Here’s What War With North Korea Would Actually Look Like: 20,000 Dead In The First 24 Hours

To borrow a phrase that was used hundreds – if not thousands – of times by leftists in the months following the election of Barack Obama, President Trump was “dealt a bad hand.” This is not an excuse for inaction or strategic mistakes, however, sort of like how the liberals used it to cover up Obama’s foolishness. Rather, the fact that Donald Trump was dealt a bad hand with regards to foreign policy is simply reality. Due largely to the fecklessness and the submissiveness of the prior administration on the global stage, America now faces several dangerous threats, not the least of which is North Korea.

For months now, President Trump and Kim Jong-Un have been engaged in a war of words, so to speak, with both leaders casting threats at one another without actually pulling the trigger. However, in addition to these threats, Kim Jong-Un has been repeatedly testing intercontinental ballistic missiles, almost as if he is trying to provoke the United States into making the first move. Many Americans and conservative commentators, such as nationally syndicated radio host “The Great One” Mark Levin, rightfully believe that the time has come for us to consider taking action against North Korea before they have a chance to strike.

“He needs to be taken out,” Levin said of Kim Jong-Un on his radio program back in April. “This inbred is hell-bent on developing long-range ICBMs – which he doesn’t need.” Levin went on to explain that he’s “not a neocon,” and that he just wants to protect America.

Indeed, the time to strike North Korea may have arrived. Waiting around while one of our greatest enemies continues to threaten us and produce powerful long-range weapons is not a strategy; it is surrender. But before the United States officially pulls the trigger, it is helpful to know what exactly we would be getting ourselves into.

Rob Givens, who was the deputy assistant chief of staff for operations of U.S. Forces Korea as well as special assistant to the Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, recently published an article on BreakingDefense.com to help shed some light on the matter. According to Givens, war with North Korea will look something like this: “Thousands of aircraft will wage an epic battle across the entire Korean Peninsula. The two American Air Force fighter wings – 100-plus fighter aircrafts permanently stationed there – accompanied by our South Korean partners would fight the opening minutes, striking against the North’s aged, but plentiful air forces while also bombing Kim Jong-Un’s missiles and artillery.”

Givens ultimately concludes, “North Korea’s casualties would be appalling. The estimates are that we would inflict 20,000 casualties on the North each day of combat.” Sadly, this sort of violence and mayhem is expected when two nations go to war with each other. While 20,000 North Korean casualties per day is certainly unfortunate, it would be unwise for President Trump and his military advisors to let it dissuade them from taking action. There is simply too much on the line. (Related: Read about why preppers should expect a war between the U.S. and North Korea, and what they should do to prepare.)

What would happen if one day, North Korea’s threats turned into action? What if they finally developed an effective ICBM that could carry a nuclear warhead over a long distance, and then used that ICBM to reduce one of America’s cities to rubble? And then what if instead of U.S. forces taking the battle to the other side of the world, the North Koreans infiltrated our country and began taking over? The amount of innocent American lives that would be taken would be innumerable, and as commander-in-chief, that is something that President Trump should do everything in his power to prevent. Because when it comes to war with North Korea, it really is a simple reality – it’s either them or us.

Why States Still Use Barrel Bombs

Smoke ascends after a Syrian military helicopter allegedly dropped a barrel bomb over the city of Daraya on Jan. 31.(FADI DIRANI/AFP/Getty Images) Summary Barrel bombs are not especially effective weapons. They are often poorly constructed; they fail to detonate more often than other devices constructed for a similar purpose; and their lack of precision means they can have a disproportionate effect on civilian populations. However, combatants continue to use barrel bombs in conflicts, including in recent and ongoing conflicts in Africa and the Middle East, and they are ideally suited to the requirements of resource-poor states. Analysis Barrel bombs are improvised devices that contain explosive filling and shrapnel packed into a container, often in a cylindrical shape such as a barrel. The devices continue to be dropped on towns all over Syria . Indeed, there have been several documented cases of their use in Iraq over the past months, and residents of the city of Mosul, which was re

Russia Looks East for New Oil Markets

Click to Enlarge In the final years of the Soviet Union, Soviet leader Mikhail Gorbachev began orienting his foreign policy toward Asia in response to a rising Japan. Putin has also piloted a much-touted pivot to Asia, coinciding with renewed U.S. interest in the area. A good expression of intent was Russia's hosting of the Asia-Pacific Economic Cooperation summit in 2012 in Vladivostok, near Russia's borders with China and North Korea. Although its efforts in Asia have been limited by more direct interests in Russia's periphery and in Europe, Moscow recently has been able to look more to the east. Part of this renewed interest involves finding new export markets for Russian hydrocarbons. Russia's economy relies on energy exports, particularly crude oil and natural gas exported via pipeline to the West. However, Western Europe is diversifying its energy sources as new supplies come online out of a desire to reduce its dependence on Russian energy supplies . This has

LONDON POLICE INDIRECTLY ENCOURAGE CRIMINALS TO ATTACK RUSSIAN DIPLOMATIC PROPERTY

ILLUSTRATIVE IMAGE A few days ago an unknown perpetrator trespassed on the territory of the Russian Trade Delegation in London, causing damage to the property and the vehicles belonging to the trade delegation , Russian Foreign Ministry Spokeswoman Maria Zakharova said during the September 12 press briefing. The diplomat revealed the response by the London police was discouraging. Police told that the case does not have any prospects and is likely to be closed. This was made despite the fact that the British law enforcement was provided with video surveillance tapes and detailed information shedding light on the incident. By this byehavior, British law inforcements indirectly encourage criminals to continue attacks on Russian diplomatic property in the UK. Zakharova’s statement on “Trespassing on the Russian Trade Mission premises in London” ( source ): During our briefings, we have repeatedly discussed compliance with the Vienna Convention on Diplomatic Relations, specif

ISDEI Instituto de Seguridad, Defensa y Estudios Internacionales

Search This Blog