Reuters: North Korea says considering strike on Guam after Trump warns of 'fire and fury'
SEOUL/BEDMINSTER, N.J. (Reuters) - North Korea said on Wednesday it is considering plans for a missile strike on the U.S. Pacific territory of Guam, just hours after President Donald Trump told the North that any threat to the United States would be met with "fire and fury".
The sharp increase in tensions rattled global financial markets and prompted warnings from U.S. officials and analysts not to engage in rhetorical slanging matches with North Korea.
Pyongyang said it was "carefully examining" a plan to strike Guam, home to a U.S. military base that includes a submarine squadron, an airbase and a Coast Guard group.
A Korean People's Army spokesman said in a statement carried by state-run KCNA news agency the plan would be put into practice at any moment once leader Kim Jong Un makes a decision.
Read more ....
WNU Editor: U.S. policies and strategies on how to handle North Korea has been .... for the past two decades .... one of patience and diplomacy with North Korea's allies to restrain North Korean ambitions, and hoping that with time North Korea will reform into something better. This "kicking the can down the road" may have worked in the past, but North Korea's openly stated goal of developing nuclear ICBMs to threaten the U.S. has clearly changed everything. And while I like to believe that North Korea is still a few years away from developing and possessing such a capability .... the leaders of South Korea, Japan, and the U.S. cannot make their decisions based on hope and what I believe in. As for North Korea's other two neighbours .... the Chinese appear to have finally woken up to the threat that North Korea possesses on China's long term strategic interests .... Chinese official: China will pay the price for sanctions on North Korea (The Hill), while the Russians are telling everyone to take a "chill pill" .... Russia downplays North Korea's saber-rattling, tells US to be 'prudent' (Washington Examiner).
More News On The Growing North Korean Crisis
North Korea threatens strike on Guam -- CNN
North Korea threatens missile strike on US Pacific territory dangerously close to Australia -- News.com.au
N. Korea threatens preemptive strike on Guam as tensions rise -- Hawaii News
Trump Threatens ‘Fire and Fury’ Against North Korea if It Endangers U.S. -- NYT
Trump warns NKorea of ‘fire and fury’ as nuke threat worsens -- AP
Trump warns North Korea of 'fire and fury' -- AFP
Alaskan senator: We're concerned about possible North Korean missile strike -- The Hill
'Trump is not helping the situation': Lawmakers throw cold water on Trump's fiery warning to North Korea -- Business Insider
South Dakota Airmen arrive ready to 'Fight Tonight' from Guam -- US Pacific Air Forcesw
North Korea’s alarmed neighbors consider deploying deadlier weapons -- Boston Globe/NYT
13 comments:
The problem with NK is we don't really know what is the goal of Kim Jong Un.
If it is "only" for an insurance of his regime, that's not a really big deal. But big weapons like that could be used for blackmailing as this "Dynasty" is so accustom. Next step could be asking US forces to leave SK or anything else....and so on.
This will finish with a war, but with more nuclear weapon on the NK side.
Nope,
The NORK's have been clear, over decades and decades, what their "demands" are,
- a Peace Treaty with the US ending the Korean War and guaranteeing the non-intervention of the US in Korean affairs,
- North/South discussions on reunification,
- no sanctions
- a drawdown of US Forces in the region,
Correct Jac The world has been more than patient with fatty and dad for decades.
The sea of fire bluff will soon be called.
The general summed it up best when he said a war with NK is NOT unimaginable.A nuke detonated over a u.s city is!
Norks arn't going for a city,
They want the midwest.
What they want is one-on-one talks with the US and that's not going to happen. It would be a huge insult to RoK, likely resulting in them walking from the table. And likely their own nukes. It'll be ROK and China with the US at the table. The fat little god-king needs to get used to it.
Jay, you have no idea what you're talking about. .again and again
LMFAO,
Did you ever consider what nuking the Midwest would cause,
LAMFAO,
Jay,please go to bed..you're clearly out of your depth and should take a nap
Of course they want a major city, you're killing me
Jay,
If this is all North Korean demands are, at least from a US perspective, this would actually be quite easy. There are some issues that might need to be worked out though.
1.) While the US may be able to negotiate a separate agreement with the NORKs to end our own involvement, an ultimate end to the war would need to be agreed upon by them and South Korea. As to the part about non-intervention in Korean affairs, the US does not intervene in the affairs of South Korea. Getting the US to not try and interfere with affairs of the Norks would be rather straight forward, however, without guarantees from the Norks that they are not going to interfere in America's internal affairs makes any agreement problematic.
2.) North/South discussions on reunification. For this to happen, the south has to be on board. There is nothing the United States can do here, however, a complete US withdrawal makes South Korean nuclear armament more likely and reunification even less likely.
3.)No sanctions. They will need to discuss this with China and Russia now who just signed onto UN resolutions imposing sanctions.
4.) a draw down of US forces in the region. Such an action, while acceptable to the US would likely lead to a nuclear armament by South Korea besides those forces are as good as dead anyway should the war become hot again. Perhaps this is what we want. I know I have called for it a number of times since at least the late 1990s.
In short, if this really was all NK wanted, they would have very easily had this from the US and more by now. As such, the logical conclusion seems to be there are other factors at work here.
Russ,
I think you are materially correct. One-on-one talks are problematic in the sense that resolving anything is going to require SK to be on board and the US cannot commit to anything meaningful without SK authorization and support here. Such an action would be deemed humiliating in the eyes of South Korea and, as you point out, they are likely to walk away entirely, develop their own nukes, and completely cut off cooperation with the US after such a betrayal.
With that said, a nuclear armed South Korea who is ALLIED with the US as opposed to simply "allied" would be a fabulous improvement. This would give us a buffer against NK and would take some of the pressure off our armed forces. Point of clarification, "allies" as I use it generally refers to those who use and abuse America for their own ends. This is NOT abnormal among nations states but Americans are growing weary of being used as pawns by the likes of South Korea and others.
Guam is much, much more likely to tip over than to get nuked.
youtube.com/watch?v=cesSRfXqS1Q
Democrat Representative Hank Johnson is one smart liberal.
The NORK's have been clear, over decades and decades, what their "demands" are,
- a Peace Treaty with the US ending the Korean War and guaranteeing the non-intervention of the US in Korean affairs,
(1) Meaning that if the NORKs invaded South Korea a 2nd time the U.S. would not intervene
- North/South discussions on reunification,
(2) Let's talk. If there are no rigged lections, we invade
- no sanctions
(3) Don't do to NORKland what the U.S. did yo Japan pre WW2. Let us invade who we want to invade without repercussions.
- a drawdown of US Forces in the region,
(4) Withdraw from your allies Japan, South Korea and the Phillipines. All the better for us (NORK) to threaten them
"Jay, you have no idea what you're talking about. .again and again" - Anon
You mean like when Jay said Obama started the nuclear modernization program in 2007?
Post a Comment