A lot of good ink has been spilled over this in the last few weeks (well, good bits on your screen). Some of the best are LL's at Virtual Mirage today, especially related to the Norks' recent threat to Guam. Within the last hour, the DPRK state press dismissed President Trump's remarks yesterday as a "load of nonsense".
The communist nation also said it would complete its strategy to attack the waters near the U.S. territory of Guam by mid-August.This strikes me as a bad sign because it's continuing the continuous escalation we've been watching for months now, but I don't have a scale that reads how bad it is. Considering what appears to be their cultural predilection to bombastic hyperbole, I don't know how worked up we should get. As LL says, though, threatening Guam "... takes the situation to another level - where it didn't need to go. But it's what the Norks want to do, and they've been wanting it for a long time. The mouse will get one last roar off."
North Korea would then wait for its leader Kim Jong Un's order to strike, with its military stating that “only absolute force” would work on Trump.
Nuclear weapons are an odd thing. It seems that with the exception of the two times that we used them (including 72 years ago today) the principle use for having nuclear weapons is as a deterrent. Essentially, the lesson I see in the 20th century is that if you have nuclear weapons, nobody messes with you. It's a Mutual Assured Destruction club that everyone with enough nuclear weapons joins. No one without nukes would start a war with the superpowers that would justify a nuclear response because they'd be utterly destroyed. But the doctrine of MAD essentially said countries wouldn't protect their citizens so that the other guys' missiles were still a deterrent. After all, if you can swat away their warheads with no damage, and they have to absorb your hits, there's nothing "mutual" about that. Many found MAD to be morally abhorrent, but there has never been a nuclear exchange or use of nuclear weapons since Nagasaki, 72 years ago.
Virtual Mirage quotes a statement from the DPRK saying that the moment they see something that looks like we're planning a preemptive strike, they'll pre-preemptively strike us first.
“The US should remember, however, that once there is observed a sign of action for ‘preventive war’ from the US, the army of the DPRK will turn the US mainland into the theatre of a nuclear war before the inviolable land of the DPRK turns into the one.”Do they honestly think they can defeat the US? (By the way, that paragraph includes some impossible physics as a bonus)
“The DPRK is an invincible ideological power in which all the service personnel and people are united around their leader in single mind and a country of an impregnable fortress in which all the people are armed and the whole country has been fortified.”An invincible ideological power? A country of an impregnable fortress? See my previous references to "what appears to be their cultural predilection to bombastic hyperbole". The first paragraph, though, is fraught with problems. The Norks aren't an experienced military. It's entirely possible fighting could break out by their simple misinterpretation of something innocent our forces are doing.
LL says he personally thinks, "the Norks themselves are past the point of no-return" and active fighting is on the way. It looks like it. If this 60 year armistice breaks and goes kinetic, it's going to be very, very bad. It's going to make bad days in the Sandbox look good (and the anniversary of the worst was a couple of days ago, too). There are over 20 million people in Seoul, South Korea, and it has long been said the North has enough conventional artillery aimed at the city to level it. Millions dead? Could be.
The hurricane warnings from the National Hurricane Center have a pretty good phrase they use. The warnings are the final notice that the storm is expected to hit, and they include the advice, "all preparations should be rushed to completion". It looks like a storm is coming. Pay heed.