South Korea’s Moon over Obama

 

Moon meets with Putin

Post by Mustang

Gordon Chang’s recent article at the Gatestone Institute is nothing if not instructive.  Reading the post, titled “Will North Korea Take Over South Korea?” … one wonders how the people of South Korea, given their history over the past 70 years, can possibly accept President Moon’s treasonous behavior as their chief executive —but then, the efforts of this man to dismantle republican democracy in South Korea does sound awfully similar to the presidency of public enemy number one, Barack Obama.

I still shake my head every time I think of Obama’s election … not once, but twice.  In fact, there are so many similarities between Obama and Moon that one begins to think about conspiracies of global proportions.

You can read the article for yourself, but here are a few of his salient points:

  • ·       While visiting North Korea, President Moon went out of his way to downplay the legitimacy of the country he was elected to represent;
  • ·       Since becoming president in 2017, President Moon has undermined his country’s democracy in tangible ways, including the use of broadcast media to suppress dissenting views, while at the same time promoting those of North Korea.
  • ·    President Moon ordered the dismantling of the South Korean military, including the removal of defenses along likely invasion and infiltration routes.
  • ·       In North Korea, President Moon recently stood mute while Kim Jung Un referred to the South Korean people as “My people.”
  • ·     President Moon has long advocated unification of the Korean Peninsula; what no one expected is that he has been working overtime to make South Korea more compatible with the authoritarian nature of the North Korean state.  As but one example, Moon insists that the term “liberal” be removed from the concept of constitutional democracy.

So why are the people of South Korea standing idly by?

I suppose for the same reason our people thought that electing Barack Obama was a wise choice —on two occasions.  South Korea society today mirrors that of the United States: it is beset with social issues, which include alcoholism, substance abuse, over-fascination with social media and video games, destruction of core family values, and a sense that their nation’s policies are of no concern.  Being lulled to sleep by drugs and technology would seem to a windfall for Kim Jung Un.

Does any of this sound familiar?  Why does this matter?  Why should anyone care what South Korea does?

Does it matter because 34,000 Americans gave up their lives during the Korean War?  Does it matter because five-thousand Americans suffered as prisoners of war in North Korea and China —and that not all of them came home?  Since the Korean armistice (a peace treaty was never signed), the American taxpayer has paid billions of dollars helping to improve South Korea’s infrastructure and subsidizing South Korea’s national defense … a treaty obligation since 1950.

On the other hand, I’m not sure that there is anything the United States can do about President Moon’s treasonous behavior.  Maybe the wise course of action is to do nothing —let the Koreans decide their own fate, come hell or high water.  The American people seem incapable of dealing with their own political system much less those of another country so far from our shores … and you know, this does suggest to me that Obama achieved most of his goals as chief executive: to make fundamental changes to the United States of America.

Is it in America’s long-term interests to abandon global leadership?

Should we hit them in the old pocket book by refusing to buy Korean cars?

Well, such a remarkable repudiation of South Korea’s present leadership would suggest that we Americans have the chutzpah to act on our principles.

Or that we even have such things as principles.

 I would be interested in reader’s views.

Advertisements

Fauxahontas Warren spent weekend in China trying to cause heap big trouble

 

So Warren wants to cause heap big trouble for Trump if she can apparently, and undermine Trump’s efforts on the eve of tense negotiations with North Korea. She spent three days blowing smoke in China as well as trying to make trouble in South Korea and Japan. All on on our dime apparently. She is not the first to make a magical mystery tour in the region. Hillary of course made her “land mark” landing in India as we all know, and this: 

Massachusetts Sen. Elizabeth Warren is in China for Easter weekend, speaking with dignitaries in Beijing about her reservations regarding President Trump’s actions on the world stage and collective concerns about Sino-American trade relations.

Warren, a Democrat whose name has been floated as a 2020 Trump opponent, talked trade policy with Vice Premier Liu He, Defense Minister Wei Fenghe and another Chinese official named Yang Jiechi, according to Reuters.

“This has been a chaotic foreign policy in the region, and that makes it hard to keep the allies that we need to accomplish our objectives closely stitched in,” Warren said.

She reportedly accused Trump of trying to “take the legs out from underneath [the American] diplomatic corps,” which “Fox & Friends” discussed may have been a reference to the president’s firing of Secretary of State Rex Tillerson.

“You can’t but help see this through a political prism,” Griff Jenkins said. “She is trying to go overseas and undermine our significant and very important negotiations.”

More at Fox News

Hillary Clinton in S. Korea says all parties should negotiate,Trump threats dangerous

 

I know we are sick of Hillary posts and I had determined I would never post another one. This one troubles me greatly. It is the kind of thing where her performance takes it to another level. One where you really want to stick it to her. Mind you, she is sitting in Seoul, South Korea where she makes these remarks. Considering it was her husband that was the fool that did the wonderful negotiation that let them have a bomb, sure, let’s go back at it. Not satisfied money-grubbing and plundering Americans, let’s try to gin up the Korean thing and upset South Korea and build anger and fear regarding Trump’s Korean policy.

