Uri Friedman, The Atlantic: North Korea: The Military Options
What would a strike actually entail?
The Trump administration claims “all options are on the table” for dealing with North Korea’s nuclear-weapons program—from using military force, to pressuring China to cut off economic relations with North Korea, to Donald Trump negotiating directly with Kim Jong Un. But what do those options look like? And what consequences could they have? This series explores those questions, option by option.
Read more ....
More News On What Are The Military Options Against North Korea
Mattis hints at US military options for North Korea -- The Hill
Jim Mattis Hints at Secret Military Options for North Korea -- Wall Street Journal
Mattis hints at secret 'kinetic' military options for North Korea -- Business Insider
United States has 'many' military options in Korea crisis: Mattis -- Hi-tech Beacon
Cryptic Mattis Says US Has Weapons to Strike DPRK Without Endangering Seoul -- Sputnik
Mattis Says US Can Take Military Action Against North Korea Without Losing Seoul -- Daily Caller
US has 'many' military options -- The Daily Star
Can US military shoot down a North Korean missile? -- FOX News
Analysts: Military Options Against N. Korea Fraught With Danger -- VOA
Attack On North Korea Could Spare Allies, Secretary Mattis Says. Analysts Aren't So Sure. -- HuffPost
If the US Military Attacks North Korea Is Seoul Safe? -- The National Interest
3 comments:
Nobody knows what Matis has planned.
Fazman. Certainly we don't. But we can still make a mind game out of it.
So... Mattis must have a few key objective's, namely
1. Protect US soldiers in south Korea and Guam
2. Protect US citizens in the continental US, Alaska and Hawaii
3. Protect South Korean citizens, especially in Seoul
4. Take out the military leadership of North Korea
5. Establish air superiority
6. Take out all intermediate to intercontinental missile launch systems
7. Take out the artillery and tunnel systems at the DMZ
8. Protect shipping routes, commercial and military vessels from north Korean submarine attacks and potential mining
9. Protect allies such as Japan who were threatened multiple times now
10. Secure chemical and other WMD's
11. Avoid civilian casualties on the north Korean side
12. Increase the likelihood of a short vs a prolonged conflict
13. Avoid spill over to or from China (ensure that weapons, oil supply and the rocket fuel cannot be sent across the eastern border)
.. And I'm sure there's more.
Some of the challenges would likely require the use of large scale, extensive bombardment - or - the use of tactical nukes. But I really cannot imagine them going so far. Using nukes once (twice) in Japan 70 years ago is one thing. But doing it again sets a pattern. And the US would look very hypocritical and dangerous, even if it were the rational choice.
I agree with your post, but when Matis reveals that he has a military strategy that minimises the risk ( ability of Kim to militarily retaliate?)against Seoul them lm guessing it's either a massive strike to subdue his artillery or a he has a bead on Kim and they are hoping to cut off the snakes head.
Perhaps China has a man in place for a coup?
Post a Comment