So, um, help me out here. In one corner, there's a country's leader with unilateral ability to launch missile strikes. Who may or may not have capability to tip the ballistic missiles with nuclear warheads. In the other, we have the US Government and our military chain of command, with all of its inherent checks and balances. One leader has repeatedly violated world law to the point that sanctions have been placed upon his country by the UN. Most of the twitter outrage today is for the President to stop talking tough b/c Hawaiians are scared, especially after a missile alert. But it seems to me that if NK was not allowed to have either an intercontinental ballistic missile program OR a nuclear program, they'd have nothing to worry about (except the Chinese, the Russians, anyone else who notices that the Entire Pacific Fleet, the world's most powerful Navy BY ITSELF, is HQ'd at Pearl). Help me understand what I'm missing, which may be misinterpreting Rep. Gabbard.
I don't know what she was trying to say, but I'm not impressed with her generally. As for NK, what do you propose to do about it, Brian? barfo
There are ways of removing the ability to craft nuclear warheads for non-nuclear states, especially those already under sanctions. Maybe the President doesn't want to use them, fine. I don't think "let them keep doing what they're doing" is a deterrent, but more a contributor to today's scare. Specifically, would any Hawaiians have batted an eye if NK's nuclear program (such as it is) and ballistic tests weren't in the news? I mean, if the people in Kansas got a tweet today saying "40' tsunami coming?" would their representatives panic, or laugh at someone's dumb mistake? I'm also intrigued at how this went out to the entire populace of Hawaii without the PACOM watch floor being able to refute it. I promise our defense capability to detect incoming ballistic missiles is higher than the populace's, including media.
I would very much like to hear your approach, Brian. I have one but would rather hear yours. In my view, allowing then to continue and keep the threat is a no go.
Two off the top of my head are classified. One that is open-source (and I don't know if it's true or not)... https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Stuxnet
The big accomplishments of the previous ESTP Presidents. TDR With the help of Admiral Alfred Mahan, boosted the US fleet into becoming a world class Navy. FDR I have very little kind to say here, except the man in charge when WWII began. LBJ The implementer of the Tonkin Gulf incident and the greatest American fiasco in history. DJT Rejuvenated the US Navy and implementer of the South China Sea Islands strategy, including a resolution of the North Korean threat. Results remain to be seen.
My favorite little daydream "solution" to N. Korea's nukes is to send fat boy a message saying that unless he gives up his program entirely, we're going to tell China that we'd rather have them as a neighbor to S. Korea than the current guys. Let him do the math. Okay, there are probably a thousand reasons why that's a really bad idea, but it makes me chuckle.
Eisenhower once said, "God help us with a man of less experience than me gets in this office." We are playing nuclear musical chairs with a despot who will do anything not to end up like Muammar Gaddafi.
I’m really lacking knowledge in this area so I just hope those in charge have a much better idea of what to do. However, this seems like just the beginning to what will be a repeat problem over subsequent generations. As technology improves and weapon systems become both easier to build and easier to conceal this problem will multiply. Every nation state will be able to pose the same risk, and even terrorist groups will be able to build nuclear or other weapons of mass destruction with ease. That’s one big reason I want the US to stop playing world cop. We might be able to succeed now, but we are placing ourselves in the crosshairs of demise down the road. As I said, my knowledge in this area is limited so feel free to school me. I’m open to changing my mind.
Hey, Hawaii: The Telecom Industry Lobbied Against Testing for Emergency Alert System Everyone in Hawaii received a ballistic missile threat today under a system that currently has no good testing protocols. https://motherboard.vice.com/en_us/article/kznxde/hawaii-ballistic-missile-warning-no-testing-system
I have around 20 friends of mine over in Hawaii working some golf tournaments. My facebook feed lit up with all there messages about this. They were freaked out for about 20 minutes.
Forget nuclear technology for a second, let's take stealth aviation. We flew the first stealth airplane 40 years ago. China and Russia only within the last few years have demonstrated one. We've already retired a class of them (the F-117s). No other country has even a prototype stealth fighter. Much less helicopter, one of which we canceled (the Comanche) and one inserted the SEALs who got Bin Laden. It's not trivial to build a) a ballistic missile program (the Scud, used heavily in the Iran/Iraq war in the 80's and the Gulf War, was a buy from Russia, b/c even with as much as Saddam was pumping into weaponry, it's hard to develop theater ballstic technology, to say nothing of accurate theater ballistic tech, to say nothing of accurate intercontinental ballistic tech), b) a nuclear program, which I have to give NK credit for--by all accounts they've been pumping almost every available won into doing so, and c) accurate targeting and guidance technology. Honestly, the drone problem is the closest one to what you're referencing, and even that is being handled in ways I can't get into. Someone has to, because there are messed-up people all over the world, doing messed-up things to people that would be an affront to anything called "civilization". If not us, who? I remind you, the UN has been trying for 60 years in some places to do so, and have been unable (maybe b/c the UN doesn't have access to classified programs). And I'd say that, even as crappy as our foreign policy has been or may be, where we've had extended presence (Japan, Korea, Germany/Western Europe) they have embraced both a representative democratic form of government and become highly-greased economic engines. Even in the newer areas (Afghanistan, Iraq) there are constitutions, some adherence to rules of law, etc. Not so where the UN has policed. You can say "I want US troops to stay home" and it's a very valid opinion. What that means is, "I don't care if someone who doesn't live here gets a raw deal, as long as I don't have to deal with it."
Like I said earlier, only because we've allowed them to be. If the twitter had come out saying "huge deadly blizzard headed for Honolulu" they would've laughed and gone back to sleep. There's almost no way a) NK has a missile that has the range to hit Hawaii, b) NK has the ability to properly mate said missile capability with a nuclear warhead, and c) be anything close to accurate enough to hit in island 30 miles in diameter from 5000 miles away...but since NK's abilities have been hyped, nothing has been done about it and our country and its military leadership has been denigrated, your friends had a rough morning.
So who is helping NK with their missile program? Seems too many recent developments to have done it without outside help.