Hillary Clinton Says Threats Of War With North Korea Are ‘Dangerous And Short-Sighted’

Hillary Clinton said on Wednesday that “cavalier” threats to start war on the Korean peninsula are “dangerous and short-sighted”, urging the United States to get all parties to the negotiating table.

Hillary Clinton displays her knowledge of Geography

It’s getting old, Hillary breeches again for another onslaught in explaining “What Happened.” For anyone who questions what when wrong for Hillary, this might be an example.
In an attempt to criticize President Trump for how he is handling the escalating tension with North Korea, Hillary Clinton again embarrassed herself by demonstrating she knows little about the Korean peninsula. During an interview on “The Rachel Maddow Show,” she said, “South Korea is literally, you know, within miles of the border with North Korea.” Of course, South Korea shares it’s northern border — the most dangerous border in the world — with North Korea. It is not miles away.

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?

South Korea: U.S. Army merges 173 camps into one huge base

How is this for repeating history? Apparently the Army has forgotten Beirut, Lebanon and Peril Harbor as an example. Better yet we spent close to 11 Billion buckeroos to leave our Service men and women as sitting ducks. I will let Mustang tell the tale today:

Ignoring History

According to Arirang News, the 8th US Army has relocated its base of operations from Yongsan, Korea (3 miles outside of Seoul) to an extraordinarily large new base at Pyeongtaek (65 miles south of Seoul), where, according to its commander, Lieutenant General Thomas Vandal, US Forces Korea will station 43,000 of its ground and air forces (and their dependents).  I’m thinking that considering our history with North Korea —or more particularly, with North Korea under the aegis of a psychopath whose missile systems are under constant development, such a move does not appear very wise.

Families at the new U.S. Army Garrison Humphreys, South Korea, will live in modern, high-rise units convenient to schools, churches, shopping and other services.

A short review:

On 7 December 1941, the Empire of Japan launched a full-scale aerial assault upon the U. S. Navy fleet at Pearl Harbor, Hawaii.  The Japanese sunk 4 battleships, 2 other ships, damaged four more battleships, 3 cruisers, 3 destroyers, and 3 support ships.  Of the total in aircraft, 188 were destroyed, 158 were badly damaged.  Battle casualties were 2,403 killed and 1,178 wounded.  It was the attack FDR had hoped for, the effect of which was to introduce the United States into World War II.  FDR’s surprise, by the way, was that the attack initially focused on Hawaii; he thought the attack would be focused on the Philippine Islands.

On June 25, 1950, 80,000 North Korean troops launched a blitzkrieg attack into South Korea, pushing all US and South Korean forces all the way south to Pusan.  It was the initial military action of the Cold War.

So now we have nearly 50,000 American forces and assets conveniently situated in what has been described as the largest US base overseas … at the cost of $10.7 billion, uniting 173 military camps situated throughout the Korean peninsula.

General Vandal told reporters, “What has changed for us is that we no longer have to defend 173 camps and installations; we now have it consolidated so it allows us to maximize our force protection.  And as I described, with assets like Patriot batteries, you can now better protect from ballistic missile threats from North Korea.”

Right: good luck with that.

My conclusions are two: the idea is simple-minded, and the American people and their limited monetary resources are not being well-served by people who have not learned any of the lessons of history.

Proof! N.Korea sank S.Korea ship

Worrisome developments as the war talk revs up. This is the problem with a President who appears weak,. Testing, testing and misjudgements as to reactions are what leads to war.

On the brink of ‘all-out war’: The lettering on a propellor that proves North Korean torpedo DID sink South’s navy ship

 
  • North Korean submarine fired torpedo in revenge for 2009 firefight
  • Seoul vows to take firm action as China refuses to condemn Pyongyang
  • North warns that punishment or sanctions will trigger ‘all out war’
  •  

    North Korea has threatened to wage ‘all-out war’ if it is punished for the sinking of a South Korean warship.

    The warning came after investigators in Seoul unveiled evidence they said proves that a North Korean submarine fired a torpedo that sank the corvette Cheonan on March 26, killing 46 sailors.

    Pieces recovered at the sinking site ‘perfectly match’ the schematics of the torpedo included in introductory brochures provided to foreign countries by North Korea for export purposes, chief investigator Yoon Duk-young said.

    The final nail in the coffin was a serial number on a torpedo fragment that matched the markings on a North Korean torpedo that South Korea obtained years earlier, Yoon said
    Read more: http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/worldnews/article-1279828/North-Korean-torpedo-DID-sink-Souths-navy-ship-propellor-lettering-proves.html#ixzz0oTTkJQsL

    %d bloggers like this: