A British Perspective on options regarding North Korea

By Mustang

A writer by the name of Mark Almond recently got a four-page spread in The Daily Mail that addressed “western” options vis-à-vis North Korea.  Beyond the usual backdrop to the problem, which essentially ignored any details about the appeasements offered to the NORKS by Bill Clinton, Almond offered up a few “alternatives.”  Personally, I’m not sure why the Mail would want to inform North Korea about our options —it appears to give some aid and comfort to the enemy, but I nevertheless found his options somewhat interesting.  His options were:

Diplomacy —treat North Korea as an equal (not as a rogue), but do try to refrain from Washington’s previous appeasements.  Surprisingly, he urged President Trump to demand verification of any halt to nuclear weapons development.  I laugh … how does one verify such a thing?  Cross my heart and hope to die doesn’t seem to be working very well.

Sanctions —allowing that Kim Jung Un cannot be “sweet-talked” into behaving himself as a responsible national leader, we should perhaps impose further sanctions upon the North Korean regime. Personally, I’m not aware that any of our previous sanctions ever worked.  Maybe we should threaten to send Jimmy Carter to North Korea.  That might work.

Limited strike —well, once more, I’m not sure that limited strikes serve much purpose beyond reducing America’s arsenal of air-delivered munitions.  North Korea is a mountainous country and I have no doubt that Kim Jung Un has a plush underground bunker where he can avoid any discomforts from American/South Korean airstrikes.  I do suspect that the American taxpayer paid for these bunkers, but then this is what happens when the American people elect a Clinton to the presidency.

Full Invasion —right.  The United States of America is already over-committed to the Middle East and without the massive participation of North Korea’s neighbors (South Korea and Japan) this option would appear to be laughable on its face.

Assassination —Although I do not think there are any Americans who are Democrats, the Democratic party in America would almost certainly oppose such attempts, unless it was Debbie Wasserman Schultz who first came up with the idea.  How should we assassinate Kim Jung Un?  Well, beyond hiring the Israelis to do it for us, I don’t see how this is a realistic possibility —unless we were to find out that Fat Kim loves M&Ms.  In that case, we’ve got him by the short-hairs.

An American Nuclear Strike —I suspect would could never get away with this.  Gore would be absolutely apoplectic, and don’t we need to protect Al Gore as a national treasure?  I wondered why a British fellow is attempting to encourage an American nuclear strike.  Hmmm.  Presently, North Korea has somewhere in the neighborhood of sixty nuclear bombs.  If he only got off one of these in his own defense, it could get messy.  On the other hand, does Un even know where Guam is?

Pressure on China —by far the most logical of all suggestions, with some modification by Machiavellian me.  So far, the Chinese have not appeared much disposed to reigning in their little fat tyrant, but what if we offered this suggestion via the New England Journal of Medicine: North Koreans are as nutritionally balanced and tasty as roast duck?

My personal opinion is that it is a darn good thing Mr. Almond isn’t working for the British Defense agency.  On the other hand, America has all these MOABs sitting around gathering dust.  What if we simply delivered one of these for every square inch of North Korea and made it an UN-limited strike?

I don’t know … I’m old, and confused most of the time.  What do Bunkerville reader’s think our options are?

Advertisements

Tactic of the South Korean Riot Police

 

Otherwise known as doing it the Roman way. Not quite the way the Charlotte police department acted.

Something the U.S. might want to consider in the long days ahead.

 

Sunday Respite – Ghost of General Lee

I think this song sums up the reason why we need to remind ourselves of the Civil War and to remember those souls who gave it all so we could be the United States of America.

The Ghost of General Lee – Waylon Jennings

Sunday Respite – The Night They Drove Old Dixie Down

This is supposed to be a “respite.” I will let Adrienne express my views with her post:

What the hell is wrong with people? Crazies are running rampant in Virginia…

I first posted this song back in 2015. I picked it then because the news was full of the push to rid the history of the Civil War and any remembrance of the South’s participation. 650,000 lives were lost. Enough said.

This is a song about a confederate soldier named Virgil Caine and his days in the American Civil War. It is a very emotional and haunting narrative.

“The Night They Drove Old Dixie Down”

Virgil Caine is the name
And I served on the Danville train
‘Till Stoneman’s cavalry came
And tore up the tracks again

In the winter of ’65
We were hungry, just barely alive
By May the 10th, Richmond had fell
It’s a time I remember, oh so well

The night they drove old Dixie down
And the bells were ringing
The night they drove old Dixie down
And the people were singing
They went, “Na, na, la, na, na, na”

Back with my wife in Tennessee
When one day she called to me
Said “Virgil, quick, come see,
There goes the Robert E. Lee!”

Now, I don’t mind chopping wood
And I don’t care if the money’s no good
You take what you need
And you leave the rest
But they should never
Have taken the very best

The night they drove old Dixie down
And the bells were ringing
The night they drove old Dixie down
And all the people were singing
They went, “Na, na, la, na, na, na”

Like my father before me
I will work the land
And like my brother above me
Who took a rebel stand

He was just 18, proud and brave
But a Yankee laid him in his grave
I swear by the mud below my feet
You can’t raise a Caine back up
When he’s in defeat

The night they drove old Dixie down
And the bells were ringing
The night they drove old Dixie down
And all the people were singing
They went, “Na, na, la, na, na, na”

The night they drove old Dixie down
And all the bells were ringing
The night they drove old Dixie down
And the people were singing
They went, “Na, na, la, na, na, na”

 

Obama knew N. Korea had miniatured Nukes in 2013, but didn’t want to deal with it

One more mess that Obama left us. The Appeasers. For old times sake I will give you a clip and link to a previous post first:

“We got this”

Enter self-appointed peacemaker Carter: The ex-prez scurried off to Pyongyang and negotiated a sellout deal that gave North Korea two new reactors and $5 billion in aid in return for a promise to quit seeking nukes.

