The Empire Should Be Placed On Suicide Watch

Tyler Durden's picture

Via The Saker,

In all the political drama taking place in the USA as a result of the attempted color revolution against Trump, the bigger picture sometimes gets forgotten. And yet, this bigger picture is quite amazing, because if we look at it we will see irrefutable signs that the Empire in engaged in some bizarre slow motion of seppuku and the only mystery left is who, or what, will serve as the Empire’s kaishakunin (assuming there will be one).

I would even argue that the Empire is pursuing a full-spectrum policy of self-destruction on several distinct levels, with each level contributing the overall sum total suicide. And when I refer to self-destructive behavior I don’t mean long-term issues such as the non-sustainability of the capitalist economic model or the social consequences of a society which not only is unable to differentiate right from wrong, but which now decrees that deviant behavior is healthy and normal. These are what I call “long term walls” into which we will, inevitably, crash, but which are comparatively further away than some “immediate walls”. Let me list a few of these:

Political suicide: the Neocons’ refusal to accept the election of Donald Trump has resulted in a massive campaign to de-legitimize him. What the Neocons clearly fail to see, or don’t care about, is that by de-legitimizing Trump they are also de-legitimizing the entire political process which brought Trump to power and upon which the United States are built as a society. As a direct result from this campaign, not only are millions of Americans becoming disgusted with the political system they were indoctrinated to believe in, but internationally the notion of “American democracy” is becoming a sad joke.

And just to make things worse, the US corporate media is finally showing its true face and now unapologetically shows the entire world that not only is it not in any way “fair” or “objective”, but that it is a 100% prostituted propaganda machine which faithfully serves the interests of the US “deep state”.

A key element of the quasi constant brainwashing of the average American has always been the regular holding of elections. Nevermind that, at least until now, the outcome of these elections made very little difference inside the USA and non at all outside, the goal was never to consult the people – the goal has always been to give the illusion of democracy and people power. Now that the Democrats say that the Russians rigged the elections and the Republicans say that it was the Democrats and their millions of dead voters who tried stealing it, it become rather obvious that these elections were always a joke, a pseudo-democratic “liturgy”, a brainwashing ritual – you name it – but never about anything real.

The emergence of the concept of 1% can be “credited” to the Obama Administration, since it was during Obama that the entire “Occupy Wall Street” movement took off, but the ultimate unmasking of the viciously evil true face of that 1% must be credited to Hillary with her truly historical confession in which she openly declared that those who oppose her are a “basket of deplorables”. We already knew, thanks to Victoria Nuland, what the AngloZionist leaders thought of the people of Europe, now we know what they think of the people of the USA: exactly the same thing.

The bottom line is this: I don’t think that the moral authority and political credibility of the USA have ever been lower than today. Decades of propaganda by Hollywood and the official US propaganda machine have now collapsed and nobody buys that counter-factual nonsense anymore.

Foreign policy suicide: let’s see what options there are to choose from. The Neocons want a war with Russia which the Trump people don’t. The Trump people, however, want, well maybe not a war, although that option is very much on the table, but at least a very serious confrontation with China, North Korea or Iran, and about half of them would also like some kind of confrontation with Russia. There is absolutely nobody, at least at the top, who would dare to suggest that a confrontation or, even worse, a war with China, Iran, North Korea or Russia would be a disaster, a calamity for the USA. In fact, serious people with impressive credentials and a lot of gravitas are discussing these possibilities as if they were real, as it the USA could in some sense prevail. This is laughable. Well, no, it it not. But it would be if it wasn’t so frightening and depressing. The truth is very, very different.

[Sidebar: While it is probably not impossible for the United States to prevail, in purely military terms, against the DPRK in a war, the potential risks are nothing short of immense. And I don’t mean the risk posed by the North Korean nukes which, apparently, is also quite real. I mean the risk of starting a war against a country which has Seoul within conventional artillery range, an active duty army of well over one million people and 180’000 special forces operators. Let us assume for a second that the DPRK has no air force and no navy and an army composed of only 1M+ soldiers, 21k+ artillery pieces and 180k special forces. How do you propose to deal with that threat? If you have an easy, obvious solution, you have watched too many Hollywood movies. You probably also don’t understand the terrain.]

