As South Korea Proceeds With Joint US Military Exercises, North Korea Vows Retaliation

The latest Korean escalation continues to refuse to be relegated to the annals of history. Various demonstrations on Saturday in the two countries confirmed that people on both sides of the the DMZ are demanding far more than just rhetorical placation. And now that the USS George Washington has symbolically entered the fray, the escalation has become about far more than just Korean nationalist pride, but is about Chinese and US spheres of influence. Which is precisely why most were speculating that a reversion to the mean was imminent: after all neither China, nor the US would benefit from a regional conflict. However as the AP reports, events may soon be spiralling out of control: "As protesters in Seoul demanded their government
take sterner action against North Korea, the North issued new warnings
against the war games scheduled to start Sunday with a U.S.
nuclear-powered aircraft carrier in the Yellow Sea. The North called the games an "unpardonable
provocation" and warning of retaliatory attacks creating a "sea of fire"
if its own territory is violated. The comments ran on North Korea's
state-run Uriminzokkiri website a day after the North's warnings that
the peninsula was on the "brink of war." China, under pressure from the U.S. and South
Korea to rein in its ally Pyongyang, urged both sides to show restraint
while Washington played down the belligerent rhetoric, noting that the
weekend war games were routine and planned well before last week's
attack." That said - there is probably no reason to worry.... After all now Hillary Clinton is involved.

"The pressing task now is to put the situation under control and prevent
a recurrence of similar incidents," Chinese Foreign Minister Yang Jiechi told U.S. Secretary of State Hillary Rodham Clinton by phone, according to the ministry's website.

Or not: contrary to repeated warnings that joint military exercises will only further antagonize the locals and certainly bring the situation to the brink of war, we now read that "South Korea has warned its army to be on guard for further attacks from Pyongyang ahead of joint military exercises between the US and Seoul." At this point the conventional wisdom is that North Korea is acting like a rabid dog (which as has recently been disclosed has nuclear capabilities). Yet the US continues to provoke it. In the global game theory game, who is therefore to blame?

South Korean President Lee Myung-bak told ministers and aides to be ready for "provocation" by the North - and the country's Marine commander vowed "thousand-fold" revenge for the attacks this week that killed two servicemen and two civilians.

The US and Seoul will begin joint exercises on Sunday in the Yellow Sea.

North Korea said any civilian deaths were "very regrettable" but accused South Korea of using members of the public as a human shield.

It also said the US should be blamed for "orchestrating" the whole sequence of events to justify sending in a nuclear-powered aircraft carrier to join the military exercises.

"If the US brings its carrier to the West Sea of Korea at last, no one can predict the ensuing consequences," North Korea's KCNA news agency said.

North Korea has warned it will continue to launch attacks if the South violates its disputed sea border.

China says it is determined to prevent an escalation of the violence but warned against military acts near its coast.

Since festivities will continue well through the night on Sunday (EDT), look for geopolitical risk to be well bid heading into Monday morning.

Below is a more exhaustive analysis of the geopolitic of the region via Stratfor.

U.S. Carrier Strike Group Embarks for the Yellow Sea

Summary

Just as both sides seemed to be nearing a resumption of talks, North Korea shelled South Korean positions on an island in disputed western waters, and a U.S. carrier strike group was dispatched to the Yellow Sea for exercises with South Korean forces. Since the sinking of the South Korean ChonAn in March, the United States had said it would deploy the USS George Washington to the Yellow Sea but had balked, in part because of objections from China. Now that North Korea has ratcheted up tensions again, Washington is sending a message to Beijing as well as Pyongyang: Rein in North Korea in order to better manage relations with the United States.

Analysis

U.S. Forces Korea announced Nov. 24 that the USS George Washington carrier strike group (CVN 73) left Yokohama, Japan, on Nov. 24 to join South Korean forces for naval exercises Nov. 28-Dec. 1 in the Yellow Sea/West Sea. The group includes the guided missile cruisers USS Cowpens (CG 63) and USS Shiloh (CG 67) as well as the guided missile destroyers USS Stethem (DDG 63) and USS Fitzgerald (DDG 62), and it may also include a nuclear-powered attack submarine

The announcement comes one day after North Korea fired artillery at Yeonpyeong Island,
which lies in disputed waters off the west coast of the Korean
Peninsula, killing two South Korean soldiers and two civilians and
damaging property. The United States had previously committed to sending
the carrier to participate in the Yellow Sea exercises as a show of
strength following the March sinking of the ChonAn (772), a South Korean
naval corvette, and had formally maintained its intention to do so in
the months since.

But the United States wavered in part due to objections from China,
which raised an outcry this summer about exercises so close to its
political capital and heartland. Instead, the United States opted to
send the carrier to participate in drills in the Sea of Japan, on the
opposite side of the Korean Peninsula from China, and continually
delayed posting the carrier group to the Yellow Sea. The U.S.
hesitations gave rise to considerable doubt in South Korea about the
American commitment to the alliance and drew attention across the region
as the United States seemed to balk in response to China’s bold
diplomatic stand.

Military Drills and Six-Party Talks

Before the North Korean artillery attack on Nov. 23, the United
States still seemed hesitant to undertake military drills with South
Korea that could upset regional sensitivities. At essentially the last
minute, Washington backed out of participating in South Korea’s Hoguk
Exercise, which began Nov. 21 and which North Korea blamed in part for
its attack on Yeonpyeong Island. The exercise would have involved
sending U.S. Marines stationed in Okinawa, Japan, to stage a mock
amphibious invasion of a small South Korean island, and while U.S.
intentions were not clear, the United States may have resisted such a
drill at a time when tensions throughout the region had intensified over
island sovereignty. Japan was calling for a similar drill as a way to
send a message to China over their island disputes (and holding
amphibious exercises with South Korea may have obligated the United
States to do the same with Japan, likely to the detriment of relations
with China).

Also prior to the artillery attack, it seemed that all parties
involved on the Korean Peninsula were moving closer to a resumption of
international talks. China began campaigning to resume six-party talks
on denuclearization back in September. Though the United States and its
allies had not committed to new talks, setting a prerequisite that North
Korea take “concrete steps” to show its sincerity, there were numerous
diplomatic meetings between the players and an opening for inter-Korean
negotiations. Stephen Bosworth, U.S. special envoy on the Korean nuclear
issue, is currently on an Asian tour for just such a purpose. Even
North Korea’s revelation of its ongoing uranium enrichment activities to
a visiting American scientist last week was a signal that talks could
resume (the information was couched in North Korean comments that it was
willing to trade away at least one of its nuclear programs, possibly
both, if the United States would give it new assurances). And while the
outcome would not likely have been the end of all North Korean nuclear
activity, it may well have served to give momentum to a new round of
talks.

The Yeonpyeongdo Attack

All of this was upended, however, when North Korea upped the ante by
shelling Yeonpyeongdo. North Korea often springs a surprise on the world
before negotiations, and over the past two decades this has been a
fairly predictable method of winning initiative in talks. But the latest
action, coupled with the ChonAn sinking, pushes the envelope further.
It could still fall within the same rubric, with Pyongyang seeking to
get a better position in negotiations or to insist that the United
States join it in direct talks. But it also raises the question
whether North Korea is trying to do something completely different or
even whether it is losing a degree of internal control amid its ongoing power transition.

