America - The Official Thread

[Dotini]

I don't think that's possible. Say we did actually launch missiles at North Korea out of the South Pacific (although it would probably coincide with strategic drone and airstrikes that immobilize nuclear facilities and launchsites). Couple scenarios for North Korea now. They might react too slowly and can't launch an effective counter. They might react and launch their whole arsenal, though we wouldn't know if they could do it before their launchsites get immobilized and destroyed, but odds are some of them would still be able to launch something somewhere, if they can actually launch something in a 15-30 minutes notice. And the actual launching of the missiles. We know that they can fire a missile into the sky, and we know they can detonate bombs, but can they launch a missile accurately into the sky with it detonating at the right location, say Seoul, without completely overshooting or undershooting the target, or without a premature mid-flight explosion, or without any sort of other failure mid-flight. And will they be able to penetrate the Patriot and THAAD (although it's range supposedly doesn't cover Seoul) missile defense systems, if they can actually get a launch off? And if they can be stopped mid-flight, will the fallout have a massive effect, affecting Seoul and the surrounding areas?

All your points here are good, and I agree with them. But you overlook one critical factor: Seoul is within range of hundreds or even thousands of long-range, big-bore artillery pieces buried in deep tunnels in the mountainsides just north of the DMZ. These big guns would rain holy hell on Seoul, and tens of thousands would perish if not evacuated before the barrages began. In days, much of Seoul and environs would be reduced to rubble and ash. This is why I call for evacuation of Seoul prior to any US attack.

I doubt that China would join in a counter attack with North Korea, knowing the stakes. I don't think that China and North Korea are as close as the media likes to portray them to be. But you never know with the Paper Tiger.

I agree here too, though tepidly. North Korea has long been a catspaw with plausible deniability for China. They would very chapped to lose this asset, IMO.

 

[Touring Mars]

Another question is, why would North Korea attack Seoul/South Korea if the US attacked North Korean installations completely independently of South Korea? The US has nuclear submarines, stealth bombers and aircraft carriers in the region capable of mounting an attack on North Korea with or without any support from SK. Another major consideration is what North Korea would stand to gain from levelling Seoul - very little, as far as I can see. North Korea would instantly lose any moral high ground it may have by attacking an innocent third party in retaliation for a US attack, and would simply provide a clear and unequivocal justification for the use of overwhelming force against it.

The US have a critical upper hand here - it knows it can get away with a limited attack on North Korea because although the DPRK are capable of inflicting very heavy losses on someone in response, it is not capable of winning a head-to-head fight with the US. The DPRK would effectively have one offensive campaign before it was crippled beyond further action, so it would have to be pretty certain it wanted to go all-in in response to any particular attack. So the question is not just how far an attacker can go before provoking a response, but how long the DPRK can hold back from an extreme retaliation, knowing that doing so would certainly spell the end of the DPRK.

 

[Dotini]

Another question is, why would North Korea attack Seoul/South Korea if the US attacked North Korean installations completely independently of South Korea? The US has nuclear submarines, stealth bombers and aircraft carriers in the region capable of mounting an attack on North Korea with or without any support from SK. Another major consideration is what North Korea would stand to gain from levelling Seoul - very little, as far as I can see. North Korea would instantly lose any moral high ground it may have by attacking an innocent third party in retaliation for a US attack, and would simply provide a clear and unequivocal justification for the use of overwhelming force against it.

The US have a critical upper hand here - it knows it can get away with a limited attack on North Korea because although the DPRK are capable of inflicting very heavy losses on someone in response, it is not capable of winning a head-to-head fight with the US. The DPRK would effectively have one offensive campaign before it was crippled beyond further action, so it would have to be pretty certain it wanted to go all-in in response to any particular attack. So the question is not just how far an attacker can go before provoking a response, but how long the DPRK can hold back from an extreme retaliation, knowing that doing so would certainly spell the end of the DPRK.

The first thing is, large US military garrisons are in the mix with allied South Korean installations along the southern edge of the DMZ, within range of the North's artillery. There is no complete independence. Additionally, both South Korea and the US would be subject to chemical/biological/cyber and other asymmetrical attacks in the event of hostilities. So these are the North's hammers. If they are attacked, they will pound the closest nail. Beyond that, my tiny mind boggles as to the why (people's motivations) any such aggressions and retaliations are undertaken by warring parties. As far as I'm concerned, war is madness and can't be justified except in self defense.

our strategy,
http://www.chicagotribune.com/news/...aa-11e7-89fa-bb822a46da5b-20170908-story.html

 

[Joey D]

That strategy reads like a bad Tom Clancy novel brief.

Truth is, I don't think anyone really knows how a war would go down - especially not a newspaper in Chicago. For as dopey as our current administration is, I don't think they'd be broadcasting their plans.

 

[TexRex]

I don't think they'd be broadcasting their plans.

