Monroe Chat

They'd still lose more than they'd gain, IMO.
The manufacturing base in the USA is not needed as much as with past wars because of the technology we have today. THE American workers built thousands of tanks, planes and automobiles for WWII. Not nearly as many would be needed today. It's a matter of time before our aircraft are flown entirely by "pilots" who never see the aircraft they're flying.
I don't see what China and Russia would gain by supporting NK in a war against the USA. We'd stop paying back our debt and stop buying merchandise from the Chinese and Russia. Are they better off at war with us, or at "peace" with us? It's not as though China and NK could wage war against the USA and be victorious. By that, I mean becoming an occupying force in the USA. Even with one of the world's largest militaries, they'd be hard pressed to take over our country. Between the physical considerations of our country (bordered on 3 sides by water, mountain ranges, etc), our military and our civilian population being well armed (presently), I don't see any foreign enemy being able to invade the USA and maintain a presence. If we thought the insurgents in Iraq were bad, imagine how Americans would behave against a foreign government on our turf!!! Some would roll over and play dead, but the one's I know would fight for everything they've ever had.
Personnally, I'm more worried about Obama than I am China.

Today the idiot said he will wipe out the United States off the map. What is this guy smoking? Something really good if he thinks he is going to basically take over the USA. I hope and pray if they fire a missile towards the United States that Obama will have the fortitude to fire back and take that idiot out. Folks I honestly think we are a on a verge of another Korean War and I do think we will take out North Korea and make it part of South Korea through time. We must first get our chips in order with China and make sure it is ok with them. I think China may sit down and a make a deal and this is the kind of thing that would happen behind closed doors but China over time could take over Taiwan and we the USA sit back and let them do it. Then we must get Japan protected also before we do anything. This is a tough situation to the say the least because if this is not handled correctly it will not be a Korean War 2 it will be World War 3 and that is something we don't want to see.

Would you approve or should the US consider using another atomic bomb to show North Korea the US is not to be messed with? Or have we as a nation gotten too soft and cuddly to even think about the possibility? This is an extreme case, much worse than the Middle East in my opinion, as Kim Jong-Il is not only a madman, he is looney tunes.

I asked my Japanese other half this question and they agreed it should be considered. This coming from someone who's parents lost family members in Hiroshima and yet as they were US citizens living here, sat in internment camps in the desert and fought for the US in the 100th/441st infantry. Just thought it was an interesting discussion that I'd pass along.

I'm not sure we even have atom bombs anymore. We've come a long way since WWII and atomic bombs. We have nuclear bombs with the capability of disrupting communicatons but not much more. Of course, we still have the big boys that could destroy the entire world if all were detonated.
We actually had warheds that were designed to be fired from the back of a jeep (korean war era) and were small enough to be affective on battlefields with "supposedly" limited effects on our own troops. Hopefully the days of destroying entire cities are behind us.
one problem with the USA using nuclear weapons, is that we're the only ones to have ever used them. They've only been used once and that was by the USA. To use them again may make the world feel that we're "quick" with the nuclear trigger since nobody else has used them. We keep telling the world that NK, Pakistan, India, Iraq, Iran, etc shouldn't have them because of the danger, yet we fire them during time of war. President Truman considered using them during the Korean War.
With the technology we have today, we may be better served by using bunker busters and more traditional munitions. Assumming we have enough, we could probably level every government building in Pyonyang in one attack. Wiping out communications and destroying the NK government infrastructure is probably our safest bet. Along with hitting any nuclear facilities. But only if all other means fail and war is imminent.

We have the greatest technological conventional superiority since the peak of the Roman empire, but we have lost the will to use it. We are scaling down and will faze out our current and future inventories of advantageous systems, for the far left whom the current administration bows to believes this to be the main issue with the new world order and passionately wants us to be like France!!!