Either way, the United States has decided that it must now
demonstrate to the world, without equivocation, that it is committed to
its alliance with South Korea. This demonstration has begun by sending
the George Washington to the region for exercises in the Yellow Sea, but
it will undoubtedly involve other actions to bolster the alliance and
the U.S. military presence in the region (for instance, the George
Washington will also participate in annual exercises with the Japanese
in December, which the Japanese still claim will focus on the theme of
defending the islands against invasion, a veiled signal to China). This
is not the first time the United States has sent carriers to the area
for drills, but Beijing’s resistance to the idea throughout the year has
made it a more controversial action. Now the United States believes it
must send the strike group to maintain credibility in the region, not
only for South Korea but for its other allies as well, and to deter its
opponents. It simply cannot afford to lose credibility by not supporting
allies when they are attacked. Moreover, it cannot afford to be seen as
backing down due to Chinese pressure.

China’s Options

In particular, the United States is sending a message to China to
rein in North Korea. China is by far the largest economic and military
partner of North Korea, last year providing about 79 percent of the
North’s total foreign investment, 90 percent of its crude oil and 80
percent of its consumer goods. China also sells arms to North Korea and
offers irreplaceable political and diplomatic assistance to Pyongyang
for its confrontations with the outside world. China was able to stymie any attempt to force a meaningful response to the ChonAn incident,
has shot down the idea of new U.N. sanctions, and has deflected
pressure and criticism of the North Korean regime on numerous occasions.

But while China will bluster in reaction to the U.S. carrier
exercises and other U.S. moves to solidify the alliance, there are
limitations on its actions following North Korea’s unpredictable attack.
China will have difficulty plausibly denying North Korean culpability
this time, as it managed to do with the ChonAn (where very little
evidence was recovered from the wreckage, and China could get away with
claiming the international investigation team was biased). However,
China has already emphasized that the North Koreans claim their
artillery barrage was a response to shells that landed in their
territorial waters during South Korean military exercises, and Russia
has said that military drills by South Korea and its allies (i.e., the
United States) are destabilizing the region. Nevertheless, seeing that
North Korea’s actions will inevitably elicit a U.S. response, China has
the option of demonstrating its sway over North Korea in order to work
with the United States and retain some ability to shape the U.S.
response. Otherwise it risks provoking the United States and losing
control over when, where and how the United States decides to respond.

All of this comes at an awkward time, with both the United States and
China striving to smooth over disagreements ahead of Chinese President
Hu Jintao’s visit to Washington in January. Because Beijing will have
difficulty abetting Pyongyang in this latest incident, it may well
become a test of Beijing’s willingness to practice a bolder foreign
policy in relation to the United States and other outside powers.

Comments

[Sean7k]

Why don't you read a book or provide comment. Chinese history is available to all. We were provided the same fear of the Russians, whose technology was found to be wanting. 

You have a different read on the Mongol invasion and takeover, the Boxer rebellion, WWII and the Japanese occupation? China has attacked Tibet (that is like the US and Grenada). They beat the Nationalist forces under Chiang Kaishek- more Chinese. 

What a rube.

[thefatasswilly]

. . .

You stated that the chinese army has never won.

This is why I stated that you a moron. Once again, read a book, moron.

[Sean7k]

And you have failed to provide a reference to whom they have beat-twice. Maybe you should change your avatar to fatheadwilly.

[thefatasswilly]

Two examples:

Indian Army

American Army

Shut up.

[Sean7k]

The indian army was a border skirmish without air force projection by either side that had minimal results. The Chinese have never defeated the American Army. Fighting to a standstill in North Korea is not a victory. 

More important, even now they are managed by an elite core that are European and American and play the part they have been given. Which is why they are conducting their economy exactly the same way. 

You think nations are important. This is naive. Nations are resources to be developed and depleted for the benefit of the elites. They could care less about the names or cultures. They will play one against the other for their benefit as they use the labor of the people, the wealth they have accumulated and enrich themselves. As they tighten the cordons of slavery, the people will rejoice in their national victories- in chains.

[thefatasswilly]

Good job changing the topic of conversation because you lost.

China is not a nation. You are a typical American, thinking from a typical round eye, western, Westphalian nation state mindset. You cannot think outside of the box. You are blind, despite the fact that your eyes are larger than mine.

[Sean7k]

What change? China has not won a war. They have not established any control over another nationality outside of North Korea. We left Korea because of The USSR, not China. 

Last time I checked- we define a nation by having a single central government presiding over a land area with distinct borders. China  fits this definition last time I checked. Perhaps it bothers you that China will continue to do what it is told by it's masters? HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA.

[Calmyourself]

Shit, drop 75 million doses of crack in China and FAW and his opium loving brethren will not show up at the flat screen factory ever again..  The Brits had China right long ago..

[Spalding_Smailes]

Water shortages and water pollution in China are such a problem that the World Bank warns of “catastrophic consequences for future generations.” Half of China’s population lacks safe drinking water. Nearly two thirds of China’s rural population—more than 500 million people—use water contaminated by human and industrial waste.

[OldTrooper]

Let the Chinese keep Sun Tzu.  I'll take Clausewitz any day of the week.

[thefatasswilly]

OMG RACISM!!! RACIST BIGOT, RED NECK COME BEAT THIS POMPOUS ASS DOWN!!!

[sangell]

It is a problem having Seoul within NORK artillary range but other than that not so minor complication the ROK, should events force a showdown, is going to take down the Pyongyang regime and probably just as fast as the US drive to Baghdad.

[Jake3463]

Yes and than they own an uneducated populace and barren waste land mostly living in the late 19th century.

South Korea has no desire to suddenly be reunified with their neighbors to the North.  Think about the problems the Western Germans had with their Eastern brothers and multiply it by a thousand.  Quite frankly, the refugee problem alone would bankrupt the South.

[Commander Cody]

Think cheap labor.

[Jake3463]

Problem is despite the labor being cheap, it is uneducated and brainwashed.

It would take South Korea years before it even got the ability to have them working building anything, because half of them are living in a concentration camp like existence right now.

[jm]

South Korea has massive infrastructure build-out capacity and little internal demand.  North Korea has massive infrastructure needs.

[Calmyourself]

Win, dismantle every lower grade skill factory in ROK, ship north.  They will work for food, hot water and kimchi and fall in love all over again, just give the idiots our strong man to worship.  Works for almost all Asians, right FAW?

[High Plains Drifter]

 I don't think the Chi coms will ever allow this to happen. It is not in their best interest. They have teeth this time. The Chinese dragon can do many things these days.

[greenewave]

We are about to embark on World War 3 and its starts with N. Korea. Please watch the video “Brink of War, Mission Accomplished at (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ZvVDt-sPQ8w).

Anonymous-

The more we can distract you from the truth and from the Great Depression II in this Country, the better!!

[ToNYC]

Nothing keeps the paranoia about being perceived as weak like gunboat diplomacy. Our leadership needs such a drama to keep the wheels well-greased and first call for the cash. The Middle Ages solution to the World before democracy.

[francismarion]

NK is just kicking the coke machine expecting a freebie. China doesn't want a mess on their doorstep. But at the same time, Homer wants Bart tear up the Flanders' expensive new landscaping, to see how Ned will react.

SK just wants NK to go away. Japan and US both want to end the NK conundrum but keep hoping for a coup that produces a less antagonistic leadership.

It could end badly.

[JohnG]

Yes, it could....but

The NORKS have done this over and over and over.  Make a bunch of noise, get some cash and shut up.  Straight out of Al Sharpton/Jesse Jackson's playbook.

A shakedown.

[Printfaster]

"A shakedown."

As I recall, Hitler performed a series of shakedowns before tiring of the game and going uninvited into Poland.

