theory that they’re alien spacecrafts. More recently, there are suggestions they aren’t from another world but from a different dimension, allowing for the way they’re able to seemingly break the laws of physics. Some have pointed fingers at China or Russia as possessing the technology to operate such vehicles, and many assume that the United States has this technology or better as well.

Personally, I see the way these events are handled by the media and military and assume that these are actually some sort of demonic creations, perhaps with higher beings guiding men to create them. The purposes could be many, but one important one is to drive men’s imaginations wild in a way that brings us further from the truth of the Bible.

Regardless of what they actually are, it’s good to know they’re at least being acknowledged by the military. This is much better than being told they’re weather balloons or high-tech drones the size of school buses.

We are currently forming the American Conservative Movement. If you are interested in learning more, we will be sending out information in a few weeks.

American Conservative Movement

Continue Reading

Military

Chip Roy on clarifying our military missions

Published

on

Chip Roy on clarifying our military missions

Congress is responsible for declaring war. That was the intent of our founders and remains the proper way in which America’s military is to be deployed. But Congress has abdicated. They’ve put the responsibility on the Executive branch while having no real input on how we are to dispense with threats abroad.

Congressman Chip Roy wants this to change. It’s time for the United States Congress to have a clear plan and make choices about who our military is to fight. Today, we’re still living under the auspices of an 18-year-old decree which was necessary when it was enacted. However, we are no longer searching for Osama bin Laden. The threats from the Middle East are still relevant, but no longer require the immediate and unfettered action of a single person in the White House to determine how to address it.

In other words, it’s time for Congress to take responsibility for war again. If we’re going to send our men and women into battle, we need to do so with a clear direction and a strategy to achieve a predesignated victory. This is what Roy was essentially saying in his op-ed for The Hill:

We will be held accountable for the votes we cast on fiscal matters, including spending taxpayer treasure on war and we should act like it by spending responsibly. But as we go forward, we should ensure the collective will of the American people is invested behind the costliest expenditure of our nation – the lives, the families, and the livelihoods of our men and women in uniform.

Congress did its job boldly declaring war after 9/11 but has since abdicated its solemn responsibility under Article 1. Congress needs to come to a consensus regarding which threats and entities necessitate military action, or other appropriate responses. If not for the man or woman who is on his or her 4th, 5th, or 6th deployment, then for the young man or woman who recently turned 18 and will deploy in the coming months to fight a war he or she wasn’t even alive to see begin.

As we move forward militarily, we must be pragmatic and focused on victory, not occupation or obscure goals that can never be achieved. When our men and women fight, it must be for a reason that goes beyond presence. We need a plan.

We are currently forming the American Conservative Movement. If you are interested in learning more, we will be sending out information in a few weeks.

American Conservative Movement

Continue Reading

Foreign Affairs

The U.N. must respond harshly to Iran, or we’ll have to

Published

on

If the UN does not respond severely to Irans attack on the world economy they have no purpose at all

The opportunity to unite the world behind complete and unambiguous condemnation of Iran is upon us. Whether it was Houthi drones, Iraqi militia, or Iranian cruise missiles that hit huge Saudi crude oil processing plant through which 6% of the world’s oil passes, all fingers point back to Tehran for orchestrating or directly carrying out the attack. Seeking confirmation is a formality. Everyone with common sense and a snippet of knowledge of the attack must come to the same conclusion.

This is a prime opportunity for the United Nations to demonstrate why they exist. This wasn’t an attack on Saudi Arabia. This was an attack on the world economy, one that will do harm to billions of people who rely on oil for their day-to-day activities. If the United Nations doesn’t take decisive and immediate action against Iran, they are as worthless as many of us have thought they’ve been all along.

This is a Saudi problem first and foremost. We sell them enough weapons and other technology that they should be able to strike back appropriately. But they’re an ally, so our involvement should be considered VERY carefully. However, the fact that this attack and other recent actions are directed towards the world economy should not only bolster the necessity for our response but should draw an international response through the United Nations.

President Trump said we’re ready.

This is not our responsibility, but it affects us so we need to be involved in a response. Does that mean regime change? No. Not from us. We should be done with that after continuous failure. A response by the international community, urged on the United Nations by the Trump administration this week, is the better solution.

Yes, Iran Was Behind the Saudi Oil Attack. Now What?

Following the Houthi attack on Saturday on Saudi Aramco’s crude-oil processing facility, Secretary of State Mike Pompeo made an obvious and necessary point: Blame Iran.

It is obvious because the Houthi rebels in Yemen lack the drones, missiles or expertise to attack infrastructure inside Saudi Arabia. In 2018, a United Nations panel of experts on Yemen examined the debris of missiles fired from Houthi-controlled areas of Yemen into Saudi Arabia and concluded there was high probability the weapons were shipped in components from Iran. As one Hezbollah commander told two George Washington University analysts in 2016: “Who do you think fires Tochka missiles into Saudi Arabia? It’s not the Houthis in their sandals, it’s us.” Hezbollah, of course, is a subsidiary of Iran’s Revolutionary Guard Corps.

Pompeo’s response is necessary because, historically, Iran pretends to seek peace as it makes war. This is why it sent Foreign Minister Javad Zarif to France last month to plead with the world’s great economic powers as it escalated its proxy war against Saudi Arabia. Iranian diplomacy depends on its adversaries treating the aggression of its proxies as distinct from its statecraft.

Unfortunately, if the United Nations doesn’t respond appropriately, we may have to. We are not the police, but this attack wasn’t just against an ally. It has an impact on American lives. We’re already prepared to tap into our own oil reserves as a result of the attack. Oil prices are going up. The world economy, including Wall Street, will be impacted. We aren’t able to sit back on this one and say, “Not our problem.”

We must first try to force the U.N. to do its job and come down hard on Iran. If they won’t do it, we may be forced to respond. As much as I’m not a warmonger, the Iranian regime is committing acts that affect Americans. They must be dealt with one way or the other.

We are currently forming the American Conservative Movement. If you are interested in learning more, we will be sending out information in a few weeks.

American Conservative Movement

Continue Reading

Facebook

Trending