But they're the best plans in a very long time. Many people have sent letters, the plans are so great. Any claim that the plans are not great is just fake news. And how great is the word "fake?" I'm pretty sure I created it. Others may have used it...I don't know.

 

[Johnnypenso]

That strategy reads like a bad Tom Clancy novel brief.

Truth is, I don't think anyone really knows how a war would go down - especially not a newspaper in Chicago. For as dopey as our current administration is, I don't think they'd be broadcasting their plans.

Chetan Peddada, the author, served as a U.S. Army intelligence officer in South Korea and helped prepare for various war scenarios and participated in refining war plans in several theater-wide exercises. Of course no one can predict the future but it's not like the article is written by some recent grad from journalism school. Source

 

[Joey D]

Chetan Peddada, the author, served as a U.S. Army intelligence officer in South Korea and helped prepare for various war scenarios and participated in refining war plans in several theater-wide exercises. Of course no one can predict the future but it's not like the article is written by some recent grad from journalism school. Source

Which is fine, but it still comes across like the synopsis of a war novel I'd buy at the airport.

Headlining it "A Sneak Peak at America's War Plans for North Korea" seems misleading. It's not a sneak peak, it's a guess. Any real strategy would more than likely be top secret on only a handful of people would actually know.

To me, it seems like sensational journalism based on a "what if" scenario. Either that or it's a clever ploy to throw off North Korea, who's probably reading all of our press.

 

[Johnnypenso]

Shocking approval ratings from a CBS poll regarding the SOTU address:

Republicans - 97%
Independents - 72%
Democrats - 43%

 

[Danoff]

Shocking approval ratings from a CBS poll regarding the SOTU address:

Republicans - 97%
Independents - 72%
Democrats - 43%

Do people watch the SOTU anymore? I stopped watching like... 6 years back. Haven't missed anything as best I can tell.

 

[Joey D]

Do people watch the SOTU anymore? I stopped watching like... 6 years back. Haven't missed anything as best I can tell.

I'm sure more people watch it than you think. I mean I don't because it's just a bunch of horn tooting about how great X party is and how Y party needs to step up an play nice.

I haven't read anything about the SOTU yet, but I imagine it went something like this:

- Tax cuts are good
- Trump saying he's responsible for job growth, the economy, etc.
- China is stealing jobs
- We need to spend more on the military
- North Korea will kill us
- Russia is bad
- We need a wall
- Democrats should stop interfering with making America great again

Past that I'm guessing there were also gratuitous shots of people looking creepy, overly happy, and rolling their eyes. Also, at least on person looking like they really need to use the bathroom and another trying to stay awake.

 

[TexRex]

Do people watch the SOTU anymore?

I haven't missed one since 1994. I don't watch to be informed of the state of the union, however; the cynic in me watches to compare things that "need to be done" with what actually gets done.

I imagine it went something like this:

- Tax cuts are good
- Trump saying he's responsible for job growth, the economy, etc.
- China is stealing jobs
- We need to spend more on the military
- North Korea will kill us
- Russia is bad
- We need a wall
- Democrats should stop interfering with making America great again

That's about what I was expecting, and that's what he delivered...for the most part. I was astonished by how little he spoke of himself or Russia.

What stood out for me, however, was the overwhelming number of "I'm pausing so you can clap for me" moments, which are backed up by the fact that the address ran 80 minutes (the third longest SOTU address--of modern times--in duration) and contained only 5830 words (the fewest in a decade).

Not surprisingly, comments on immigration revolved around terrorism and gang violence--"dreamers" being mentioned only briefly--and comments regarding mass shootings were only part of an over-arching "strength" narrative and didn't touch on a change being necessary, because such comments would alienate his base.

He certainly did not reinforce the "best orator to hold that office [of the President] in generations" claim that that crap weasel Stephen Miller made; at best he showed he was able to adhere (presumably) to the words as written, but he couldn't stifle his special brand of sign language ("A-okay" and "Make the Ls").

 

[Rage Racer]

Another question is, why would North Korea attack Seoul/South Korea if the US attacked North Korean installations completely independently of South Korea? The US has nuclear submarines, stealth bombers and aircraft carriers in the region capable of mounting an attack on North Korea with or without any support from SK. Another major consideration is what North Korea would stand to gain from levelling Seoul - very little, as far as I can see.

Retaliation.
To do unacceptable damage to the opposite side in case if DPRK's soveregnity is threatened. That's a deterrence factor. Other "nuclear club" countries normally use nukes for deterrence. But in case of Seoul, North Korea doesn't even need nukes to do this.

Losing Seoul alone (but there are US military assets in the other places of RK) wouldn't make direct damage to US, I guess (except for the US citizens in the city), but the world would remember Trump as the person who provoked this mess.

