| Author | Message | ||
     Mark & Bev Preston (Markp) Member Username: Markp Post Number: 153 Registered: 02-2002 |
Found a good perspective on North Korea. The global chess game with some interesting outcomes. North Korea is China's pit bull on a leash. Problem is, sometimes they bite the owner. Beijing plans to use North Korea to help drive the US out of the Pacific BrookesNews.Com ^ | 13 March 2003 | Peter Zhang http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/news/863262/posts - Mark | ||
| Paul Grant (Paul_grant) New Member Username: Paul_grant Post Number: 13 Registered: 03-2003 |
Mark, Are you trying to run me ragged by employing a multi-front debate!  I just logged on. I'll check your link a little later but its sounds like it'll be interesting. Cheers, Paul | ||
| Todd W. McLain (Ganryu) Member Username: Ganryu Post Number: 143 Registered: 10-2002 |
Frankly, I think his the gentleman's theory is a bit far fetched. To say that the U.S. would be pushed out of Asia is pretty far fetched (especially out of Japan), but is he forgetting about the U.S. territories such as Saipan and Guam? He might want to look at the B-52 and B-1 squadrons that just moved to Anderson AFB at Guam. How about the fact that the Navy has recently re-activated their submarine base on Guam, which could be expaned from it's current contingent of 3 fast-attacks to also be the homeport for SSBNs. As for pushing the U.S. out of Japan, it's never going to happen. The Navy will never agree to move their only forward deployed carrier group (yes, that pesky carrier that interferes everythime the Chinese navy decides it wants to bother Taiwan) all the way back to Hawaii and the Marines will never move off of Okinawa. Realisticly, I know that it is the policy of the Japanese Ministry of Defense to keep the U.S. military as it is far cheaper to keep American forces on station then it is to build-up the JDF. Plus, it's cheaper for the U.S. since the Japanese government is footing the bill for the bases. Realisticly it's cheaper to keep a U.S. soldier/airman/marine here in Japan than it is at a stateside base. | ||
| Todd W. McLain (Ganryu) Member Username: Ganryu Post Number: 144 Registered: 10-2002 |
Also, just as some food for thought, a friend and I were recently discussing what be a viable target for a single North Korean nuclear warhead. All targets in South Korea are out. It would defeat the purpose of starting any war (land-grab). Mainland Japan is pretty much out. While the naval facility at Yokuska or Sasebo might be tempting, it would have to come as a complete sneek attack, otherwise the Navy would have already sortied it's ships. That pretty much leaves Okinawa (home-sweet-home). We figured that if they were to launch a single warhead, they could take one of the largest air bases in asia, as well as about 75% of the Marine force that's stationed here, who's main mission is to reinforce Korea should the North ever decide to cross the DMZ. While that's pretty scary, the worst part was when we started thinking what would happen after that. I think it's almost a given that the U.S. would live up to it's treaty commitments and respond in kind, reducing some (if not all) of N.K. to ash and radioactive dust. But, we also figured that China would use such an opportunity to make a grab at Taiwan, among other things. So, the big question is, would the U.S. follow it's un-official policy and protect Taiwan, thereby putting us in a shooting war with the Chinese, or, would the U.S. follow the official line and turn a blind-eye. Given the current administration, I would have to probably say yes. Hello World War III. I thought this nightmare ended with the fall of the Sofiet Union? And people think a war in Iraq would destabalize the world! Maybe, just maybe, this is why we should keep any more 2-bit dictators from getting their hands on such nasty-things. Just my .02 of the currency of your choice. | ||
| Stacey R Abend (Srafj40) New Member Username: Srafj40 Post Number: 7 Registered: 03-2003 |
Todd, A nice bit of war gaming. Isn't the Navy looking at a port in Vietnam? Stacey | ||
| Mark & Bev Preston (Markp) Member Username: Markp Post Number: 155 Registered: 02-2002 |
Todd, Look at it from the Chinese side. I'm sure this is their aim, which is why the article is not so far fetched. To actually accomplish it is another. The point of the article is who controls North Korea and why are they rattling their swords? China has a role in this even though they claim they don't. Your point of 2-bit dictators and WMD is very true. - Mark | ||
| Paul Clawson (Pnut) Member Username: Pnut Post Number: 56 Registered: 02-2003 |
China is definitely secretive. they would never claim the above as their intentions. I think China will assist in holding down North Korea simply because they don't want competition. I heard one report that North Korea could hit Alaska or California. They would have to be stupid to try though as they would be turned into the biggest pot hole in Asia. | ||
| Stacey R Abend (Srafj40) New Member Username: Srafj40 Post Number: 9 Registered: 03-2003 |
Just so everyone does not think that I am a total wack job for uttering Vietnam and a possible U.S. return. http://www.thongluan.org/EN2/NEWS/news_2001_feb-jun/01_06_12_VietnamSeesCommerci alFuture.htm Still mulling all this over. What of Australia? Japan getting nukes? Stacey | ||
| Todd W. McLain (Ganryu) Member Username: Ganryu Post Number: 148 Registered: 10-2002 |
Stacey, I don't think the Japanese would go for nuclear weapons being staged here. You should see them shit and raise a fuss everytime one of the nuclear-powered fast-attack submarines appears off the coast. The nippers (and don't nobody start flaming me for that remark, I live here, damnit!) run down to they bay and start taking water samples to make sure the bloody thing didn't leave any radiation in the water! This from the same people who feel free to dump all sorts of toxic chemicals in the water. | ||
| Stacey R Abend (Srafj40) New Member Username: Srafj40 Post Number: 11 Registered: 03-2003 |
Todd, It is Nippon after all. Stacey | ||
| Christopher Dynak (Adtoolco) Member Username: Adtoolco Post Number: 105 Registered: 08-2002 |
I swear, I get more info on D-web than any news source out there. I love this BB. | ||
| Don Wilbanks (Asphaltgypsy) New Member Username: Asphaltgypsy Post Number: 29 Registered: 06-2002 |
That was an interesting article-link Stacey. Like Christopher said, we get quite a bit of non-front page news here on DWeb! | ||
| Stacey R Abend (Srafj40) New Member Username: Srafj40 Post Number: 16 Registered: 03-2003 |
Don, You have to love Reuters and the BBC Overnight. If I recall the idea of Vietnam was a because of th Phillipines. Stacey | ||
| Mark & Bev Preston (Markp) Member Username: Markp Post Number: 162 Registered: 02-2002 |
Stacey, I think you will find this post on Vietnam interesting. South Vietnam: Worthy Ally? (General Creighton Abrams Reassessing the ARVN) thehistorynet ^ | 3-15-03 | Lewis Sorley http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/news/866256/posts "Former Viet Cong Colonel Pham Xuan An described in 1990 his immense disillusionment with what a Communist victory had meant to Vietnam. "All that talk about liberation' twenty, thirty, forty years ago," he lamented, "produced this, this impoverished, broken-down country led by a gang of cruel and paternalistic half-educated theorists." Former North Vietnamese Army Colonel Bui Tin has been equally candid about the outcome of the war, even for the victors. "It is too late for my generation," he said, "the generation of war, of victory, and betrayal. We won. We also lost." I think you will find some very insightful opinions as part of the discussion. -Mark |