[JohnG]

Yes.  Another good example of a resource grab.  The people gotta eat or I can't stay dictator.  Only NK does not have the military capability to invade anyone.  So as someone wrote above this is their yearly bailout request for food.  If they shell SK, then we have to take them out, and that's game over imho.  Won't happen.  Lil' Kim might be crazy but he's not stupid.

[Printfaster]

"Lil' Kim might be crazy but he's not stupid."

By inference, that statement says that "Hitler was not crazy, but smart" when he went into Poland.

OK

[JohnG]

Hitler was a sociopath.  Pulled a fast one on all of Germany, and they loved him for it.

http://jessescrossroadscafe.blogspot.com/2010/11/walter-trout-they-call-...

Last video down.

[thefatasswilly]

Pulled a fast one on Germany? Are you unfamiliar with German history? Hitler's rise was an inevitable result of said history.

[Weimar Ben Bernanke]

North Korea is not like iran. Iran can defeat the US in an assymetrical war by simply:

•  Closing the Port of hormuz for months with massive numbers of anti-ship missiles that can be mass produced,massive amounts of Chinese Silk worm missiles,mines,and sucide boats that can cause trouble for the USN
• They will activate the shiite militias to cut the US supply lines from Kuwait to Baghdad. US troops will be surrounded and low in supplies. It will be "Black Hawk Down" X10,000
• Fire hundred of missiles at US bases in Iraq to cause even higher casulties. Also they would turn the green Zone into dust. 
• Then you have thousands of light infantry IRG crossing the border to help the shiites and provide MANPAD to the shiite miltitas which can shoot dwon any supply carco planes,and shoot down helicopters.

 North korea has no assymetrical capabilities to bring the US on its knees unless China enters the war.  So yeah North korea is toast not like Iran.

[francismarion]

Three lines is all it takes to avoid getting caught up,

So, if Iran attacks us and gives us a bloody nose, how is their being sent back to the stone age as a result of this attack  'winning'?

And how does blocking the Strait of Hormuz help Iran, that depends on oil exports to survive? That single act would  bring down the regime.

And the video-game scenario you describe of a hundred thousand US military personnel being surrounded may have had some application in nineteenth century history, but we would cut them a new one and go right through it. Get real.

The kid gloves would come off (finally!) once someone started threatening our survival.

You wildly overestimate the opposition and think because we use featherdusters instead of MOABs that we are weak. You need some fresh air.

We have orders of magnitude more military power than the Iranians.

[thefatasswilly]

Have you ever played World of Warcraft? A young, inexperienced orcish leader named Garrosh speaks as you do. "Crush them, we have superior force and power, etc. etc." He is unable to see both sides.

His advisor, a much older, battle hardened orc, Saurfang, constantly attempts to engage him in conversation about supply lines, strategy, tactics, etc. He sees all sides clearly.

Your inability to think outside of the "US is the fucking greatest evar" mentality highlights your simplemindedness, and thus, stupidity. Shut the fuck up unless you actually have something to contribute.

[lumen ex lumine]

"Have you ever played World of Warcraft?"

Let me see if understand this. You base your analysis of modern international military conflict on the puerile musings of some on-line dungeons-and-dragons characters?

Listen. I know you've got a lot more time on your hands now that Limewire is off-line ... but would you mind spending it somewhere else?

Jesus Christ !

[Calmyourself]

LOL, that useless fat ass must be 12 yo..  Ha, Iran kicking our ass they have one, yes one refinery in the entire country..  They have put many of their nuke facilities next to or in cities so Israel won't attack them.. What happens when our gloves come off?  We may be broke, but we are swinging Thor's hammer and if you get in the way you are dust China, Iran idontgiveashitastan, your dust..

[thefatasswilly]

So analysis of strategy, tactics, and supply lines are irrelevant to warfare?

Really? Are you a fucking moron?

[Calmyourself]

When opponents are roughly equal analysis of logistics is the primary study.  When you have basically third world countries going up against the U.S. you study politics and infrastructure.  How fragile is the country the U.S. will be attacking on their soil, politically and economically. See how that works, we attack on their soil, they do not attack ours unless said country can project force across 3500 miles of ocean.  Supply lines will mean nothing when a carrier force can devastate a country from 300 miles out.  You need to forget about the Chinese cultural superiority and start thinking force projection.  If we ever take the gloves off it will be very bad for you as your country will be forced to nukes very quickly and you do not have enough to kill us, we have enough to obliterate all of China and then throw a few hundred more to bounce the rubble.  Put that in your opium pipe and smoke it..

[thefatasswilly]

Are you unfamiliar with the outcome of China vs. America during the Corean War?

Seriously, you Americans spew so much retarded bullshit it hurts my mind.

[Smiley]

World of Warcraft is for pussies who suck and can't hang in a good game of Battlefield: Bad Company 2

[Weimar Ben Bernanke]

First off I was not refering to Iran attacking us. I was referring if we tried to do a preemptive strike against their nuclear sites. Second iran will never attack us because we use that as an excuse to go to war with them. Iran does not have a missile that can hit Kansas City,they are not a threat. However as you fail to see because of your blind hubris Iran can give the US more then a headache if attacked. Cutting of an enemies supplies still apply to modern warfare. You say this is 19 century rubbish,you seem to forget Stalingrad which was in the 20th century. So okay you'll say this only applies the 20th century warfare. So tell me this US personnel having there supply lines cut will be no problem? You say you would cut them a new one and go right through. One there will be massive casualties and two these lines are cut there will be not enough fuel to get out of iraq. Now lets say we try to go through them(shia militias) you will risk very heavy casulties from IED,and EFPs. I am not saying our military is weak all I'm saying is that our troops in Iraq are vunerable to hundreds of Shahab,Scud C and D missile hurled at them and on top of this your supply line is cut and surrounded by heavily armed shia with Al Qods,and Basij reinforcement pouring across the border. Cutting you enemies supplies is effective in warfare today. If they are cut our troops will not move anywhere. Plus our troops are penny packed everywhere across the nation so they vunerable. If Iran fire 4 Shahab missile at the green zone casulties will to high for the American public to stomach. Then you add Iraqi shiites(60% of the population) up in arms and do a guerilla war campaign with no end. If they get MANPAD and other advanced AA systems(which they will) all bets are off for air supremacy in the Iraqi skies. Do you think the American peopel can stomcah 850 US soldier killed on one day from Shahab attacks and hundred more from Shia,Iraqi Army/police attacks? And this happens on  a daily basis and the supply lines are cut? If we stand and fight and wait for reinforcements this will create high casulties that can not be tolerated. If we leave Iran and Syria will fire scores of missiles at a retreating convoy which will be our "Highway of Death."

Now you mention we go all out in Iraq. Then what? All the gains made by the surge will be undone. The Iraqi Army and police side with the shia insurgents,the iraqi govt is collapsed,you have a nation in ruin,and Iran has a Ho Chi Minh type weapons trail fro Iran to southern Iraq ready to rearm the shiites. You will have to leave. And when you leave Iran will fire a volley of missiles at a retreating convoy which will create even higher casulties. If you stay Iraq will become worse then it was back in 2004-2007. And face a never ending guerilla war supported by iran and iranian irregular forces. So attacking iran will be a disaster at any case. We do not have the money for a war and have no will for another war from the AMerican public. So America can win conventionally but will be overwhelmed assymetrically becaouse of our vunerable position in Iraq.

[Sean7k]

Just to toss in the odd strategy: the US uses no troops at all. We send in stealth bombers and missiles and crush the military and political infrastructure. The bombers are flown from here and refueled all along the route here and back. 