But yes, the DPRK also has major wseaknesses and I cannot exclude that the North Korean armed forces would rapidly collapse under a sustained attack by the US and the ROK. I did not say that I believe that this would happen, only that I don’t exclude it. Should that happen, the US might well prevail relatively rapidly, at least in purely military terms. However, please keep in mind that any military operation has to serve a political goal and, in that sense, I cannot imagine any scenario under which the USA would walk away from a war against the DPRK with anything remotely resembling a real “victory”. There is a paraphrase of something Ho Chi Minh allegedly told to the French in the 1940s which I really like. It goes like this:” we kill some of you, you kill a lot of us, and then we win”. That is how a war with the DPRK would probably play out. I call this the “American curse”: Americans are very good at killing people, but they are not good at winning wars. Still, in the case of the DPRK there is at least a possibility of a military victory, even if at a potentially huge cost. With Iran, Russia or China there is no such possibility at all: a war with any of them would be a guaranteed disaster (I wrote about a war in Iran here and about a war with Russia too many times to count). So why is it that even though out of the 4 possible wars, one is a potential disaster and the 3 others are a guaranteed disaster, why is it that these are discussed as if they were potential options?!

The reason for that can be found in the unique mix of crass ignorance and political cowardice of the entire US political class. First, a lot (most?) of US politicians believe in their own silly propaganda about the US armed forces being “the best” in “the world” (no evidence needed!). But even those who are smart enough to realize that this is a load of baloney which nobody outside the USA still takes seriously, they know that saying that publicly is political suicide. So they pretend, go along, and keep on repetitively spewing the patriotic mantra about “rah, rah, USA, USA, ‘Merica number one, we are the best” etc. Some figure that since the USA spends more on aggression that the rest of the planet combined, that must mean that the US armed forces must be “better” (whatever that means). To the birthplace of “bigger is better” the answer is self-evident. It is also completely wrong.

Eventually, something crazy inevitably happens. Like in Syria were the State Department had one policy, the Pentagon another and the CIA yet another one. The resulting cognitive dissonance is removed by engaging in classical doublethink: “yes, we screwed up over and over, but we are still the best”. Ironically, that kind of mindset is at the core of the American inability to learn from past mistakes. If the choice is between an honest evaluation of past operations and political expediency, the latter always prevails (at least amongst civilians, US servicemen are often far more capable of self-critical evaluation, especially in ranks up to Colonel and below, the problem here is that civilians and generals rarely listen to them).

The result is total chaos: the US foreign policy is wholly dependent on the US ability to threaten the use of military force, but the harsh reality is that every country out there which dared to defy Uncle Sam did that only after coming to the conclusion that the US did not have the means to crush it militarily. In other words, only the weak, which are already de-facto US colonies, fear the USA. Or, put differently, the only countries who dare to defy Uncle Sam are the strong ones (that was all quite predictable, but US politicians don’t know about Hegel or dialectics). And just to make it worse, there is no real US foreign policy. What there is is only the sum vector of the different foreign policies desired by various more or less covert “deep state” actors, agencies and individuals. That resulting “sum vector” is inevitably short-term, focuses on a quickfix approach, and unable to take into account any complexity.

As for the US “diplomacy” it simply doesn’t exist. You don’t need diplomats to deliver demands, bribes, ultimatums and threats. You don’t need educated people. Nor do you need people with any understanding of the “other”. All you need is one arrogant self-enamored bully and one interpreter (since US diplomats don’t speak the local languages either. And why would they?). We saw the most compelling evidence of the total rigor mortis of the US diplomatic corps when 51 US “diplomats” demanded that Obama bomb Syria. The rest of the world could just observe in amazement, sadness, bewilderment and total disgust.

The bottom line is this: there is no “US diplomacy”. The USA have simply let that entire field atrophy to the point were it ceased to exist. When so many baffled observers try to understand what the US policy in the Ukraine or Syria is, they are making a mistaken assumption – that there is a US foreign policy to being with. I would argue that the US diplomacy slowly and quietly passed away, sometime after James Baker (the last real US diplomat, and a brilliant one at that).