 

[Johnnypenso]

That's about what I was expecting, and that's what he delivered...for the most part. I was astonished by how little he spoke of himself or Russia.

What stood out for me, however, was the overwhelming number of "I'm pausing so you can clap for me" moments, which are backed up by the fact that the address ran 80 minutes (the third longest SOTU address--of modern times--in duration) and contained only 5830 words (the fewest in a decade).

Not surprisingly, comments on immigration revolved around terrorism and gang violence--"dreamers" being mentioned only briefly--and comments regarding mass shootings were only part of an over-arching "strength" narrative and didn't touch on a change being necessary, because such comments would alienate his base.

He certainly did not reinforce the "best orator to hold that office [of the President] in generations" claim that that crap weasel Stephen Miller made; at best he showed he was able to adhere (presumably) to the words as written, but he couldn't stifle his special brand of sign language ("A-okay" and "Make the Ls").

If you've been watching them since 1994 you should know by now that all these SOTU addresses are pretty much the same, especially during times of relative peace and prosperity. "We're doing great, here's all the great stuff we've done, here's what we have to do, let's pull together and get it done". A handful of human examples are always trotted out to promote your agenda. War heroes, crime victims, first responders, kids, average working Joes, etc., whomever fits the bill and promotes your pet causes or the cause d'jour. Lots of clapping and cheering, especially for the patriotic stuff followed by lots of self congratulating and patting each other on the back. All the while it's the job of the opposition party to sit there and look glum and bored, lest they ever let on that the sitting POTUS has actually done something good and worthwhile in the previous year.

Rinse and repeat...

 

[DesertPenguin]

If you've been watching them since 1994 you should know by now that all these SOTU addresses are pretty much the same, especially during times of relative peace and prosperity. "We're doing great, here's all the great stuff we've done, here's what we have to do, let's pull together and get it done". A handful of human examples are always trotted out to promote your agenda. War heroes, crime victims, first responders, kids, average working Joes, etc., whomever fits the bill and promotes your pet causes or the cause d'jour. Lots of clapping and cheering, especially for the patriotic stuff followed by lots of self congratulating and patting each other on the back. All the while it's the job of the opposition party to sit there and look glum and bored, lest they ever let on that the sitting POTUS has actually done something good and worthwhile in the previous year.

Rinse and repeat...

So a 🤬 sucking contest then?

 

[TexRex]

you should know by now

Oh, I do. Which is why, after noting that I've

been watching them since 1994

, I also noted that I don't watch them to be informed of the state of the union...because that's not what is on offer.

 

[Johnnypenso]

So a 🤬 sucking contest then?

I would have went with shameless self promotion myself

 

[samurai8juice]

That strategy reads like a bad Tom Clancy novel brief.

Truth is, I don't think anyone really knows how a war would go down - especially not a newspaper in Chicago. For as dopey as our current administration is, I don't think they'd be broadcasting their plans.

If anyone has plans, it's the CIA. They probably know more about North Korea's defenses than any other group in the United States and the World (except for the Chinese and the Russians). And I'm sure there's been decades of attack/defense plans ready, being updated every so often to accommodate for changes in strategy and technology. Because if there isn't a plan ready, what the hell has our military leadership been doing the past 4-8 years?

It's baffling that North Korea has been able to last this long...no uprisings, no...anything. The people of the country faithfully think that they're the brightest spot in the entire world, without questioning the power or authority of the government. They've allowed very very little to no outside influence on their people or culture. I wonder how much longer they'll last.

 

[Biggles]

. For as dopey as our current administration is, I don't think they'd be broadcasting their plans.

If anyone has plans, it's the CIA. They probably know more about North Korea's defenses than any other group in the United States and the World (except for the Chinese and the Russians). And I'm sure there's been decades of attack/defense plans ready, being updated every so often to accommodate for changes in strategy and technology. Because if there isn't a plan ready, what the hell has our military leadership been doing the past 4-8 years?

It's baffling that North Korea has been able to last this long...no uprisings, no...anything. The people of the country faithfully think that they're the brightest spot in the entire world, without questioning the power or authority of the government. They've allowed very very little to no outside influence on their people or culture. I wonder how much longer they'll last.

Surely the plans would have been drawn up by the military, not the current administration ... at least I would certainly hope so? The CIA would have provided intelligence on which the military would base their plans. I understand there are around 35,000 US military personnel stationed in SK, so a huge number of US lives would be threatened by even a conventional conflict with NK.

Dealing with NK represents a unique challenge, as the state of the country & its leadership is unlike any other. Usually you could count on a degree of general self-interest governing the actions of a country. It's difficult to to know how to evaluate that in the case of an egomaniacal dictator leading a nation of totally brainwashed citizens. I have a neighbour who was born in China the year Mao took power. Her life story is a truly fascinating tale (she is a very wealthy property owner now). Her description of life under Mao, culminating in the Cultural Revolution, is really eye-opening - yes, it's really possible for people to be so oppressed, so fearful, & so ignorant of any alternative reality that they they never think to challenge the status quo.