We protect the existing base of Iranians that want a non-muslim government and treat with them.

You forget something that all those generals recognize, we fight wars to create debt and make money. This has dictated land wars with huge expenses in men and material. They know we don't need to send a single land or sea soldier in. This is the reference to "Thor's Hammer" capability- especially when we are thousands of miles away and cannot be targeted. We wouldn't even have to clean-up.

[Weimar Ben Bernanke]

First off the resistence against the ayatollah's regime has begged the US and Israel not to bomb the nation because it would unite the Iranian people. You may hate the regime but if a foreign power were to come to bomb you nation,damnit lets fight. Now you bring up a massive bombing blitz against Iran.The United States learned over North Vietnam — or from the Battle of Britain or in the bombing of Germany and Japan before the use of nuclear weapons — air campaigns alone don’t usually force nations to capitulate or change their policies. Serbia did give up Kosovo after a three-month air campaign, but we suspect Iran would be a tougher case. In any event, the United States has no appetite for another war while the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan are still under way, let alone a war against Iran in order to extricate itself from Iraq. The impulse to use force against Iran was resisted by President Bush and is now being resisted by President Barack Obama. And even if the Israelis attacked Iran’s nuclear facilities, Iran could still wreak havoc in Iraq. . So lets say we bombed Iran heavily,the regime will still be in place because there is still a majority of iranians who support the regime. Third I was talking about what our forces in Iraq will go through. Even if we did a massive shock and awe campaign the shiites in Iraq will still cut the supply line from Camp Tampa Kuwait ti Baghdad. Then they will start a never ending guerilla campaign because they have been stocking up with weapons. Fourth Iran has sleeper cells in Saudi Arabia,Egypt,Oman,Bahrain,UAE,Lebanon,Jordan ect to destablize the middle east.

Plus a massive bombing campaign would need a massive buildup in the Persian Gulf. Iran will notice this and start attacking the buildup of forces. Bombing a nation only will not lead to a collapse of the regime,it will only make it stronger,and the people angry. Plus a bombing campaign will cost money of this size. Iran is a large nation,a campaign like this will cost money and time. Like I said Iran cannot defeat the US in conventional warfare,but they have massive assymetrical capablities. Wars are not only bombs and jets,its the will to fight on. So If we attack Iran this would end in madness. The shiites are 60% of the Iraqi population,and they are being heavily armed by Iran just in case for an attack. So an attack on Iran.

We don't have an "army" in Iraq like we used against Saddam. We just have five light brigades trained and equipped for constable duties. If they get into trouble, expect our Iraqi "allies" to help finish them off.

Our supply lines in Iraq and Afghanistan are far from the ocean and very vulnerable. In addition, we rely on Muslim companies and drivers to deliver supplies. They will not drive during a "war" even if the danger is low, and may refuse to drive out of principle. And our airlift could transport maybe only 10% of what they need.

Don't expect the Iraqis to cheer, since they were bombed too. We could see thousands of Iraqis take to the streets in protest and block traffic as we bomb their Shiite brothers. Sistani would be pissed(he is iranian by birth), and say something to incite them.

Iran will just give a headache until we give up. Having your supply lines cut and the entire population going up in arms against you is not a good situation to be in and facing missile attacks from Iran will be too much for us to bare. We can beat anybody conventionally but when it come to assymetrical warfare we always fail to learn. Iran does not need to hit us at home,all they have to do is to put our troops in an impossible situation.

[Sean7k]

Please read a comment for content before you waste an argument. We do not have to stage a bombing campaign in the middle east. We are fully capable of doing it from here. The bombing campaigns you refer to did work- outside of Kosovo and that was because, one, we wanted to leave something and two, the Russians might not have allowed it.

We sent in troops for two reasons in the other cases: one, we did not want Russia to take control of Germany and it's capacity. Two, Japan capitulated- worked from my seat.

Finally, you assume we want to take control of Iran- not necessary. We merely need to show we can remove the ruling government. You cannot control Muslims in a democratic society without fear of harsh reprisals. All we have to do is cut off the head. 

Iraq will control their own. A minority tyrant did that for years.

Sleepers? Please. You don't think the middle east people understand treachery? They could teach us a thing or two.

Iran is a straw man put up by our own government. Buy into that propaganda at your own risk. 

[francismarion]

Yes we can be bloodied. But we will prevail. Not boasting. Just fact.

Don't think the hundred thousand US forces in Iraq are a flock of of chickens waiting to be plucked.

And don't think the Battle of the Khyber Pass or the Battle of Britain contain the dynamics of the reaction of the US to such an attempt.

We are talking Armageddon.

You persist in this fantasy because of the seductiveness and antiquity of the notion of the battle of envelopement and annihilation, of which there are countless examples.

You just fail to factor in the US reaction when dubbed as the proposed victim. Not go' happen.

Think Armageddon.

No force on earth can play out the scenario you suggest.

Think the end of the world.

[Weimar Ben Bernanke]

It is not a fantasy but a reality. Our supply lines in Iraq are very vunerable. it is a known fact here are examples from people who say it is.

Patrick Lang, “The vulnerable line of supply to US troops in Iraq,” Christian Science Monitor ,July 21, 2006: Hostilities between Iran and the United States or a change in attitude toward US forces on the part of the Baghdad government could quickly turn the supply roads into a "shooting gallery" 400 to 800 miles long….The volume of "throughput" would probably be seriously lessened in such a situation. A reduction in supplies would inevitably affect operational capability. This might lead to a downward spiral of potential against the insurgents and the militias. This would be very dangerous for our forces…it seems unlikely that air resupply could exceed 25 percent of daily requirements. This would not be enough to sustain the force.

http://www.csmonitor.com/2006/0721/p09s01-coop.html

Joseph L. Galloway, “What if our supply lines are cut?” Arizona Daily Star, August 6, 2006: “However invincible the military of the world's only superpower might seem, every army has its weak spot. Historically, it centers on logistics, the supply line tail that wags the dog… The lifeline for American forces in Iraq is a 400-plus-mile main supply route that runs from Kuwait through Shia-dominated and Iranian-infiltrated southern Iraq to Baghdad and points north and west….Along that route, trucks and tankers driven by third-country nationals — Turks and Pakistanis and others — haul 95 percent of the beans and bullets for our troops and 100 percent of the fuel that our tanks and Bradleys and Humvees gulp at staggering rates…. That route runs through the heart of Iraq's Shiite Muslim south, an area now thoroughly infiltrated by Iranian Revolutionary Guards and under the sway of well-armed Shiite militiamen and Iraqi police who are often indistinguishable from the militiamen and sometimes the same people…. The lightly protected American convoys are vulnerable to ambushes, improvised explosive devices and even an occasional rocket-propelled grenade slamming into a fuel tanker.

http://www.azstarnet.com/sn/printDS/140663

John Robb, “What’s Next in Iraq,” globalguerrillas.typepad.com. Wednesday, September 20, 2006: “In this near term conflict, we are likely to see a repeat of the lightly manned defensive hedgehog used successfully by Hezbollah against Israel. If placed along critical US military supply routes or immediately outside US mega-bases, and augmented by informational superiority (a combination of better local intelligence and advanced signals intercepts), these defensive tactics would extract a heavy toll on US troops…. http://globalguerrillas.typepad.com/globalguerrillas/2006/09/whats_next_in_i.html