Military suicide: the US military was never a very impressive one, certainly not when compared to the British, Russian or German ones. But it did have a couple of very strong points including the ability to produce a lot of technical innovations which made it possible to produce new, sometimes quite revolutionary, weapons. And if the US track record on ground operations was rather modest, the US did prove to be a most capable adversary in naval and aerial warfare. I don’t think that it can be denied that for most of the years following WWII the USA had the most powerful and sophisticated navy and airforce in the world. Then, gradually, things started getting worse and worse as the costs of the very expensive ships and aircraft shot through the roof while the quality of the produced systems appeared to be gradually degrading. Weapons systems which looked nothing short of awesome in the lab and test grounds proved to be almost useless once they to to their end user on the battlefield. What happened? How did a country which produced the UH-1 Huey or the F-16 suddenly start producing Apaches and F-35s?! The explanation is painfully simple: corruption.

Not only did the US military industrial complex bloat beyond any reasonable size, it also cloaked itself in so many layers of secrecy that massive corruption became inevitable. And when I speak of “massive corruption” I am not talking about millions but billions or even trillions. How? Simple – the Pentagon claimed did not have the accounting tools needed to properly account for the missing money and that the money was therefore not really “missing”. Another trick – no bid contracts. Or contracts which cover all the private contractor’s costs, no matter how high or ridiculous. Desert Storm was a bonanza for the MIC, as was 9/11 and the GWOT. Billions of dollars got printed out of thin air, distributed (mostly under the cover of national security), hidden (secrecy) and stolen (by everybody in this entire food chain). The feeding frenzy was so extreme that one of my teachers as SAIS admitted, off the record of course, that he had never seen a weapons system he did not like or which he did not want to purchase. This man, whom I shall not name, was a former director of the US Arms Control and Disarmament Agency. Yes, you read that right. He was in charge of DIS-armament. You can imagine what the folks in charge of armament (no “dis) were thinking…

With the stratospheric rise of corruption, the kind of US general which had to be promoted went from fighting men who remembered Vietnam (where they often lost family members, relatives and friends) to ass-kissing little chickenshits” like David Petraeus. In less than half a century US generals went from combat men, to managers, to politicians. And it is against this lackluster background that a rather unimpressive personality like General James Mattis can appear, at least to some, like a good candidate for Secretary of Defense.

Bottom line: the US armed forces are fantastically expensive and yet not particularly well-trained, well-equipped or well-commanded. And while they still are much more capable than the many European militaries (which are a joke), they are most definitely not the kind of armed forces needed to impose and maintain a world hegemony. The good news for the USA is that the US armed forces are more than adequate to defend the USA against any hypothetical attack. But as the backbone of the Empire – they are close to useless.

I could list many more types of suicides including an economic suicide, a social suicide, an educational suicide, a cultural suicide and, of course, a moral suicide. But others have already done that elsewhere, and much better than I could ever do myself. So all I will add here is one form of suicide which I believe the AngloZionist Empire has in common with the EU: a

Suicide by reality denial”: this is the mother and father of all the other forms of suicide – the stubborn refusal to look at reality and accept the fact that “the party is over”. When I see the grim determination of US politicians (very much including the people supporting Trump) to continue to pretend as if the US hegemony was here to stay forever, when I see how they see themselves as the leaders of the world and how they sincerely believe that they need to get involved in every conflict on the planet, I can only come to the conclusion that the inevitable collapse will be painful. To be fair, Trump himself clearly has moments of lucidity about this, for example when he recently declared to Congress

Free nations are the best vehicle for expressing the will of the people — and America respects the right of all nations to chart their own path. My job is not to represent the world. My job is to represent the United States of America. But we know that America is better off, when there is less conflict — not more.

These are remarkable words for which Trump truly deserves a standing ovation as they are the closest thing to a formal admission that the United States have given up on the dream of being the World Hegemon and that from now on the US President will no longer represent the interest of trans-national plutocracies but he will represent the interests of the American people. This sort of language is nothing short of revolutionary, whether Trump truly delivers on that or not. Unlike everybody else, Trump does not appear to suffer from “suicide by reality denial” syndrome, but when I look at the people around him (nevermind the prostitutes in Congress) I wonder if he will ever get to act on his personal instincts.

