Wednesday, November 24, 2010

North Korea, if we ever needed a leader it is now….

article-1279828-09A9D5AA000005DC-219_634x369 North Korea sinks South Korean Ship  (Strike one)

article-1279828-09A9FF48000005DC-639_634x427_popup Parts of a torpedo salvaged from the Yellow Sea Evidence overwhelmingly proves North Korea fired a torpedo that sank a South Korean warship

 

koreanbombing

  North Korea fires on South Korea, (Strike 2)

DMZ_Korea_2008 kim

I have stood on the DMZ and looked at North Korean Soldiers in full battle gear, that is the way it has been since the 1950’s….

douglas-macarthur

Do you think we have a man like this in charge???????

345373.full

I hope so……

15 comments:

Sandee said...

I hope so too Sarge.

Have a terrific day. Happy Thanksgiving to you, Miss Bee, Chuck and JJ. :)

The Constitutional Insurgent said...

What exactly would you have us do? We're a bit stretched due to military adventurism of the last decade.

Hope you have a Happy Thanksgiving.

Empress Bee (of the High Sea) said...

help us all...

smiles, bee
xoxoxoxoxxoxo

Noll's Nip said...

I hope and pray for the best.

crockettlives said...

In my experience, the ROKs are not ones with which to trifle. Have a Happy Thanksgiving, Sarge.

Sarge Charlie said...

I suppose I would tell them I am really mad now, do it again and I will be really really mad, what would you do?

BTW, I take exception to your comment about military adventurism of the last decade. It seems to me that we were fighting a war on terror until it became an overseas contingency operation. Maybe in all you wisdom you should revisit 9/11/01 to remind you that our adventurism was a response to an attack equal to pearl harbor.

The Constitutional Insurgent said...

So then...you wouldn't do anything more than what is already being done? What would MacArthur do?

As for military adventurism, we were fighting a 'war on terror' only until Al Qaeda vacated Afghanistan. Now we're mired fighting Taliban who didn't attack us, and Iraqi insurgents who didn't either.

musingsofjustjon said...

>>>>As for military adventurism, we were fighting a 'war on terror' only until Al Qaeda vacated Afghanistan. Now we're mired fighting Taliban who didn't attack us, and Iraqi insurgents who didn't either.<<<<

The Taliban and the Iraqi insurgents were supporting Al Qaeda - taking out the enemies support structure is proper technique in war.

We continue to fight a war on terrorism and Al Qaeda in particular because certain countries - Pakistan in particular - refuse to do anything about the problem and refuse to allow us to take care of the problem. Why we continue to support the government of Pakistan is beyond me.

As for Korea, the entire world community has condemned them for their actions and behaviors. Frankly, it is time for someone to show them Newton's Third Law.

Of course, that is just my opinion

JJ

The Constitutional Insurgent said...

Well I would invite you to learn about the relationship between Al Qaeda and the Taliban and the motivations for why they fight.

Additionally, only AIQ [who didn't exist in Iraq prior to our invasion] can be counted as our enemy; the other Sunni insurgent groups who did ally with AQ, did so because we invaded their nation.

My original point to Sarge was, what could we do to North Korea, since the vast bulk of our conventional forces are inextricably tied down fighting two entities who didn't attack us. All the while Al Qaeda creates networks in a myriad of other nations and the NorKs conduct felony sabre rattling.

I don't know about you, but I'd like to actually fight those who attacked us, and defend against those who can.

I suppose I'm an odd sort of patriot that way.

Linda said...

No matter how you look at it, this whole thing between North and South Korea has bad written all over it - especially considering the number of military personnel that we have stationed over there already.

And as for the war in the Middle East - ask any military person who has served over there and they will tell you that the terrorist Muslims hate our country with a passion - an unreasonable passion that knows no bounds and would every possible measure to wipe us out if given the opportunity. Hence I don't think we're wrong in maintaining a military vigilance over there. At all. It stinks but they aren't ever going to leave us alone even if we ask nicely.

Amazing Gracie said...

Excellent, Linda!!! Excellent....
I'm not an optimist over this one. It's hard to fight a loony tyrant with nuke power; a religious loon with soon-to-be nukes; and dirty bombs being lobbed from anywhere.
Someone needs to do something besides holding tea and crumpet discussions.

Traveling Bells said...

This is a scary situation. And KJI is a madman, wanting to go out of power with a bang.

Big hugs, honey...

Sarge Charlie said...

If you really want to know what I would do, something like our president did to Libya when they attacked us. They have not tried that again.

The Constitutional Insurgent said...

You'll get no argument from me that the ROK has every right to respond in kind or with overwhelming force. But the similarities between NK and Libya stop right where they start.

We have the majority of 29,000 US service members within artillery range of the NK batteries. We also do not have to conventional power to project in order to stop or roll back the very likely NK invasion.

So while it makes for good internet bluster and a venting of frustration over the antics of KJI, a military response is something that can only be undertaken with the complete resourcing of our military. As we are mired fighting an enemy that didn't attack us....that's not going to be possible.

jennifer said...

My daughter takes a class in high school called International Studies. Next week, they get together with students from all over the county (also taking that class) and have a model United Nations. Oldest Daughter and her group represent South Korea. She found the news particularly interesting.