Raymond Barrett, “A tougher journey to stock US troops in Iraq,” The Christian Science Monitor, January 8, 2007: “…with the possibility of increasing US forces by some 20,000 combat troops seeming more likely, the supply route from Kuwait will be ever more vital. ‘A very big proportion of the food and water [used by the US military] comes from Kuwait,’ says Robert Soussa, the managing director of Kuwait & Gulf Link Transport Co., a group heavily involved in this logistics business. ‘There are hundreds of fuel tankers a day ... shared between many companies. They don't have many [petrol] refineries in Iraq, the Kuwait government supplies them with petrol,’ he says….Soussa adds that the upsurge in violence has impacted the logistics business. "Because of the incidents in Iraq, they have reduced the number of trucks [per convoy],’ he says. The rise in violence has affected the flow of convoys traveling into the country. ‘[There are usually] eight movements in a day, but nowadays it's reduced to five. In one movement there are about 45 trucks," the businessman says. ‘The supply line from Kuwait is absolutely crucial. You cannot supply the level that is required by air,’ says Paul Rodgers, professor of peace studies at Bradford University in West Yorkshire, England, who has written monthly security briefings on Iraq since 2003. Professor Rodgers says that a more substantial US combat presence in Iraq could cause insurgents to avoid direct confrontation and intensify attacks on supply lines. ‘In the longer term, they [insurgents] may respond [to a troop surge] by attacking the supplies, rather than the troops themselves, he says.

http://www.csmonitor.com/2007/0108/p06s01-woiq.htm

 The "fantasy" you call it is a cause of concern and a reality. I agree with you that we would go all out to prevent enciclement and annihliation. However you did not read clear,Iran will just inflict heavy casulties on our troops because the American public cannot stomach huge US casulties. We are powerful but our troops will be going through hell. I never said they would be annihilated,I said they will maintain heavy casulties. The military will not be helpless they will escape into Turkey. that is what Iran wants,a retreating US leaving Iraq in chaos. What I'm saying is iran wants a propaganda victory not a victory on the ground. We crush iran conventionally anyday in the week. But they can give us a headache in assymetrically. Iran's military is weak but its assymentrical capabilities can put the mideast into chaos.

[thefatasswilly]

"Unless China enters the war."

Dude, you need to alter your thought processes. China WILL enter the war, so no, North Corea is not necessarily toast like Iran.

[Jadr]

The English language doesn't work the way you think it does apparently.  Since you can not make that inference based on the statement.

[Calmyourself]

Keep reading.. 

[kaiserhoff]

Oh, but he was invited, by Stalin.

[OldTrooper]

How'd that work out for Hitler, Printfaster?

[Printfaster]

Trooper, that was the point.

How it works out is not the question.  Whether action is taken is the question.

Besides, old Aldolf was a bit too close to winning for my comfort.  If he had ever figured out that SOSUS was operating, the North Atlantic would have closed.

[99er]

Crude

http://99ercharts.blogspot.com/2010/11/crude_27.html

http://www.zerohedge.com/forum/99er-charts

[Jake3463]

In any regards to this issue, our State Department appears to be afraid of a guy in Iceland leaking internal documents than the crazy guy in N.Korea with a few nuclear weapons.

[OldTrooper]

+ A Shitload.  Insightful and funny - and more disturbing the more I think about it.

[Azwethinkweiz]

But shoppers are back in droves. Temporary holiday employment is up huge as the sheeple push down and trample the weak in their attempt to get the best prices on that HDTV.

The recession is officially over......the apocalypse has just begun.

[wesa]

Is there a possibility that China may be acting behind the scenes to support N. Korea and to thereby pressure the U.S. regarding the Fed's stated goal of weakening the dollar?  A weak dollar, if it occurs, would put a lot of pressure on China via the effects on it's trading partners.  It seems to me that all-out currency warfare on a world-wide scale could easily have serious military consequences. 

Our economy has no way to internally create enough jobs to support the level of consumer spending that would be required to take us back to sustained 3% to 4% growth.   QEII or III or IV certainly won't do it.  Perpetual war, even for war-weary people, might offer a diversion and some illusion of growth.

Tyler hasn't written anything on this (as far as I can tell) so maybe this should be a topic to consider.

[francismarion]

As someone said above, crisis drives up the dollar, strengthening Chinese holdings; and drives down commodities, making Chinese acquisition cheaper.

Perhaps a bit too cynical to suspect the Chinese of starting NK-SK conflict for financial gain. More likely motivation would be Chinese economy implosion, redirecting domestic  anger outward.

[Jake3463]

There is probably more going on in China than us Westerners are aware of.  I always find it odd how Americans trust Chinese Government statistics.

There have been quite a few rabble rousing conflicts this year for the Chinese Government.

In reality does anyone really think the Chinese are that concerned over a Chinese Fishing boat.

[Clapham Junction]

You know, your scenario is not far fetched.  I feel that we are far too complacent about these developments. When and if, it will look something very like what you described.

China would only initially be behind the scenes. 

All the while your rather "detached" President gets hurt playing "Round Ball" as you Yanks call it.  You can't make this shit up.

[chinaguy]

Again, this has never been about N. & S Korea. N. Korea is a vassal state of China and Pyongyang would never have made this move without some sort of "understanding" with the PRC. China felt it was in their best interests for this to occure. Sure enough, we sent in a wholly neutralized HR Clinton (bitch slapped, again, Obama Admin). Pretty much, this is going to play out 80% to 100% however China wants it to.

What they want, however, is open to considerable specualtion.....

[francismarion]

China supplies fuel and food to NK so you have grounds for your supposition.

But also consider that if China didn't supply food and fuel, refugees would stream north into China. So China supplies out of desire to keep refugees out.

NK knows this and can flout Chinese requests and at the same time tweak US into providing supplies.

NK seems to have a corner on brinksmanship right now. But cliffs are notorious for eroding under one's feet and a slip could produce more conflict than NK wants.

[chinaguy]

a) read Sun Tzu, N. Korea is a vassal state, manipulated by China. There is no "supposition" involved.

b) China does't give a rats ass about about N. Korea other than for it's value as a vassal state.

c) This is not Thailand where thousands of refugees can cross in from other countries. China would simply shoot or imprison N. Koreans if they tried to illegally cross into China.

d) Prision in China is a "pay as you go" system you produce more in jail than it costs to keep you, so they are happy to have more slave labor.

[francismarion]

Adding in three lines usually gets you past the date line.

We are not talking thousands, we are talking millions of refugees. China cares about its international image and would not slaughter or brutally treat refugees on the scale you envision.

China has billions of trade annually with SK, which would take a dim view of China maltreating Koreans.

Sun-tzu had plenty to say on strategy and tactics but not a lot to say on twenty-first century international affairs.

It would be better to look at the world from the Chinese view, not some twenty five hundred year old general.

China does not want a nuke or three popping five hundred miles away from Peking. Not good for business.

[thefatasswilly]

Your understanding of the mentality of the Chinese state is sorely lacking. You need to read a book.

[francismarion]

this and this gets past the date line I think

Fatass

I am glad to see that you are enjoying my explication of China's NK dilemma.

As a self-loathing, America-hating Chinese supremacist, your attention to me is flattering and I hope to enlighten you further as the days go on.

Why not step out of character for once and make a reasoned response to my arguments instead of merely staging fits of primal rage?

If you have read my posts as you claim, you know I would welcome someone that could refute my assertions.

It would fuel me to greater efforts. But I know how futile it would be to expect that from a 'Johnny one-note' Chinese supremacist as yourself.

Too bad.

[thefatasswilly]

You claim that Chinese supremacist views are predictable, yet you fail to understand the mentality of the Chinese state.