Trump is clearly the best man in the Trump administration, he seems to have his heart in the right place and, unlike Hillary, he is clearly aware of the fact that the US armed forces are in a terrible shape. But a good heart and common sense are not enough to deal with the Neocons and the US deep state. You also need an iron will and a total determination to crush the opposition. Alas, so far Trump has failed to show either quality. Instead, Trump is trying to show how “tough” a guy he is by declaring that he will wipe out Daesh and by giving the Pentagon 30 days to come up with a plan to do this. Alas (for Trump), there is no way to crush Daesh without working with those who already have boots on the ground: the Iranians, the Russians and the Syrians. It is really that simple. And every American general knows that. Yet everybody is merrily plowing ahead is if there was some kind of possibility for the USA to crush Daesh without establishing a partnership with Russia, Iran and Syria first (Erdogan tried that. It did him no good. Now he is working with Russia and Iran). Will the good folks at the Pentagon find the courage to tell Trump that “no, Mr President, we cannot do that alone, we need the Russians, the Iranians and the Syrians”? I very much doubt it. So, yet again, we are probably going to see a case of reality denial, maybe not a suicidal one, but a significant one nonetheless. Not good.

Who will be the Empire’s kaishakunin?

Alexander Solzhenitsyn used to say that all states can be placed on a continuum which ranges from states whose authority is based on their power to states whose power is based on their authority. I think that we can agree that the authority of the USA is pretty close to zero. As for their power, it is still very substantial, but not sufficient to maintain the Empire. It is, however, more than adequate to protect the interests of the United States as a country provided the United States accept that they simply don’t have the means to remain a world hegemon.

If the Neocons succeed in their attempt to overthrow or, failing that, at paralyzing Trump, then the Empire will have the choice between an endless horror or a horrible end. Since the Neocons don’t really need a war with the DPRK, which they don’t like, but which does not elicit the kind of blind hatred Iran does, my guess is that Iran will be their number one target. Should the AngloZionists succeed in triggering a war between Iran and the Empire, then Iran will end up being the Empire’s kaishakunin. If the crazies fail in their manic attempts at triggering a major war, then the Empire will probably collapse under the pressure of the internal contradictions of the US society. Finally, if Trump and the American patriots who do not want to sacrifice their country for the sake of the Empire succeed in “draining the DC swamp” and finally crack-down hard on the Neocons then a gradual transition from Empire to major power is still possible. But the clock is running out fast.

Comment viewing options

Select your preferred way to display the comments and click "Save settings" to activate your changes.
Escapeclaws's picture

The Neocons are the implacable enemy of mankind. Glad that Saker seems to realize this. I wonder if Donald Trump does.


eforce's picture

Iran has been preparing for decades, it would be Vietnam 2.0 imo except with much higher US casulties.

Escrava Isaura's picture

But Trump is not a neocon. He’s not going to attack another nation.

Actually, he’s gonna end attacking other nations, again, because he’s like Kennedy, right?


Escrava Isaura's picture

Do you think that matters for the deep state? Actually, it complements the deep state, because it takes two to tango.

You can’t have a Republic when its citizens are ignorant.

Immorality, no less than morality, has at all times found support in religion.

Sigmund Freud.


Dame Ednas Possum's picture

Next you'll be quoting John Podesta and Gary Glitter to support your views. 

Escrava Isaura's picture

I rarely, I mean, rarely quote politicians, because they are all opportunists, meaning, talk from both sides of their mouth, because there’s always a hidden agenda that takes forever, if ever, for the public to find out. Below is a good example.

But nice try with your agenda, not that comes as a surprise.

Donald Trump presidential campaign, 2000 

Trump focused his campaign on the issues of fair trade, eliminating the national debt, and achieving universal healthcare as outlined in the campaign companion piece The America We Deserve, released in January 2000. He named media proprietor Oprah Winfrey as his ideal running mate and said he would instantly marry his girlfriend, Melania Knauss, to make her First Lady. Critics questioned the seriousness of Trump's campaign and speculated that it was a tactic to strengthen his brand and sell books.,_2000 


flicker life's picture
flicker life (not verified) Escrava Isaura Mar 13, 2017 5:29 AM

I'm making over $7k a month working part time. I kept hearing other people tell me how much money they can make online so I decided to look into it. Well, it was all true and has totally changed my life. This is what I do...

Zorba's idea's picture

You have constructed quite an arrogant meme to presume to speak from a historical perspective of Trump's presidency all in 50 days. Step right down! Can you name that tune in two notes. Why yes, of course as long as you and your meme are free to believe your nonsense.

