Drums of war


Aside from all the comments I’ve made in this thread which explain my reasoning and my wager, none of the scenarios brought up here are similar to the planning cycle for the invasion of Iraq. Its worth pointing out again that there have been decades of planning on potential scenarios with the DPRK and yet the scenario remains fundamentally unchanged.

EIDT: Unfortunately the BBS does not seem to support markdown tables so as a bit of minimal explanation:

  • Iraq was vulnerable from air, land and sea, the DPRK is none of the above
  • Iraq required far more logistical planning to get ground troops and equipment in place while the US has had both stationed in the RoK & Japan for decades. Not to mention air and sea power in East Asia
  • The invasion of Iraq did not involve scenario planning which would cover dealing with the near certainty of massive damage to one or more US treaty allies

The scenarios could not be more different really.


Period propaganda on Sparrow Force:

Somewhat dated racial politics in the narration.



Two unsubstantiated claims, or perhaps one and just an opinion in that tweet. Person did not follow up with any explanation of “EIGHT times” nor does the Politico article explain or justify this claim or the claim/opinion of making way for war.


I’m unclear whether you’re complaining that war isn’t coming fast enough for your tastes, or bragging that your tolerance for our current state of extreme political tension is better than everyone else. But your definition of “peace” is definitely unique.


I’ve absolutely zero desire for any more war than currently exists. There is already too much in the world for my taste.

In regards to the current state of affairs with the DPRK doing the occasional launch over Japan, I’ve made it very clear previously in the thread that this has become a normal state of affairs here. Of course if you haven’t read this entire thread, not seeing that is understandable.

The world as a whole is far from at peace. My point throughout this thread is that I don’t believe that there is any impending war involving the DPRK and that the ideas regarding either impending US kinetic conflict with Iran or the scenario of the US somehow playing puppet master to create a Saudi/Iran war are full on tin foil hat conspiracy thinking. I made that entirely clear when I joined this thread on the day it started and offered to put my money where my mouth is.


I saw, but I sincerely believe that a state of impending war should never be normalized.

I absolutely agree that less war is far preferable to more war. I definitely don’t want to take any bets on the outcome of Trump’s warmongering.


I don’t know of anyone here or any public commentators who see it as a state of impending war. I cert don’t see it that way. What is weirdly “normal” is “oh, another rocket from the DPRK” kinda like “oh, another decent sized but not fatal quake/tsunami”.

As Robert E. Lee has been quoted "It is well that war is so terrible, else we would grow fond of it”.

To this particular child of the Cold War, it just looks like saber rattling not warmongering. That word has much heavier connotation. Obviously thats subjective. As I see it, if someone really believed so, they’d take my hundred dollar bet as free money and if they were even pretty strong in that belief but not certain, the hundred dollars would look pretty easy. Kind of as we used to say in Texas,“fish or cut bait” (to use the most polite form of that saying).





Interesting that the DPRK is now directing its Stalin-esque spokes voice at AU as well. As for General McCaffrey, I can’t say much one way or the other, he is most certainly learned, experienced and entitled to his opinion. Considering his career, his criticism of the Trump administration is no surprise at all.

What is funny to me in that article is the Clinton quote:

Meanwhile Hillary Clinton, Mr Trump’s beaten opponent in last year’s presidential election, took her own swing at his handling of the Korean crisis.
“We will now have an arms race, a nuclear arms race, in East Asia,” the former US secretary of state told CNN.
“We will have the Japanese, who understandably are worried with missiles flying over them as the North Koreans have done, that they can’t count on America.
“Diplomacy, preventing war, creating some deterrents is slow, hard-going, difficult work. And you can’t have impulsive people or ideological people who basically say, ‘Well, we’re done with you.’”

This proves that she still has no understanding of East Asia. She didnt when she was SoS and obviously doesn’t now.

  1. As for a nuclear arms race in East Asia, besides the DPRK who else does she think is in that race? Certainly not the RoK or Japan.
  2. As for the Japanese thinking they can’t count on America, she’s simply deluded and does not understand the situation here any more than she did as SoS.


Not surprising, and not unjustified.

The Oz military function as American auxiliaries. We’re a province of the empire.


You may or may not be aware but the DPRK used pretty much the same language towards Japan back when Japan had the unbridled temerity to enquire about the fate of Japanese citizens kidnapped by the DPRK. Surely that too was unjustified? (rhetorical question)

Does Queen Elizabeth know about this?

Also, does the AU/ROK cooperation fall under the concept of province of the empire? Do you count the ROK in that group?


The Guardian understands that at the time the board’s findings were suppressed, the British government was attempting to sell type 42 destroyers.


We too are a province of the US ‘empire’.

We could hardly not be.


did you forget the /s?


Not really.

I would characterise the UK’s current geo-political position as being akin to that of the former heavyweight boxing champ now relegated to carrying the tycoon’s bags and occasionally punching people as directed.

We were once an independent power. We now persist in the belief that we have some independent clout based as far as I can tell entirely on memories of empire.

We have no realistic independent military capacity nor really anywhere where it would make any kind of sense to use what little we do have other than in support of US policy.

If the chips are down, we will do what the US wants. That’s the bottom line of UK policy on pretty much anything of any importance.