This is why I feel no need to refute your "assertions." You do not understand how the Chinese think; you claim you do, but still fail. You are unable to think outside of the American mentality. This is very common amongst round eyes in the US.

Lastly, I find it hilarious that you docile Americans seem to believe that my generous usage of insults is an indication of rage.

[francismarion]

These three lines are the beginning of the post tra la

Racial hatred, blasphemy and mindless rage do go hand in hand with mental imbalance, regardless of the race of its sufferer.

China suffers from adversarial relationships with all its neighbors, dependence on the West for its economic survival, droughts, pollution, desertification, cultural annihilation, regional rivalry, a haywire economy one step away from implosion, seven hundred million in poverty, a second rate military, lack of moral or ethical restraint, totalitarianism, an inferiority complex resulting from centuries of domination by foreign powers, the after effects of a destructive and failed ideology and lack of understanding of what the role of a great power in the twenty first century should look like.

And from the potentially fatal disease of national supremacism.

Since 1945, it has been the wisdom of the US and the West to maintain stability in the world through diplomatic and military means for the purpose of promoting peace, democracy and prosperity throughout the world. The evidence of our success is that even China is today taking the first tentative steps on that long road. The proof of our success will be the elimination of all China's ills described above.

Perhaps you could learn a thing or two from the culture that is manifestly superior (though not quite perfect, alas), morally and materially, to your own, little brother.

Wallowing in callow sophistry and succumbing to petty rage is unbecoming a man, and as one that would represent his nation, self-defeating.

Restain yourself, fatass, and seek higher awareness. Your object is attainable through mercy and truth, in equal measure, prudently applied. Consider.

[szjon]

China has the ultimate power over most of Asia, it controls the supply of water. That's all we need to know, nukes, standing armies and fancy fighter jets become irrelevant in regional conflicts.

[thefatasswilly]

You have obviously never read any of Zbigniew Brzezinski's works. He understands that Chinese do not suffer from an "inferiority complex," as you claim. He is deathly afraid of the Chinese, and rightly so. Your simplemindedness is hilarious.

[cosmictrainwreck]

I think he got one over on you, Swamp Fox, but he tipped his hand in the last line of his post: "hilarious...generous use of insults...= rage" Does he think we all that stoopid? (just 'cause we're round-eye). Apparently, the generous use of insults is simply standard Chinese method of negotiation or discussion. Hmmmm. Maybe we do have more to learn. Ya can't trust 'em, that's for sure, cause they'll LIE right to your face; it's simply a tactic, a manuever.....no "moral" implications whatsoever. 

[cosmictrainwreck]

prior post mis-placed....meant for FranMar, not the Chink

[Azwethinkweiz]

But what if...

The North Korean refugees acted like the immigrants from Mexico in the United States, making cheap labor even more cheap---providing the Chinese factory workers with the ability to purchase their very own "cheap goods" spuring domestic growth?

[Calmyourself]

Actually as Fat ass above shows many Chinese are racist to the extent that other peoples are expendable.  China would set up a fertilizer plant over the border and feed the rice fields with the norks..

[BrosMacManus]

Interesting point...could it be that the Chicoms are pushing to drive the US out of their sphere of influence on a shortened 2 year timeline knowing BHO is neutered and reluctant/ill-equipped to engage in high stakes geopolitics? BHO has an agenda, and it's domestically focused, to a fault.

What's the point of having allies if you have no stomach to stand by them? Granted, ROK has increasingly vacillated between wanting us out to wanting our support when the PRK and the Chicoms growl. However, imagine the Chicoms getting cozy and conducting joint military drills in our "sphere", practically off our coast (whatever came of the missile off the coast of CA)? We wouldn't stand for it, or at the very least would have our own plans drawn up to annihilate it at the slightest provocation.

Does BHO have the stomach for this game, where nothing is black and white, and nuance reigns supreme? If not and allies don't matter, let's shitcan NATO, the UN and any treaty we've ever entered into.

I'm a lowly plebe and not as sophisticated as the majority of ZH contributors who believe they know what is going on and know how it will play out, believe the US is the driving force of all that plagues the world and believe in the inevitibility of the Chicoms (i.e., slant-eyed pinko fucks for you Chicom lovers) checkmating the US. 

[Mr Lennon Hendrix]

O/T

Another failed bomb plot guided by Federal Agents.

The bomb was a fake and had been provided to Mohamud as part of a long-term sting by the FBI. It also said Mohamud had been in contact with an unnamed individual overseas believed to be involved in terrorist activities.

Somali-born teen arrested in US car bomb sting:

http://www.independent.co.uk/news/world/americas/somaliborn-teen-arreste...

Feds: Somali-born teen plotted car-bombing in Ore.:

http://news.yahoo.com/video/us-15749625/23223502

[Brother Revegen...]

US will start new war, like it or not. It is just a question of time. It is such a shame to be an american these days... like being a German during Hitler's rise. 

[Clapham Junction]

I disagree.  Starting a war, not a pussy war like fighting Iraq, but one against a country with nukes and millions of men takes balls.

Maybe Steve Jobs and Pyoun Mung Fuck could fight over the internet on some shit-ass computer game.

[Brother Revegen...]

I cannot agree. Starting a war with any country, just because your economy is fucked and country slides to abyss is a moral crime. It is not a pc game. It is like blaming jews in all sinsKoreans are also normal people, and don't deserve such a destiny. I believe that the US should be dissolved one way or another. Like Hitler's Germany was.

[JohnG]

"I believe that the US should be dissolved one way or another"

Only parts of the US such as the FED, IRS, HHS, Congress, and don't forget the TSA shitbags (one of those bastards grabbed my balls so hard I was hurting for two fucking hours, if it weren't for my wife right there I would have ended his life on the spot, the ass pounding fag).

[Brother Revegen...]

Yes, I think, you are right

[doolittlegeorge]

actually "starting a war because somebody fired on your little boat" is what's messed up.  "starting a war to save the economy" sounds like great news.  unfortunately "i cannot recall of a single war that was economical."  of course "who starts a war because they want to conquer you" anymore.  SOOOOOO Ghengis Khan...

[szjon]

What a banal reason to start a war, hey, look at my American testicles, impressive ain't they?

I wasn't aware you were fighting Iraq, I thought 'regime change' was the buzzword of that conflict?

[francismarion]

If you mean what you say, why don't you move?

Even a worm moves on when the griddle gets hot.

Or are you just another gutless idiot that doesn't know thing one about the world or how it got to this point?

Or you're just a pathetic troll.

Read a book. Any book. You may get an idea.

[Brother Revegen...]

You are so arrogant and meaningless, I am sorry to say that.

[francismarion]

Adding in three lines usually takes you out of the date line.

You are the one parading your profound lack of understanding when you compare the US with Hitlerian Germany.

Deeply offensive and ignorant.

[thefatasswilly]

You don't see the corporate fascism rising in America? Seriously, the US is the the fucking greatest EVEAR!!!!!! Always has been, always will be, right?

Moron.

[francismarion]

The first three line as ever are for the dateline

The US possesses a tradition of democracy that has survived for centuries. For fascism to succeed in the subversion of American democracy, the American people would have to be co-opted.

The corporate fascism you posit cannot succeed in co-opting the American people by virtue of the nature of corporate fascism, which seeks to obtain wealth and power for corporations, not the people.

The people retain the political power to change their government. They also retain the power to form militias, as guaranteed in the Constitution. This is the bedrock of American democracy and civil liberty.

When Americans have had enough, they will remove the object of their dissatisfaction through Constitutional means, either political or extra-political.