Zorba's idea's picture

Sigmund was a cocaine addict...that would please the deep state narc dealers

SWRichmond's picture

The empire builders should just go ahead and suicide.  I'll watch.

Chris Dakota's picture
Chris Dakota (not verified) Escrava Isaura Mar 13, 2017 7:19 AM

Both parties have planned to disolve the country.

This is obvious to any thinking person.

lakecity55's picture

McCain took Barry's dick out of his mouth long enough to say something stupid?


JB Say's picture

Its in his ass now he'll never shut up

doctor10's picture

Donald Trump is going to do whatever DC tells him to.

Lea's picture

I sure hope he is NOT like Kennedy, who gleefully waged overt or covert wars against Cuba, Laos, and Vietnam, overthrew Diem and just loved the Cold War.

"Given his belief in the global struggle between east and west, his acceptance of the domino theory, his conviction that Vietnam was the testing ground for combatting 'wars of national liberation,' his often zealous committment to counterinsurgency, and his determination to never appear soft on communism, Jack might well have been compelled, as conditions worsened, to commit more American troops to Vietnam. It is clear that his harsh public rhetoric made disengagement more difficult." (Thomas Reeves, A Question of Character, p. 411)

No more unhinged dudes like that at the head of the USA, for Heaven's sake!

American Gorbachev's picture

the escalations in syria and yemen suggest many questions

is DT trying to give the mic/neocons a big chunk of change $$$ and a little bit of action to placate and preoccupy them?

or is it just the beginnings of a globe-spanning belligerence to include the arctic circle, eastern europe, south china sea ?

remember, DT is a man of 'action' and circumstances are quickly evolving to emasculate him on the domestic policy fronts, which leaves him with the constitutionally-mandated wide latitude in foreign policy

logicalman's picture

Big difference is that Vietnam couldn't block the supply of oil to the West.

I think the outcome would have been very different if that had been the case.

lakecity55's picture

I have been on the Iranian border. I have flown over Iran. I do not think the USSA wants to fight a ground war in that country.

The USSA would lose.

US Foreign Policy should make it clear to Iran we are pulling back and will not attempt to overthrow their government again. Right now, the policy is being driven for the benefit of Israel. We really have no dog in that fight, other than assuring with every other nation that the seaways remain open.

Both nations could gain by cutting down the rockets they shoot off for effects. Trade is more important. Increasing everyone's standard of living if they want to work for it is better.


Oldrepublic's picture

I like the Iranians, have been there twice when the Shah was in power.Would like to visit it now but impossible due to my passport.

War with Iran would be for the US  like Suez was in 1956 for the UK which ended  British world power

East Indian's picture

You dont need a war with Iran to finish the American empire; participating in the ongoing Syrian dismemberment is enough. 

lakecity55's picture

Revoke their US passports and make them flee back to Zion.


Jubal Early's picture


NAME THE FUCKING JEWS!  You and Saker both.  Neocons were never anything approaching conservative and the talmudic bolshevics were never anything approaching communists.  Both are totalitarian zionist-racial-supremecist groups who relish in the murder of stupid goyim.

This is a typical Saker piece and it is just a lot of blather because he either cannot see or cannot say the truth.  At least we can e thankful he didn't start spewing out his anti-German "Nazi" propaganda.

Escapeclaws's picture


Are all Jews Neocons? It's the Neocons that are the problem. There are good Jews and bad Jews.

Be thankful that "Neocon" has become a dirty word, like "cunt".

detached.amusement's picture

not quite - there's uninformed ones, and there's bad ones

doctor10's picture

"Idiocracy" in action.

The USA is remarkably heterogenous. Little or no effort to force assimilation over the last 30 years. Full"assimilation" of foreigners to American ideals and beliefs is the last thing the Neocon's overlords-the people who lent them the money to make the mess of the world around us-want to have happen.

Constitutional Law, thought and behavior has been their only historical restraint. The fewer aware of those resources going forward, the less impediment to their global agenda.

Escapeclaws's picture

It would be great if all those immigrating to America would assimilate to American culture. I have hope for Latin Americans because they are already close in culture to Americans, as were the various Europeans groups who came to America. I have known Mexicans since I was a kid and love them and their culture. Of course there are problems with the gangs and drug dealers. They should be deported and held in jail before deportation. In general, homogeneous cultures are more livable and peaceful. Europe has become a hopeless mess with a dismal future. Trump is really a beacon of hope for America to return to its roots IMO. I don't give a damn what the entire rest of my family thinks about him.

detached.amusement's picture

I think you mean "the appearance of Constitutional Law," because in reality that went the way of the dodo ~157 years ago.

