Family members disembark from a UH-60 Blackhawk helicopter Oct. 30 after a mock evacuation flight during Courageous Channel at U.S. Army Garrison Yongsan in Seoul, South Korea, Oct. 30, 2015. Army.mil
Defense News: US Noncommittal on Strategic, Missile Defense Assets for Korea
WASHINGTON — The Pentagon and State Department remained careful Thursday when discussing whether strategic assets or missile defense systems could be moved closer to South Korea, but would not rule out anything when discussing US actions in response to Tuesday’s North Korean nuclear test.
Pentagon press secretary Peter Cook told reporters that the relationship between the US and the Republic of Korea remains “iron-clad,” a phrase he used four times when discussing the US willingness to protect its longstanding ally.
He also said the US would “consider every possible option that should be considered to further the defense of South Korea.”
However, just how far the US is willing to go is unclear.
WNU Editor: This is not the time for the U.S. to be wishy-washy when it comes to the Korean peninsula .... our relationship is "iron-clad" but we will not say how far that commitment will go .... sighhh .... that is not the message that they should be sending. And while the U.S. is communicating their lack of commitment to defend South Korea, the Pentagon is making it very clear on what they will bring out if the situation blows up into a war .... The U.S. has a plan to evacuate troops’ families and pets from Korea in case of nuclear attack (Military Times).
2 comments:
WNU,
The U.S. has had NEO plans for Japan, Korea and Germany for decades.
http://www.dtic.mil/doctrine/new_pubs/jp3_68.pdf
Joint Publication 3-68
Noncombatant Evacuation Operations
You fight better if your family is taken care of. This is the bare minimum that the Pentagon had to do to maintain morale and control.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Non-combatant_evacuation_operation
Aizino,
You're spot on. Furthermore, if hot war should come of this, I think it should be understood, at a minimum, that the US and its allies are unlikely to win this war. As such, at a bare minimum, if we MUST be in the middle of a war between South Korea and North Korea and North Korea's allies, the focus should be on trying to make such an endeavor to costly for NK to seriously consider it.
IF WNU's analysis from a couple of days ago or so is correct that the main goal of the NK leadership is to stay in power, an approach that makes things excessively costly to NK and its allies just might work. If I misread WNU's position, I'd appreciate a clarification.
Post a Comment