Pathetic whimpering by doomsters such as Fatass and his ilk are simply leaves in the wind. The American people will determine their own destiny.

The greed of corporations will never end but we may see fit to restrain it. I think it may be about time.

But do not conflate America with corporatism. You lose the argument right off to bat when you show your lack of comprehension of the character of America.

[thefatasswilly]

The American people are controlled by corporate television. Your arguments are very, very pathetic.

[cosmictrainwreck]

"controlled by TV...." in your dreams, Chinaman

[Printfaster]

Let the capitulation to the Chinese begin:

http://hken.ibtimes.com/articles/86248/20101127/china-seoul-north-korea-...

Time for the Chinese to pick out headquarters for the occupation of an intact South Korea.

[JohnG]

WTF?  How you got that out of that article is astounding.  Did you even read it?

[thefatasswilly]

It's not astounding. He simply understands how the Chinese state sees the world.

[snowball777]

90340332.jpg

[bankonzhongguo]

China has every chance to really make a play as a "peace keeper."  Having learned the lessons of deploying the PAP to Haiti, I never understood why China didn't seek to foment a wet firecracker war on the peninsula, only to have the PLA come in and pick up the pieces in DPRK.  I can see a ton of incentive for the PLAN to build a deep water port only 80 south of Vladivostok and 500 miles from mainland Japan.  Its got to be frustrating to the PLAN to always slip out of Dalian under the eyes of the USA. Surely these guys have looked at the US presence in Central America eg Panama to understand how to hold territory under another flag.  The best thing for China is for DPRK to start a still born war and take control of the region and maybe cripple some competing chaebols.  All those NE China construction battalions are ready to work and the PLA wants a strategic mission.

[francismarion]

China has thrown in its lot economically with the West.  Trade has made the Chinese dependent on foreign markets and it cannot wean itself without profound disruption and possible economic implosion.

Also China seeks territorial aggrandizement, but is unwilling to further alienate already suspicious neighbors and their ally, the US in an effort that would be deeply embarassing if unsuccessful. Therefore they are taking a 'long view' and are allowing their economic and military power to grow to a preponderating status before exerting their will. 

For these reasons it is safe to conclude that China does not want NK to risk war that could quickly escalate to a nuclear exchange just a few hundred miles away from Peking.

China is unable to control NK to the extent it would like, yet the US may require China to approve sanctions in the UN, or be the only abstaining power, which would isolate China and complicate their foreign policy.

[chinaguy]

Have you ever even been to China? Frankly, your thought process indicates you haven't a clue how the Chinese think. & Yes, after working there for 25 years... I do.

[francismarion]

Those three first lines that gum up the works

Chinese leadership is concerned with maintaining the integrity of the state, aggrandizing its borders when feasible and expanding it influence globally through economic activity.

I am sure your experience exceeds Henry Kissenger, 007 and Sun-tzu all rolled into one, but the constraints on and possibilities for Chinese actions are there for all to see, if they look.

If you want to take your experience and  whatever you read for the measure of China, so be it.

But I would not be too encouraged by the support you have gained in this thread from the raving lunatic, Fatass Willie.

His avowed Chinese supremacist views may be what you take to be the basis for Chinese foreign policy behavior, but a look at the world should dispel any illusions.

China is stuck in an economically and  geopolitically intractable position.

All I am saying is that China must conform to the world's expectations of appropriate behavior or it will suffer accordingly.

China does not seek war with the US though it never seems to tire of watching us bat down the curves they throw at us through their surrogates.

China seeks a long term advantage through organic growth, which it should be able to maintain if it can adapt in the next twenty or thirty years to a rapidly changing environment.

Those of us that wish the best to the people of China are a bit puzzled by some of the commenters here, that do not seem to recognize the economic interconnectedness of China and the US that has arisen in the last few years, and the softening tone of China toward US declarations of interests in areas considered vital to China. Evidence of this is China's efforts to win Taiwan through economic integration, while maintaining military options, and the growingly ambiguous attitude toward Pyongyang, as a result of expanding Seoul-Peking economic ties.

Please show me where I am wrong.

[chinaguy]

China does not seek war with the US. Please show me where I am wrong.

You are a fool. China is already at war with the US.

[francismarion]

US-China military conflict has been sublimated into economic competition thanks to WTO. The wisdom of stitching China into the orbit of the West has already been revealed as China tones down its saber-rattling on Taiwan and Korea.

Of course, China is self-centered and seeks to discomfit the US. But we can hope that in time this behavior will alter as China sees its greater good to lie in accomodation with the West. This alone is reason to maintain the unquestionably overwhelming military advantage the US now enjoys.

We should all hope that the Chinese hawks will in time be tamed by the bureaucrats and technicians that run China today.

By the way, China guy, if you are going to run with my little brother, FAW, make sure he is in bed by ten.

[OldTrooper]

Of course, China is self-centered and seeks to discomfit the US.

At least we agree on one point.

Hoping for China to change is a real long shot IMHO.  The odds of China changing while surrounded by US forces or proxies is even more remote.  Chance of the USA maintaining a 'overwhelming military advantage' long enough for China to 'come around' - while running staggering budget and trade deficits - next to zero.

Also, the 'benefits' of hooking up with the West may not be as attractive to China as we imagine.

Winston Churchill said, 'You can always count on Americans to do the right thing - after they've tried everything else.'  I guess we keep at the Empire game because there are a few things yet to try.

[thefatasswilly]

"We should all hope that the Chinese hawks will in time be tamed by the bureaucrats and technicians that run China today."

Not only are you an idiot, you like to get high on hopium too. You don't even know who runs China, and you attempt to speak as if your opinions are relevant. You epitomize almost everything I despise about modern America. Presumptuous dumbass.

[francismarion]

I love you too, little brother.  Now wipe your nose and go outside and play.

[bankonzhongguo]

You must work for the State Department and translate "Zhongguo" as "middle kingdom."

Its been a dog fight in Africa between the US and China for at least ten years.

I always am struck by base radicals of the Chinese "alphabet."  Many many of those radicals refer to war or power. You haven't lived until the sons of PLA general officers on some NYC junket breakout in drunken nationalist song on the subway. 

These guys are hungry, hungrier than couch potato Americans.

[francismarion]

Thanks for sharing your first-hand experience, zhongguo

Don't underestimate the three thousand years of Western mayhem, though.

Illiad, Odyssey, Aeneid, all spoke of the Greco-Roman warrior races that carved up the Mediterranean Basin area.

Then the Germanic invasions, culminating after fifteen hundred years of butchery in WW I and WW II; the interval being punctuated (or is it punctured?) by the Crusades, the Thirty Years war, the Hundred years war, Frederick the Great and Napolean, just to mention a few of the headlines. Never mind the gritty little murder-fests of Louis the XIV and Marlborough, the conquest of the New World, the Vikings and the ever-popular Balkans.

I could go on, but the point is, NOBODY has it over on us when it comes to killing capacity or killing urge. God help us, we are the best.

As for couch potatoes, let'em stew. There are enough warrriors in the states to fill all the tanks, jets and ships we can build with plenty left over for the retail trade. I ain't worried about that. Just the poachers in the county where I live could field a full-fledged batallion.

[thefatasswilly]

Yes, I agree with chinaguy.

Shut the fuck up.

[francismarion]

Chill, little brother. I have cool pops for you and your friends if you will promise to not bite the hand that feeds you.

[thefatasswilly]

I am beyond calm: I simply attack idiocy with great hostility.

The human race possesses vast overpopulation and stupidity problems. Those of low intellectual quality, such as yourself, deserve neither respect nor oxygen.