Killdo's picture

it's even worse in Canada - it feels like a refugee camp - many people from all poor countries around the world but they don't really mix. When I got my citizenship - I was the only white person (apart from one Russian )  - the other 150 or so were mostly pakistanis and Arabs. This was years ago - I am pretty sure it's even worse now. 

that's what they want to achieve in EU also - social cohesion is the biggest enemy of Klepto-Psychopaths  - they want every country to be like the US where everyone is scared of everyone else and nobody can unite to challenge the psychopaths in charge. Also when you fear things - the 'fuck-it' factor kicks in so you spend more because you are more compulsive. 

marketing is based on that too - they work to create what 's called Panoramic Fear in marketing: create fear of everythign so to create more impulsive shopping. How that fear affects the country is something they don't give a fuck about. All teh MBAs care about is their bonuses

teslaberry's picture

the whole article is just typical anti-establishment wishful thinking. 


the empire is evolving . it's 70 years, so it's aging into itself. this may not be its most graceful moment but this empire is no where near its end. 


the west dominance of the world just got started 3 hundred years ago. it only developed in earnest 200 years ago. and was only firmly established and born into fruition 100 years ago with world war 1 ending the ottoman empire and laying waste to what was left of the czars and the internal suicide of the chinese empires. 


the west has at least 100 good years of empire left in it. and after that another 200 years of some pretty painful death throes. 


as for an oncoming contractionary period following the last 40 years of excesss.......yea, there's probably going to be some painful speedbumps. is this time really different?

there's still a bull market in bonds and ultra hyper inflation of food stuffs and gasoline has not yet even begun to emerge from any perceptible corner of the empires choke points. 


not only that, but there's so much slack dead weight in the empire that a mere 'correctionary period ' of 20 years or less would be all that would be necessary to burn off the dead weight of malinvestment and corruption. 


just about every empire has its speedbumps and infections. the end doesn't come swiftly but by conquest. mutually assured destruction has taken that option off the table . that is the ONLY reason this time IS DIFFERENT . and the world is a safer place for it. 


bitch all you want about fukushima and how milliosn of people will die years earlier because of it. but it's pernicious effect will not suddently end japan, let alone the greater world around us. so too, do terrible and persistenly rotten sources of destruction possess a slowly deteriorating influence upon global empire . it is not as fast as the tone of your article suggests you hope it is........

Sandmann's picture

 the end doesn't come swiftly but by conquest,........


British Empire folded through legislative acts in Westminster Parliament

Soviet Empire folded through phased withdrawal of Soviet troops after 1990 from Central Europe

Ottoman Empire was corroding throughout 19th Century as was Hapsburg Empire which is why Berlin Conference 1878 was so important

Victor999's picture

Primarily due to advanced transport and communications technology, the world is changing much more rapidly than in the past.  And corruption is eating away at an accelerated pace.  Many empires do have relatively short lives, so don't get too comfortable.  The Eurasian continent is in the rapid process of integration.  Once that reaches critical mass within the next decade or so, the end for the American Empire will come much more quickly as the major trading countries of the world move from an American sea-dominated trade routes to overland trade routes from London to Vladivostok and Beijing.  The Russians and Chinese are already preparing for a financial and monetary system independent of the petrodollar. And the US, like many empires before it will soon, under neocon leadership, overextend itself militarily (if it has not already done so).


Your optimism aver the American Empire is unrealistic.

teslaberry's picture

no my optimism is in the corporatist western empire that has now infested all of south america . africa is doomed to irrelevance and satrapy. india is mostly as well. 


americas empire is just there to reinforce the western corporatist cabal. 

Zorba's idea's picture

Well, Many Japanese are concerned about their 54 nuclear reactors that are mostly idle yet stil ferile. 

hoist the bs flag's picture

"100 good years of empire left in it."...really now?

...How did you go bankrupt..."It occurs first very slowly, then all at once." 

Sandmann's picture

Considering North Korea is 35 miles from Seoul and 40% South Korean population lives around Seoul and there is only a Ceasefire in force, the US should tread carefully in a country where the President was just removed.

