Warning

 

Close

Confirm Action

Are you sure you wish to do this?

Confirm Cancel
Member Login

Site Notices
Posted: 12/30/2002 12:50:17 PM EST
[Last Edit: 12/30/2002 1:01:00 PM EST by Bostonterrier97]
The Article in this link describes in some detail of a long list of North Korean Violations of the Korean War Cease Fire Agreement along the Korean DMZ. Many Americans have died. One unarmed US soldier in 1976 was hacked to death by Korean Soldiers who used hatchets. He was hacked to death in front of US observors who could do nothing. (actually there were [b]2[/b] US Servicemen who were hacked to death) For details on the story behind the Axe Murder see this link: [url]http://www.imjinscout.com/Paul_Bunyan.html[/url] I really don't understand [b]WHY[/b] our government continues to tolerate the existence of the North Korean Government. Particularly at this moment while the North Korean Government is hell bent on resuming Nuclear Weapons Production. (most intelligence experts believe that North Korea managed to produce a couple of nukes before Klinton shut down the North Korean Nuclear Weapons Facility: a breeder reactor for creating weapons grade plutonium) [url]http://www.koreanwar.org/html/dmz_war.html[/url]
Link Posted: 12/30/2002 12:54:08 PM EST
[Last Edit: 12/30/2002 1:02:49 PM EST by Bostonterrier97]
This next link provides a list of US Servicemen who were killed along the Korean DMZ since the "end" of the Korean War. [url]http://members.cox.net/mohmedal/koreandmz.htm[/url] A Quick list of "incidents" along the DMZ can be found here: [url]http://www.theforgottenvictory.org/old/lifeondmz.htm[/url]
Link Posted: 12/30/2002 1:14:26 PM EST
The latest Article on the North Korean Actions surrounding their Nuclear Facility [url=http://story.news.yahoo.com/news?tmpl=story2&cid=514&ncid=514&e=4&u=/ap/20021230/ap_on_re_as/koreas_nuclear_104]Russia Warns North Korea[/url] An excerpt from the article: [b]North Korea signed the treaty in 1985, but U.S. authorities believe the communist nation has at least one or two bombs made from 1980s-vintage plutonium. The North tried to withdraw in 1993 over suspicions it was producing weapons, but that crisis was averted by the 1994 energy deal with the United States[/b] An Satellite Photograph [img]http://us.news2.yimg.com/us.yimg.com/p/ap/20021230/capt.1041276382.north_korea_nuclear_ny195.jpg[/img] [img]http://us.news2.yimg.com/us.yimg.com/p/ap/20021230/capt.1041276248.north_korea_nuclear_ny194.jpg[/img] [img]http://us.news1.yimg.com/us.yimg.com/p/rids/20021227/i/1041026337.3020349485.jpg[/img] [img]http://us.news1.yimg.com/us.yimg.com/p/rids/20021227/i/1041008179.2215100462.jpg[/img] North Korean Workers constructing a Nuclear Reactor last August [img]http://us.news1.yimg.com/us.yimg.com/p/rids/20021222/i/1040578350.3154599973.jpg[/img]
Link Posted: 12/30/2002 1:47:24 PM EST
In the late 60's they were awarding combat infantryman badges for service on the DMZ.
Link Posted: 12/30/2002 2:32:12 PM EST
Link Posted: 12/30/2002 3:37:59 PM EST
I was really shocked about this. I am a big time history buff and I never heard about the combat in the DMZ ever. I even asked my parents, a couple of a well read people, and they also never heard of any deaths due to combat on the Korean DMZ. I really glad you guys brought this to my attention. Anyone written someone like the History Channel and ask them about doing some show on this?
Link Posted: 12/30/2002 3:58:54 PM EST
There's an account of the DMZ fighting at [url]http://www.koreanwar-educator.org/toc/dmz/FIGHTING%20BRUSH%20FIRES%20ON%20KOREA.htm[/url]
Link Posted: 12/30/2002 5:26:06 PM EST
Link Posted: 12/30/2002 5:34:28 PM EST
Wait untill you hear about the actions that occured in the Philippines against the MILF in the mid to late 1980's....
Link Posted: 12/30/2002 7:15:10 PM EST
Once action in the Gulf is finished, rhetoric against North Korea will step up quite a bit. Right now, the administration is making a good move in not saying or doing anything threatening. My reasoning for thinking this follows: The US could probably fight a war in the gulf, and a war in Korea successfully, but they'd be stretched thin. If anything else came up, then there would be little the US could do to respond. Imagine having the majority of forces tied up in Korea and Iraq, and having China make an attempt to invade Taiwan. Lack of major sealift capability be damned, if China wants to move on Taiwan, they can take it. What would the US be able to do, barring nukes? Not much. The dotrine is to be able to fight 2 major wars in 2 separate parts of the world simultaniously. The US can certainly do this. What isn't said, however, is that this really depends on [i]which[/i] wars that they're fighting. The administration is doing the right thing by moving against Iraq first. Iraq is weak, and can be finished quickly. Then there is no other non-terrorist threat, other than those in the East China Sea. No need to split forces, and no other enemy to rear its ugly head at an inappropriate time. Hopefully the US can stomp Iraq in a few weeks, so that NK's Fearless Leader doesn't feel ignored, and make an early lunge for the South. I also would think that cruise-missile strikes on all nuclear-related targets in NK are already planned. Thats my little "Armchair General" take on things. Please point out anything that is way out there. I'd appreciate the criticism.
Link Posted: 12/30/2002 8:01:45 PM EST
The dotrine is to be able to fight 2 major wars in 2 separate parts of the world simultaniously. The US can certainly do this. What isn't said, however, is that this really depends on which wars that they're fighting.
View Quote
