U.S. says it is taking necessary precautions on N Korea

Any strike by N. Korea will result a reaction that reduces them to an agricultural community for the next 50 years!

WASHINGTON — The United States is taking “all the necessary precautions”.....really? Do not misunderstand me...you do not want to futher provoke North Korea by sending carriers and subs off its coast "enmass" nonetheless I do not live in South Korea. If I lived there I would be a bit concerned knowing that within 15 minutes or so a dirty low level bomb could be at my doorstep. I would think many in that area of the world would be a bit nervous....trying to hit America with a missle is not the same as hitting your neighbor or those on the next block.

Any attack by the North would be their first & last.

The US cant beat some disorganized rats in the desert over the course of a decade... how are they going to beat a country that actually has weapons? Not to mention that NK is country that has China and Russia as allies. Good luck with that one, Barry.

@ Shannon Clark:

By not pussy-footin' around. In other words, unrestricted warfare. If you're in the way, then you're a target. No worries or regrets about collateral damage.

Reports are that NK is moving medium range missile launchers to their east coast. Now the question is, will the US allow those launchers to go on line or will they take them out first?

The US wont do squat.

Now the question is, will the US allow those launchers to go on line or will they take them out first?

With all the threats pouring out of NK, you would think that any missles wouldn't and shouldn't make it out of thier air space. If Japan, U.S and SK let the missle go untouched like the other occasions, then they should just let NK say and do anything they want.

The American man in the street reaction: "nuke 'em till the glow in the dark"

North-Korea gonna shell something, fire some rounds in the DMZ. South-Korea and US won't respond. North-Korea will then claim the other party is weak. Seen that pattern before. North-Korea knows how to play with fire.

if the shooting does start, it will probably be the first real war the US comes out on top since WW2...

Japan's military easily can take out N. Korea. Japan should issue to NK a warning that if NK were to fire a missile that comes even skims the skies over Japan's territorial sea border (200 nautical miles from the continental shelf off the coast of Japan), let alone goes over the skies of Japan's land, then Japan will tell (i.e., not ask) the US that Japan is going to bomb back to the stone age N.Korea. Then Japan should do it.

The US cant beat some disorganized rats in the desert over the course of a decade... how are they going to beat a country that actually has weapons? Not to mention that NK is country that has China and Russia as allies. Good luck with that one, Barry.

The US is still undisputed king of conventional warfare. Look at what happened in the early days of Iraq and Afghanistan.

When it comes to asymmetrical warfare, nobody is good at it. Not the British. Not the US. Not France. Not Russia. Nobody.

It's time to call the Dumpling's hand. Enough is enough. By letting it continue in a endless loop, the world is just aiding and abetting the suffering of the North Korean people. BUT...... South Korea should be the ones to do it with the rest of the worlds backing, any other plan will just result in the country taking the lead in being villainized by the usual crowd of people who automatically respond to any sort of military action.

@ Deplore:

Westerners aren't good @ asymmetrical or guerilla warfare, because they refuse to engage in indiscriminate bombing and shelling of the areas where live the insurgents, rebels, etc.; in other words, unrestricted warfare. For example, in 2004, the US fought and defeated insurgents in Fallujah, Iraq, but it took several weeks and cost the lives of a couple hundred US soldiers. Had the US instead chosen to reduce to rubble Fallujah, the battle would have lasted less than a week and cost few, if any, US lives.

People who chose to live with the insurgents, rebels, etc. should understand that they also choose to share the fate of these insurgents, rebels, etc.

The only collateral damage that should be of concern to Westerners when fighting uncivilized freaks is whether or not a pilot's coffee spills during a bombing run.

@baka gaijin:

Actually what the US is not good at is understanding that freedom means different things to the people of other cultures. In Iraq, Afghanistan, etc it simply means you do not have a repressive government keeping you from going over the nearby hill and killing all the SOBs that don't pray the same way as you do. You can't give freedom and democracy to people who have another agenda and another concept of the value of human life.

Hello all posters.

All I read are how NK and US can or cannot conduct a winnable or unwinable war. Spare a thought for those countries like South Korea, Japan, Taiwan and NK neighbouring countries, they are the one that suffer the most then US being thousands of Kilometers a way. The fall out from a nuclear bomb will affect these countries first than the US.

Its time both US and NK to take a step back and let the issue calm down.

Its time both US and NK to take a step back and let the issue calm down.

Where is the US not attempting let the issue calm down? NK is the one stirring things up. If they keep it up, someone is going to get hurt...and it wont be the US, Japan, or Skorea.