Wiping them out would be a very systematic and elementary operation though we would sustain some initial casualties due to the proximity of population centers to artillary and other Northern positions. The hard part becomes the occupation or what to do once you have broken their kneecaps!!

one problem with the USA using nuclear weapons, is that we're the only ones to have ever used them. They've only been used once and that was by the USA. To use them again may make the world feel that we're "quick" with the nuclear trigger since nobody else has used them. We keep telling the world that NK, Pakistan, India, Iraq, Iran, etc shouldn't have them because of the danger, yet we fire them during time of war.

With the technology we have today, we may be better served by using bunker busters and more traditional munitions. Assumming we have enough, we could probably level every government building in Pyonyang in one attack. Wiping out communications and destroying the NK government infrastructure is probably our safest bet. Along with hitting any nuclear facilities. But only if all other means fail and war is imminent.

Totally agree with these points. Although I could definitely think of a few places that I'd like to see them used.

Really it is a matter of leadership change. It's difficult to use a nuke on a population that isn't totally at fault. They are following the will of their leader under pressure. I would LOVE to see it used in Iran and/or NK....but the people that are affected are those that are innocent and only live in the country....not the ones making the ridiculus decisions, accusations, and/or threats.

Our inventories fluctuate from administration to administration and decade to decade. After WWII, a lot (if not most) of our equipment stayed in Europe. Vehicles were sold as surplus, even though they never saw service.
We hadn't been out of WWII for 5 years when Korea reared it's ugly head and we ramped up again.
Blueblood is right that the left (present administration included) would love to do away with our military and have the entire world sit around a pseudo campfire (real campfires contribute to global warming) singing Kum-ba-ya. That's a happy little world they live in. Too bad it's make-believe.
As far as for after the war was over and the Koreas united, I don't see an occupying force as we've had in Europe or Japan. The Korean Peninnsula was once one country and will be again. All Koreans want unity. Many have family on the other side of the boader. If South Korea won, then that government would also govern the area that was once North Korea. The reverse, should NK win. It's not like Germany after WWII, which was without a government.

Is this a possible reminder to NK that we have weapons capable of traveling the world? Or that we could potentially intercept (as difficult as that may be)?

-------------------------------------------

Air Force test fires missile from Calif coast
AP - 30 mins ago

VANDENBERG AIR FORCE BASE, Calif. – The Air Force says it has successfully launched an unarmed Minuteman 3 intercontinental ballistic missile from a California base, firing it to targets in the Pacific Ocean.

Lt. Raymond Geoffroy (JEFF-rey) said the ICBM was launched from Vandenberg Air Force Base at 3:01 a.m. Monday.

He said it carried three unarmed re-entry vehicles that hit their targets near the Kwajalein Atoll in the Marshall Islands, some 4,200 miles away.

On clear mornings, missile launchings from Vandenberg can be seen as far away as Los Angeles, 140 miles to the southeast, but fog along the coast made Monday's launch difficult to see even in the immediate area, Geoffroy said.

The Air Force said the launch was an operational test to check the weapon system's reliability and accuracy.

Test data will be used by United States Strategic Command planners and Department of Energy laboratories.

Update:
SEOUL, South Korea (AP) - North Korea fired seven ballistic missiles off its eastern coast Saturday, South Korea said, a violation of U.N. resolutions and an apparent message of defiance to the United States on its Independence Day.
The launches, which came two days after North Korea fired what were believed to be four short-range cruise missiles, will likely further escalate tensions in the region as the U.S. tries to muster support for tough enforcement of the latest U.N. Security Council resolution imposed on the communist regime for its May nuclear test.
South Korea's Joint Chiefs of Staff said three missiles were fired early Saturday, a fourth around noon and three more in the afternoon. The Defense Ministry said that the missiles were ballistic and are believed to have flown more than 250 miles (400 kilometers).
"Our military is fully ready to counter any North Korean threats and provocations based on strong South Korea-U.S. combined defense posture," the Joint Chiefs of Staff said in a statement.

