North Korea

N. Korea

The U.S. is prepared to launch a preemptive strike with conventional weapons against North Korea should officials become convinced that North Korea is about to follow through with a nuclear weapons test.  North Korea has warned that a “big event” is near, and U.S. officials say signs point to a nuclear test that could come as early as this weekend.  The intelligence said that the U.S. has positioned two destroyers capable of shooting Tomahawk cruise missiles in the region, one just 300 miles from the North Korean nuclear test site.

American heavy bombers are also positioned in Guam to attack North Korea should it be necessary, and earlier this week, the Pentagon announced that the USS Carl Vinson aircraft carrier strike group was being diverted to the area.

The U.S. strike could include missiles and bombs, cyber and special operations on the ground.

The danger of such an attack by the U.S. is that it could provoke the volatile and unpredictable North Korean regime to launch its own blistering attack on its southern neighbor.

“The leadership in North Korea has shown absolutely no sign or interest in diplomacy or dialogue with any of the countries involved in this issue,” Victor Cha, the Korea Chair at the Center for Strategic and International Studies told NBC News Thursday.

On Wednesday, North Korea said it would “hit the U.S. first” with a nuclear weapon should there be any signs of U.S. strikes.

On Thursday, North Korea warned of a “merciless retaliatory strike” should the U.S. take any action.

“By relentlessly bringing in a number of strategic nuclear assets to the Korean peninsula, the U.S. is gravely threatening the peace and safety and driving the situation to the brink of a nuclear war,” said North Korea’s statement.

North Korea is not believed to have a deliverable long-range nuclear weapon, according to U.S. experts, nor does it yet possess an intercontinental missile.

South Korea’s top diplomat said today that the U.S. would consult with Seoul before taking any serious measures. “U.S. officials, mindful of such concerns here, repeatedly reaffirmed that (the U.S.) will closely discuss with South Korea its North Korea-related measures,” Foreign Minister Yun Byung-se told a special parliamentary meeting. “In fact, the U.S. is working to reassure us that it will not, just in case that we might hold such concerns.”

“Two things are coming together this weekend,” said retired Adm. James Stavridis, former commander of NATO and an NBC analyst. “One is the distinct possibility of a sixth North Korean nuclear weapons detonation and the other is an American carrier strike group, a great deal of firepower headed right at the Korean Peninsula.”

“It’s high stakes,” a senior intelligence official directly involved in the planning told NBC News. “We are trying to communicate our level of concern and the existence of many military options to dissuade the North first.”

“It’s a feat that we’ve never achieved before but there is a new sense of resolve here,” the official said, referring to the White House.

The threat of a preemptive strike comes on the same day the U.S. announced the use of its MOAB — or Mother of All Bombs — in Afghanistan, attacking underground facilities, and on the heels of U.S. missile strikes on a Syrian airbase last week, a strike that took place while President Trump was meeting with Chinese President Xi Jinping at Mar-a-Lago.

Multiple government officials familiar with the situation say President Trump has talked to Chinese president Xi twice about North Korea since their Florida summit.

China has since sent its top nuclear negotiators to Pyongyang to communicate the gravity of the situation to the North, officials say. On Wednesday, President Xi called for a peaceful resolution to the escalating tensions.


Source: Link>>>

  • Three components:

    Did they have the gas that they said they did not?

    Did they use the gas?

    How as it delivered?

    If it was delivered by any other means, I don’t think it changes anything, if the other things are true.

    Assad just said, “I didn’t do it.” Should he believed? Is he related to the Minister of Information from the Iraq War? So how credible is Assad?

    Does he have a history of doing bad things?

    And if it wasn’t Assad’s doing and wasn’t Assad’s chemicals, why did he wait a week to come up with that defense?

    Perhaps a distinction without a difference.

    • LM

      I don’t know who and how.

      Assad said the gassing never happened. He is a liar so nothing he says can be trusted. The whole world sees the video and what the survivors and witnesses say. The Russians are notorious liars so nothing they say can be trusted.

      I’m inclined to believe the analysis of the MIT expert Postol regarding the local, ground-level delivery method (does not address who and why). If the U.S. has satellite proof of an airborne delivery, they can show it, maybe ID the type of aircraft and disprove Postol, or maybe ground-based observation and proof of air-drop. I’m “open minded”. Open is required for both entry and exit of stuff.

      I have come to accept that our government people lie when it wants to and thinks it can get away with it. They lie often, even under oath…..every administration for a century or more:

      The Gulf of Tonkin incident…… leading to the Vietnam Wall with 58,000 names. I was in the theater at the time and was gung-ho as LBJ sent in the troops, wishing I was not in Saigon just to peddle condensed milk to the Vietnamese but in a Marine uniform fighting off the commie take over of Asia. But LBJ was a lying sonofabitch and McNamara accomplice. Similar successive Administrations on a variety of subjects. Lying sonsofbitches abound, on many issues. Walter Cronkite broadcasting from the scene that we lost the Tet Offensive when the opposite was the case as N.Vietnam regulars were beaten badly….also by their own account (by 1968 Tet I was transfered out and was living in Panama watching it on the TV news, “that’s the way it was”). Etc.

      I don’t know who and how the Syria gas attack was carried out. Maybe Julian Asange can find out (amazing he has not been rubbed out by now).

  • PT

    “2017 U.S. reports on Syrian chemical weapons incidents show that the reports were not vetted by any experienced intelligence officials. In other words, these were political rather than fact-based reports.”

    The key question is not how it was delivered (by ground or by air) but who supplied the poisonous gas, since Obama and Susan Rice guaranteed that all of it was removed by the Russians. Assad said today that the attack was phony and the children were acting. Does this “expert” know more about missiles and chemical weapons than our military/intelligence? I think that all of them are lying. -PT