The last time I saw the defense review precedings headed by then Joint Chiefs of Staff Colon Powell before the Senate on CSPAN the picture wasn't even that rosey. He wasn't even getting close to 2 major wars Capability. The last I heard it was a Major Conflict and one Minor. During WWII I guess you could say that the US was fighting on 3 Major conflicts. Europe: (Libya,Eqypt,Sicily,Italy,Normandy, France,Germany) Pacific: (Midway,The Island Chains(Iwo,Tarawa,New Guinne,Philipines,etc) Asia: (China,Burma, India) True Global War. I realistically don't see us Able to fight 2 wars at the same time without shifting into a total war footing with campanies pumpings out Guns,Butter,Tanks,Bullets,Planes, 24 hours a day. And having a Draft to get 2/3 million more men. Depending on the situation. The worst case scenario is to allow things to develop in such a manor as a whole continent explodes into War at the same time. Don't forget that in Korea we were not only fighting the Koreans but also eventually the chinese as well. And they attacked in strenth of 1,000,000 men. Chinas Army is larger then Russia's 12,000,000 Active/ 30 Million reserve; man army at the height of the USSR's power. God forbid such a catastrophe. I love the way the current administration is handling the situation, but aside from what is being said in public and the saber rattling, all of which has a purpose. There are some very real worries within the American Military Juggernaut. As our enemies wait on us this is the One time that America Becomes stronger with each passing day. Unfortunately every nation on the face of the planet knows what the current US force structure is. What is imponderable to the Enemies of America is what the Industrial Might and the American people are capable of producing and the actual numbers of men and tanks we can over a year period put on the ground if need be. For instance around 2/3000 M1 tanks have been built over the last 18 some odd years. I would not find it inconceivable that under the right sorts of pressures the Good Ole US of A could produce that many in a single year. And that is where America's strength in a long drawn out conflict is. And A long drawn out conflict is exactly where the US and our Allies are finding ourselves. But in that you can see that our enemies over the short term have very little chance of victory, and over the long term NO chance at victory. Thank God Almighty for the USA.
Link Posted: 12/30/2002 8:28:09 PM EST
You guys buy me an AR15 and I'll snipe across the Korean border. Civilian National Defense of America.
Link Posted: 12/30/2002 10:14:33 PM EST
Been there (1985), done that! [IMG]http://album.gunsnet.net/data/glockgunner/full_447_p4039.jpg[/IMG]
Link Posted: 12/31/2002 4:42:49 AM EST
A Washington Times Op/Ed is arguing for [url=http://www.washtimes.com/op-ed/20021230-31744088.htm]Attacking North Korea Now[/url] As you may recall the Scud Missles which were found on a cargo ship that was bound for Yemen were NOT on the shipping manifest. see: [url]http://www.intelmessages.org/Messages/National_Security/wwwboard/messages_02/3003.html[/url] note the excerpt: [b]The ship‘s manifest said it was carrying [red]40,000 sacks of cement[/red], an official said. But a search found 20 containers, each about 20 feet by 40 feet, that were covered with sacks of cement. After clearing the sacks and discovering signs of a high-tech arsenal, the Spanish captain signaled for American explosives experts, who are expected to file a more thorough report after they complete their work, perhaps by Wednesday.[/b] Obviously if the Missles were not on a shipping manifest, then they were bought Not by the Yemeni Government but by either a terrorist organization or by Iraq. North Korea is a principle supplier of missles for rogue nations. Given the history of North Korea's conduct along the DMZ as well as selling arms to rogue nations, and combined with the fact that they are attempting to restart their Nuclear Weapons program in flagrant violation of the Nuclear Arms proliferation treaty that they signed. I would say that North Korea is a significant and immediate threat to our National Security as well as to our National Interests in other parts of the globe. And is a threat to our major Allies and Trade Partners (Japan and South Korea). [b]We really need to ATTACK North Korea[/b]
Link Posted: 12/31/2002 5:24:24 AM EST
Benjamin0001, I beg to differ! What you say was accurate in 1941, leading to the US winning WWII. It is NOT true today. Much of our production capacity has been moved overseas. Even basic steel capacity is gone. It would take YEARS to build the MANUFACTURING capacity to in turn build the needed weapons of war.
Link Posted: 12/31/2002 5:51:57 AM EST
Used to fly anti- PRK infiltration patrols on occasion in my previous life. Would, on occasion used (haven't played that game in a loooonnnng time) to attempt to sneak spec ops types over in minisubs and small boats all the time. Pre-emptive strikes seem in order. They are admittadly in violation on the treaty and that is really all the justification we need in my book. Still wating for Carter to give back his Nobel Prize......
Link Posted: 12/31/2002 6:02:38 AM EST
Originally Posted By MickeyMouse: Benjamin0001, I beg to differ! What you say was accurate in 1941, leading to the US winning WWII. It is NOT true today. Much of our production capacity has been moved overseas. Even basic steel capacity is gone. It would take YEARS to build the MANUFACTURING capacity to in turn build the needed weapons of war.
View Quote
MM you are absolutely correct. Do we today even possess a domestic steel mill capable of pouring the size plates necessary to build capital warships? Where do we get the plates to build aircraft carriers? For a fact the smokestack industries of America are gone due to EPA et al. It's not like it's 1939 and there's all this excess manufacturing capacity sitting idle. Those plants are long gone. You can't fight a war with just IC's.
Top Top