 

[Johnnypenso]

If anyone has plans, it's the CIA. They probably know more about North Korea's defenses than any other group in the United States and the World (except for the Chinese and the Russians). And I'm sure there's been decades of attack/defense plans ready, being updated every so often to accommodate for changes in strategy and technology. Because if there isn't a plan ready, what the hell has our military leadership been doing the past 4-8 years?

It's baffling that North Korea has been able to last this long...no uprisings, no...anything. The people of the country faithfully think that they're the brightest spot in the entire world, without questioning the power or authority of the government. They've allowed very very little to no outside influence on their people or culture. I wonder how much longer they'll last.

I think you answered your own question. The NK's are like mushrooms, kept in the dark and fed 🤬. They have no idea how much they'd be welcomed with open arms by their brothers and sisters to the south, and indeed the world, if they could only throw their doors open. But if you control the press and the flow of information, you control the people. I highly doubt all the people think they're the brightest spot in the world given that a great many of them are starving and sick.

 

[Imari]

Losing Seoul alone (but there are US military assets in the other places of RK) wouldn't make direct damage to US, I guess (except for the US citizens in the city), but the world would remember Trump as the person who provoked this mess.

Sorta but not really. Trump might have provoked it, but destroying Seoul if SK hasn't actually signed off on the war would make NK look even worse.

If South Korea does sign off on the US attacking NK then that's a different story, they're essentially declaring war. But South Korea won't advocate open war against North Korea because they're not insane.

It's baffling that North Korea has been able to last this long...no uprisings, no...anything. The people of the country faithfully think that they're the brightest spot in the entire world, without questioning the power or authority of the government. They've allowed very very little to no outside influence on their people or culture. I wonder how much longer they'll last.

Long enough, I imagine. Honestly, I hope they're left to their ways instead of becoming another Afghanistan. There are worse things than living in a relatively stable oppressive dictatorship. Like living in an active war zone.

 

[LMSCorvetteGT2]

The point is, you can't say someone is adding jobs when thousands of people are losing theirs. Common sense really.

Yeah you can the labor department even said for the month of January employment is up adding 243k jobs in the private sector, which was greatly underestimated by those projecting numbers. So while others may be losing their jobs or getting diminished because of higher minimum wages state and even Fed perhaps, that doesn't mean job growth is down.

To praise or take away from any person undermines the complexity of the market and labor projections.

 

[DK]

The swamp got a little shallower yesterday, as Trump's appointee to head the CDC, Brenda Fitzgerald, has resigned after a report that she bought shares in Japan Tobacco a month after starting her new job.

 

[Johnnypenso]

I didn't think there'd be much to this impending memo release..until I heard James Comey used the words "weasels and liars" in a tweet, while invoking the name of Joe McCarthy.

 

[Dotini]

The FISA court abuse memo is released.
https://www.cbsnews.com/news/nunes-...pite-fbi-warnings-grave-concern-live-updates/

 

[twitcher]

I haven't read the full thing yet....but it's not looking good. It's definitely not just a publicity stunt by the Rep. Something is definitely rotten in the state of Denmark.

 

[05XR8]

http://pix11.com/2018/01/31/all-inmates-in-new-york-state-prisons-will-get-free-tablets/

Trying to make jail more appealing?

 

[Northstar]

Trying to make jail more appealing?

It's not like they are getting ipads or something worthwhile. These are the ones they will be getting.

Considering it sounds like it's the company itself that is flipping the bill (sort of like a drug dealer ironically enough, tablet is free, but you gotta pay for everything after that ), I don't really have a problem with it as long as they are closely monitored.

 

[Dotini]

$9 million went from HRC and DNC to Perkins Coe. From $1million to $8 million went from Perkins Coe to Fusion GPS. Perkins Coe paid $1 million to Orbis (British spy Steele's company) and $168k to Steele himself. Perkins Coe, and or Steele, paid Russians to populate a "dossier" with BS. The FBI also paid Steele. Knowing all this, the FBI swore (4 times) upon oath to the FISA court as to the veracity of the dossier in order to obtain warrants to spy on Trump and associates. Or as best as I can make from H.A. Goodman.

"Follow the money." We learned that from Watergate.

 

[Lain]

It's not like they are getting ipads or something worthwhile. These are the ones they will be getting.

Considering it sounds like it's the company itself that is flipping the bill (sort of like a drug dealer ironically enough, tablet is free, but you gotta pay for everything after that ), I don't really have a problem with it as long as they are closely monitored.

"Corrections-grade tablet computing" doesn't sound like a worthwhile experience to you?

 

[DK]

Well, this is awkward for the Trump cult.