[francismarion]

To tell the truth, I used to harbor the same inclinations, little brother. But time has a way of wearing down our teeth.

As an American, you exult in your freedom. As a Chinese-American, you feel the ambivalence of US society toward you. As an intellect you are an empty vessel. But one that I hope will be filled in time. Pray for wisdom, little brother.

[Cistercian]

 I have heard that before...Malthus anyone?And China is a problem in the overpopulation area.Luckily biogenic weapons with fabulous race selectivity are developed and online.

  That way, we won't waste any plutonium or uranium.

 Starvation is a political problem.Just visit Sudan.

 And China has a slight problem with having enough women...the Han may disappear sooner than you think.But the most stunning indictment of your position is this..David Rockefeller agrees with you!Be afraid of that last point in particular....

[thefatasswilly]

I know all of this. Why do you think I am so aggressive? The endgame scenario is east vs. west: chinese versus jews. Funny that white people think that they matter, though.

China will not cease to exist, though. The oligarchical elites recognize the superiority of the Chinese methods of state. How they go about incorporating this into their scheme, however, remains to be seen . . .

[AUD]

"South Korea’s Hoguk Exercise, which began Nov. 21 and which North Korea blamed in part for its attack on Yeonpyeong Island"

I've read elsewhere that this 'exercise' involved firing artillery into disputed waters just off the North Korean coast, before the North's response. Kind of provocative.

[Printfaster]

Ahem.  The islands attacked by the NORKs lie in disputed waters.

Would you declare the residence of South Koreans on those islands as a provocation? 

Here is your disputed border.  It covers a pretty wide swath, including sea access to Seoul.

http://thelede.blogs.nytimes.com/2010/11/23/a-line-in-the-sea-divides-th...

Even firing a shell from those islands south would land in disputed waters.

[AUD]

Ahem. I believe I wrote;

"before the North's response".

I would say any firing of artillery in disputed waters is provocative. If it was indeed the South Korean military that fired first then they are the provoc-ers.

[New_Meat]

"... and it may also include a nuclear-powered attack submarine."

Don't leave home without them. (yes, plural).

DPRK Kilos are nasty, silent, have serious warning/lead time, who knows what orders they have?

688s and VA have way too much shallow water experience (than they were planned to have).

PLAN sub incident--well, maybe more than one side to that story.

- Ned

[bankonzhongguo]

I'm not sitting in the CIC, but Kilos? 

I can see some converted Sang-o (literally the Yugo of subs) bow filled with a shaped charge of composition B or C and aimed at the USS GW.  I just can't see the US chain of command giving orders to the CSG to sink an approaching north Korean sub in time.  The north can find some suiciders and face it China would be silently smiling to see a US carrier at the bottom of the Yellow Sea.

[cosmictrainwreck]

yeah, chain of command is a definite dis-advantage, even a hazard, now that even the miltary is so damn PC & bureaucraticaly hog-tied, they have to call the White House (telecon with Joint Chiefs) to get OK just to take a shit. Commanders will be lucky to get some shots off in self-defense.

[New_Meat]

Ya, the bubbleheads were always most worried about the Kilos.  Sang-o a lot noisier, but I'd hate to be under Holder's version of RoE, nor be the TF Judge trying to interpret the mess that RoE have to be today in the Yellow Sea.

and yep, Cheshire cat smiles with GW on the bottom or seriously damaged.

- Ned

[CitizenPete]

So I really wonder which is worse for the average peasant...

...the provocation of a war mongering MIC floating in a nuclear class aircraft carrier group (for an "already scheduled" exercise) to provoke the North and thumb their nose at China OR Hillary swinging her balls into the situation.

Ladies and gentlement I present your US government and MIC in action:

Lusitania  http://www.gwpda.org/naval/lusika04.htm

Gulf of Tonkin  http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=K2Wl2M4yLkY

USS Liberty  http://www.gtr5.com/

Northwoods Document https://docs.google.com/viewer?url=http://www.gwu.edu/~nsarchiv/news/20010430/doc1.pdf

Downing Street Memo: http://downingstreetmemo.com/memos.html

Chomsky on US Global Policy: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=tyU-IAusdNY   (somewhat difficult to understand in parts).

Finally a reach for those sheople amongst us PTech: http://www.youtube.com/user/corbettreport#p/a/u/2/-bQA0SKwa7Q and a 9/11 "Conspiracy Theory" : http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=CDsW4DyyZvU

Peace

The next big WikiLeaks Dump: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=dQQaNv7wBZY  (My guess is that they will reveal that the US has perpetuated the myth of CIAeda and Osama Bin dead-for-years Laden.)

[cosmictrainwreck]

well, re next leaks...one can only hope..... Love how all the talking heads and experts jsut massage that word "damaging" HA! Fuckin'-A. Sure as hell beter be damaging: damaging to your BULLSHIT, LYING, COWARDLY, DECEPTIVE and HOMICIDAL facades, you cocksuckers. 

[ibjamming]

Yup...more dirty secrets will be revealed.  Maybe people will become outraged at how governments work and we'll get some REAL change next election?  Do you think people will FINALLY stop going with the two parties and elect REAL people?

[MOAB]

In particular, the United States is sending a message to China to rein in North Korea.

Wrong. The US is sending a message to China that they can start a war on China's doorstep very easily. It is Chinas problem to try and stop their "buffer" country (NK) from reacting to US provocation. Once the US tease out an overly agressive response from the threatened chiwawa that is NK, the US use it as justification to escalate tension in the region which was ALWAYS AIMED AT CHINA.

Check this, at gata's site:

http://www.gata.org/node/9335

The guy says it straight out - from the bloomberg article: "The U.S. has to resolve its "twin deficits" in the government budget and the current account, Xia was quoted as saying. Three ways that may help the U.S. achieve that target include reducing military expenses, selling part of its gold reserves, and relaxing some export limits on technology, he said."

Jim Rickards also laid it out. He said on kingworldnews that the tension is all about china not having the gold in proportion to their economy/power. Sorry havent got the exact interview link but theyre archived.

So the chinese are saying we will accept gold or military technology in exchange for our reserves of US bonds. But until then china will just keep their "detonation switch" cause its more valuable to them to retain than to cash out at a time that suits the US. After all if China takes Bernankes offer to sell their treasury holdings when he fires-up his printing presses, they cant take those dollars to market and buy gold. Its just not available.

The chinese sub which "popped up" next to USS kittyhawk during wargames doesnt look so innocent all of a sudden. The chinese were sending a message to the US that for all the talk of US subs being able to hear a pippie fart, they (the chinese) know better. Nice way to make a point too.

The US is just doing the same old saber rattling crap they always pull. But its a pretty big game of chicken this time given the domestic tensions within all countries involved.

[walcott]

nuke the living crap out of NK and start over.

That would be a God send.

[Rodent Freikorps]

What would China do with more cheap labor?

War brides though...

North Korean males hardest hit.

[ThisIsBob]

What  is South Korea doing lobbing shells into North Korean territorial waters particularly after they were warned not to.

Here, try this:  Stand offshore the Eastern seaboard and shoot a few across the dotted line into US territoral waters toward the mainland.

What do you think would have happened had Castro fired a few into nearby US territorial waters in the Straits of Florida?

Stupid fucks.

[Madhouse]

Just a few comments into this subject and I already see idiots speaking of the nuclear war as being winnable. I really have to ask if you are a) 12 years old, b) a C school freshman or c) simply a fucking moron. Get off and STFU.

[New_Meat]

... d) Econ PhD.

[BrosMacManus]

deleted