It would not look good for the US to be using nuclear weapons on another Asian country. It would also not work if North Korean ground forces were alrewady near Seoul.

Destroying South Korea might cause economic dislocation and embroil US in long-term Asian conflict.

After all the only reason the EU was created was the Korean War in 1950 when Truman needed troops from Europe and had to re-arm 12 German Divisions against French opposition. This is why the Pleven and Schumann Plan were developed to give France veto control over German Armed Forces and why the Messina Conference led to the Treaty of Rome 60 years ago with UK leaving bases in Germany to reassure France.

Korea was always tied to events in postwar Europe

Victor999's picture

You are an idiot.  Germany did not participate in the Korean War - their army had been decommissioned after WWII.  And only a few European countries (France, Belgium, Luxembourg, the Netherlands, and Greece) took part, contributing only battalion sized units, certainly not divisions.  12 German divisions - I think not! 


I don't know where you get your history, but I strongly suggest you refrain from posting here unless you wish to embarrass yourself.

Innominate's picture

US troops were moved FROM Germany. 12 German divisions had to be raised to maintain defence of Europe from the Soveits. Read more carefully.

Long memory man's picture

Hi there please do not forget that we british had units fighting in the Korean War also.


Sandmann's picture

Germany had no Army in 1950. Truman wanted a German Army so US troops could be moved from Europe - WHICH IS WHAT I WROTE - Acheson called the Project "Package".

I think Victor999 you shpuld learn to read.........btw you forgot the UK and Turkey in Korea.

Sandmann's picture

In 1950, a few weeks after the outbreak of the Korean War, the United States ordered France to accept the rapid rearmament of the Federal Republic of Germany (FRG), because they were increasingly afraid that the Soviet Union, which had had nuclear capability since late 1949, would launch an offensive military campaign in Western Europe. At the same time, the French army was embroiled in Indo-China, and British units were involved in Malaysia. The 14 Western divisions based in Europe did not seem up to the task of taking on over 180 communist divisions. The West German Chancellor, Konrad Adenauer, officially called for the right to raise an armed force capable of protecting the country from the threat posed by the East German ‘People’s Police’. The situation was far from simple. In 1950, the FRG had neither army, Ministry of Defence nor, of course, a general staff. It still had no Ministry of Foreign Affairs, yet its geographical position at the heart of Europe, as well as the fact that its eastern part had been annexed, meant that it was sure to be the literal battleground of any East–West conflict. 


The member states of the North Atlantic Treaty Organisation (NATO) were also in favour of German rearmament, with the notable exceptions of the French and Belgian Governments. The bulk of public opinion, too, especially in France, did not seem ready to accept a new German army, as memories of the Second World War and of German occupation were still too painful.

keep the bastards honest's picture

Yes South Korea impeached the US friendly  President for one who is not. People were pleased.

 North  Korea and Iran were named as US targets for atack after the Twin Towers antic.  NOrth Korea is desperately poor and it is horrendous what it has gone thru to make itself too nasty to attack.  Iran,  well  need I bring up Madelaine Albrights  'It was worth it', 500,000 kiddies dead due to sanctions by the US.

sarz's picture

Albright's dead worth-it kids were in Iraq, not Iran. 

Duc888's picture



So much bullshit about NK, which is zero threat to USA, even California or Hawaii. NK is a little toy, like a rattle box for 
China to let loose and make a bit of noise when they get miffed at Uncle Sham. 

shamus001's picture

But with a little luck, maybe NK can reach Kalifornia, and wipe the southern half off the map, along with pelosi and the rest of the headcases.

Immigration problem corrected

Hollywood loones corrected

Anti Constitutional Senators and Congressman corrected

If only....

lakecity55's picture

(NSA SGT operator to CO:)

"Sir, it appears hundreds of thousands of Americans have emailed California target co-ordinates to N Korea."

Logan 5's picture
Logan 5 (not verified) Mar 13, 2017 1:47 AM

Jared Kushner wanta a war with Iran, NOT Trump supporters.

Victor999's picture

Interesting that you said "not Trump supporters" rather than "not Trump".

quax's picture

The illustration that accompanied this article on the front page is one of the most Anti-American drawings I've seen for a while (have to go all the way back to the cold war to conjure up similar shit).