So Obama, Appeaser in chief, went back to playing golf:

It was clear what Obama officials were doing in 2013.  The DIA report represented inconvenient facts that threatened President Obama’s North Korea “strategic patience” policy — a policy to do nothing about North Korea and kick this problem down the road to the next president.  Obama officials tried to downplay the DIA assessment to prevent it from being used to force the president to employ a more assertive North Korea policy.

Tuesday’s bombshell Washington Post story that the Defense Intelligence Agency (DIA) has determined North Korea is capable of constructing miniaturized nuclear weapons that could be used as warheads for missiles – possibly ICBMs – left out a crucial fact: DIA actually concluded this in 2013. The Post also failed to mention that the Obama administration tried to downplay and discredit this report at the time.

During an April 11, 2013, House Armed Services Committee hearing, Congressman Doug Lamborn, R-Colo., inadvertently revealed several unclassified sentences from a DIA report that said DIA had determined with “moderate confidence” that North Korea has the capability to make a nuclear weapon small enough to be launched with a ballistic missile.

The Director of National Intelligence and Obama officials subsequently tried to dismiss Lamborn’s disclosure by claiming the DIA assessment was an outlier that did not reflect the views of the rest of the U.S. Intelligence Community.

Obama officials tried to downplay the DIA assessment to prevent it from being used to force the president to employ a more assertive North Korea policy.

More at Fox News

Donald Trump On North Korea In 1999 – Meet The Press w/ Tim Russert

For those who still think that Donald is some yahoo that knows little, take a look at this interview done in back 1999.  Meanwhile Clinton, Bush and of course, Obama let North Korea get the big one.

24 GOP Vote to keep Transgender, sex assignment surgery in the military

Twenty-four Republicans banded together on Thursday to defeat an amendment which would have ended former President Barack Obama’s 2016 policy of funding “gender-reassignment” surgery for soldiers who want to live as members of the opposite sex.

Bradley Manning

The July 13 vote saw Democrats vote in lockstep to defeat the amendment, despite the national unpopularity of the transgender ideology. They were joined by 24 Republicans who broke with their party to assist the Democrats to defeat the amendment, without any visible objections by the GOP’s business-focused leadership. Individual vote tally roll call HERE

Mustang gives us his thoughts today:

Obama’s Tranny Plan

Justin Amash is a US Congressman serving Michigan’s third district.  He is among the youngest members of serve in Congress and a first-generation Palestinian Arab of Greek Orthodox descent.  This probably explains why Congressman Amash opposes suspension of Barack Obama’s plan to destroy the US military … the plan to validate and accept transgender recruits into the Armed Forces, and offer to them life-time medical care for life.  This is exactly what we need in America: taxpayer funded hormone treatments, expensive surgeries, and lots of bed rest while normal people are in the field training for combat.

Let’s review: Obama’s Tranny Plan (OTP) is an ideology that holds that a person’s legal sex should be determined by their self-declared “gender identity,” not by their male or female body.  The ideology also says the federal government should force Americans to accept the “gender identity” claims made by each person, regardless of scientific data about genetics, biology and the variety of normal behavior and appearances shown by normal equal-and-complementary women and men.

The OTP also demands dignity and respect to transsexuals in community showers, and sleeping spaces.  This is fine —we can respect gender confused persons while they maintain their status as civilians— and then we do not have to worry about hurting their feelings while in a community shower.

One must ask, “What was Obama thinking?”

Well, if Obama was thinking at all, he was thinking about destroying the military.  One cannot have military readiness if priority spending is allocated to transgender social engineering at the expense of combat readiness.  A soldier will not risk his own life to save someone who he despises; units lacking esprit de corps fail in combat.  It only makes sense, then, that Secretary of Defense James Mattis has suspended Obama’s ludicrous plans while the Department of Defense reviews the short-term and long-term implications of OTP.

Rethinking OTP is not enough; they should be shelved entirely because, if implemented, the OTP will cost the American taxpayer more than $3.7 billion over ten years.  Meanwhile, American government is not addressing tens of thousands of homeless and starving Americans, military veterans are routinely denied proper medical care from combat-related wounds and injuries, social security recipients are denied sufficient increases in their annuities to maintain pace with the cost of living, and the government denies Medicare benefits to the elderly in order that we can take care of children of single parents.  One final thought: if the Pentagon ultimately approves OTP, it will inspire mutant-gender activists to place greater pressures on idiotic judges and spineless politicians to impose farcical rules on civic groups, schools, universities, and in the workplace.

This brings us back to Congressman Amash, a Republican.  Why is he supporting the Obama Tranny Plan?  The engine of a member of congress is fueled by popular opinion, and on this issue, polls indicate that a large majority of the American people reject the absurd progressive notion that a man can be a woman simply because he feels like one. Again, let’s evaluate Amash based on who he is and what he believes: he is Palestinian Arab.  Do Palestinian-Arab’s want to see the United States of America with a strong, efficient military?

I think not.

More info at  Breitbart

%d bloggers like this: