In 2010, during the reign of North Korean President Kim Jong-Il, Pyongyang responded to drills with murderous attacks on the South Korean island of Yeonpyeong. North Korea said the attacks were in response to a live fire exercise that led to shells falling in its territorial waters. The situation improved when the combined militias agreed to refrain from firing in the direction of North Korea. In the current drills, these restraints have continued, and no response has come from Kim Jong-Un. Clearly firing in the direction of North Korea at this time would be viewed as provocative. The drills include 10,000 Korean troops and 3000 US personnel. They will run through March 21. Additional drills will continue through April 30.
In recent days North Korea has made harsh rhetorical attacks on the new president of South Korea. President Park Geun-hye, the first woman to hold that office, was assailed by the north calling her inauguration a “venomous swish of skirt.” She was personally attacked and blamed for rising tension on the peninsula. We note that the DRNK once called former secretary of state Hillary Clinton a “minister in a skirt.”
It was President George W. Bush who established the original missile defense sites in Alaska and California, in direct response to threats of a missile strike from North Korea. Yesterday, James Miller, undersecretary of defense for policy stated,: “Our policy is to stay ahead of the threat — and to continue to ensure that we are ahead of any potential future Iranian or North Korean ICBM capability. Our concern about Pyongyang's potential ICBM capability is compounded by the regime's focus on developing nuclear weapons.” North Korea's third nuclear test last month is obviously a serious concern for all nations."
We said here earlier that we were concerned that Hagel and the Obama administration are throwing money at problems. While it is necessary to safeguard the American people, it is agreed that DPRK is years away from being able to launch a missile attack on the United States which would trigger the proposed defense system. Are other solutions also being considered, and are steps being taken? Yes, we hesitate to consider a military attack on North Korea’s nuclear and missile sites, for fear of transcending agreements with Russia and China, who have accepted the current strict sanctions. But with our unmanned drone aircraft, and the availability of the Navy Seals, an attack on North Korea would surely be effective, and far less costly. Are we increasing our space monitoring of activities on and below ground in North Korea? Is it possible that any maneuver on their part could go undetected?
Article comments
1 - Dr Joseph S Maresca
Models must be built to show how these advanced systems would operate, if built. In addition, the cost curve for building these advanced systems must be explained. Military expenditures on weapons systems tend to take on an eternal life of their own and this is what the Congress will be most concerned about.