@ TheDevilAsistant

Yes NK talks a lot but most of the time without follow upwith any action.I n the US case it has a lot of action in so doing has in a way contributed to the heightening of tension in the Korean Peninsula. Many Northern Asian Countries and the SE Asian Nations would like to see both NK and US to tone down their action so that a solution could be found. This issue is not just US and NK alone it affects the whole of Asia. US may not be hurt but definitely Japan and Korea when come to a nuclear war.

Redcliff,

Yes NK talks a lot but most of the time without follow upwith any action

"Most" of the time...How does anybody know what they mean "This" time.

so that a solution could be found

The only solution is for NK to shut its mouth.

I would rather have the NK get some real aid rather than go to war.( If you would call it a war. It would probably take one or two days to neutralize the current KN Govt). But if Kim Jong Fat keeps on talking his smack, then he should be taken care of with a Can O' Whipass.

People in the US are getting tired of all these threats from North Korea. You even have members of the Armed Services Committee talking about attacking North Korea first.

"We should be prepared to do it right now," Sen. James Inhofe (R-Oklahoma), a ranking member of the Armed Services Committee said about striking North Korea. "In terms of the capability we have out there with the F-22s and the battleships ... a pre-emptive strike from something like that would get their attention."

Kim Jong Un should take heed of the old adage: If you play with fire, you get burned.

@itsmeagain

Isn't NK mostly an agricultural community already?

@ TheDevilsAssistant

" I would rather have the NK get some real aid rather than go to war."

Now you are at least start to talk some sense here. Both countries,the NK and US, should tone down their war mongering cries and not increasing it. Incidentally you must have missed the news that US is thinking of dialing back its war game in this part of the Region that shows that the US is now beginning to think that this sort of showing of force is not very helpful in resolving current tension..

I cant get any sleep with that barking dog, someone throw a rock at it...please...! Dear Leader of starving people, shut the hell up!!! or die by the hands of the USA...United States Navy come calling, you better flee for your life...RUN, Dear Leader....

@ Droll Quarry:

Defending a country against threats has nothing to do with bringing freedom to others. Who gives 2-cents about whether or not some are free and some aren't free? Those unwilling to fight for their own freedom don't deserve freedom.

To paraphrase Benjamin Franklin, 'Those who choose security over freedom will end up with neither.'

baka gaijinApr. 05, 2013 - 12:41PM JST Japan's military easily can take out N. Korea. Japan should issue to NK a warning that if NK were to fire a missile that comes even skims the skies over Japan's territorial sea border (200 nautical miles from the continental shelf off the coast of Japan), let alone goes over the skies of Japan's land, then Japan will tell (i.e., not ask) the US that Japan is going to bomb back to the stone age N.Korea. Then Japan should do it.

But what will happen when the dust settles? The real problem with NK is not the threats it keeps making. No, the real problem is if the NK regime fall and China and South Korea would have 25 million people streaming across their borders desperately looking for food. That's why the status-quo is preserved. It's that nobody wants to have to take responsibility for the millions of peasants who are forced to call NK home. NK is largley isolated and monstrously impoverished. Also, if unification takes place in Korean Peninsula, China will no longer have buffer with the west, which will create another problem.

"Those who choose security" are choosing freedom for themselves. The USA cannot be known as the World Security Forces. Stand up Japan, change the constitution, and defend an attack with an attack. "The best defense is a strong offense" at the countries own expense.

@ noriyosan73:

Not quite sure that I understand your point, but if your point were that Japan should defend itself, then I agree; so, I voted good for your post. My use of Mr. Franklin's quote was in reference to countries that choose to let others defend them, rather than defending their own country.

Also, were you to look closely at my use of Mr. Franklin's quote, then you'd see that it's in reference to internal policies of countries and each country's freedom or lack thereof. For example, in all of the former dictatorships of the so-called communist or socialist countries, there still are people who long for the return of another Stalin, Hitler (Nazi Germany was a socialist country and NAZI is an acronym for National Socialist German Workers' Party), or Mao. These people reason that, for them, life was easier, because the gov't took care of everything for them. So, they preferred economic security (even though all commie countries were and are dirt poor hell holes) to freedom.

Which brings to mind the quote of another founder of America, Thomas Jefferson. To paraphrase Mr. Jefferson, 'A gov't with the power to give to you anything also has the power to take from you everything.' "Everything" includes one's life.

In other words, the greatest threat to anyone's freedom usually is one's own gov't.

@sfjp:

What will happen? The same thing that happened after Eastern Europe was freed from the yolk of totalitarianism; the same thing that happened to many countries on both sides after the devastation of WWII. Perhaps you've no faith in the resiliency of humans, but I do have such faith.

As for preserving the status quo, I suggest you talk to those who aren't one of the four million in elite class. Please consider talking with those who've escaped from NK.

Eastern Europe was freed from the yolk of totalitarianism;

Yes. A lot of people with egg on their faces, apparently....