(AP) South Koreans watch a television broadcasting undated image of a North Korea launch missile at the Seoul Railway Station in Seoul, South Korea, Saturday, July 4, 2009. South Korea says North Korea has fired the fifth missile off its eastern coast....

South Korea's Yonhap news agency said the first three appeared to be Rodong missiles while the rest were an upgraded version of Scud-C missiles, citing intelligence authorities.
The Defense Ministry said it could not confirm the report, saying more analysis needs to be done.
Scud-C missiles have a range of up to 300 miles (500 kilometers), which could hit most of South Korea. The Rodong has a range of up to 800 miles (1,300 kilometers), putting most parts of Japan within striking distance. Yonhap said, however, that the range of the Rodong missiles launched Saturday had been reduced.
U.N. resolutions ban North Korea from firing Scuds, medium-range missiles or long-range missiles. Among the U.N. measures is Resolution 1874, passed after North Korea's May 25 nuclear test, that prohibits any launch using ballistic missile technology.
Thursday's missile launches, on the other hand, did not violate the resolution, according to South Korea's Foreign Ministry. Kim Tae-woo, vice president of the Korea Institute for Defense Analyses, said they were believed to be cruise missiles.

Ballistic missiles are guided during their ascent out of the atmosphere but fall freely when they descend. Cruise missiles fly low and straight to their target.
The North has a record of timing its missile tests for U.S. Independence Day, which fell on Saturday.
"The missiles were seen as part of military exercises, but North Korea also appeared to have sent a message to the U.S. through the missile launches," a senior official in South Korea's presidential office said, without elaborating.
The official told The Associated Press that North Korea could fire more missiles in coming days, but said there was little possibility it could fire an intercontinental ballistic missile, as it threatened in April.
He spoke on condition of anonymity because he was not authorized to speak to media.
Yonhap said North Korea was pulling out personnel from its missile launch site and was allowing ships to sail again in waters off its east coast - an indication no more missiles would be launched in the near future. Yonhap cited an unidentified military official.
The Defense Ministry said it could not confirm the report.
The North had initially warned ships to stay away from its east coast through July 10 for military exercises.
But the South Korea-U.S. combined forces command will not change its heightened alert level until tensions are eased, the Defense Ministry said. The command increased surveillance in May, when the North threatened military strikes on South Korean and U.S. troops.
The U.S. has 28,500 troops in South Korea as a deterrent against North Korea.
Daniel Pinkston, a Seoul-based analyst for the International Crisis Group think tank, said both political and military reasons were behind the launches.
"I think it's a demonstration of their defiance and rejection of the U.N. Security Council Resolution 1874, for one thing, and to demonstrate their military power capabilities to any potential adversaries," Pinkston said.
He also pointed out that July 4 is not only U.S. Independence Day but also the anniversary of a 1972 joint communique in which the two Koreas agreed to work toward peacefully reunifying their divided peninsula.
During the U.S. Independence Day holiday in 2006, Pyongyang fired a barrage of missiles, including a long-range Taepodong-2 that broke apart and fell into the ocean less than a minute after liftoff. Those launches, which occurred on July 5 in North Korea, also came amid tensions with the U.S. over North Korea's nuclear program.
North Korea's state news agency carried no reports on the launches.
South Korea and Japan, which are within easy range of North Korean missiles, condemned the launches as a "provocative" act that violates the U.N. resolution.
South Korea "expressed deep regret over the North's continuous behavior that escalates tensions in Northeast Asia by repeatedly defying" the resolution, the Foreign Ministry said in a statement.
In Tokyo, Chief Cabinet Secretary Takeo Kawamura said in a statement that the launch of missiles "is a serious act of provocation against the security of neighboring countries, including Japan, and is against the resolution of the U.N Security Council."
In Beijing, a Foreign Ministry spokesman said he had no immediate comment. China is the North's closest ally.
---