Trump’s ‘God Bless the USA’ Bibles Were Made in China, Raising Eyebrows

[webfact]

North Korea's bark may be worse than bite in threat to shoot down U.S. bombers

By Christine Kim and David Brunnstrom

 

FILE PHOTO - Japan's Self-Defense Forces F-15 fighter jets (top and bottom) conduct an air exercise with U.S. Air Force B-1B Lancer bombers flying from Andersen Air Force Base, Guam, in the skies above the East China Sea, Japan, in this photo released by the Air Staff Office of the Defense Ministry of Japan September 9, 2017. Air Staff Office of the Defense Ministry of Japan/HANDOUT via REUTERS

 

SEOUL/WASHINGTON (Reuters) - North Korea has threatened to shoot down U.S. bombers flying near the Korean peninsula, but it would have difficulty matching its words with action given aging air defence systems mostly dating to the Cold War, military experts said.

 

In intensifying rhetoric between the United States and North Korea during the past week, President Donald Trump said the U.S. would "destroy" the country if it threatened the U.S. or its allies. Pyongyang's foreign minister Ri Yong Ho responded that Trump had "declared war" and North Korea reserved the right to take countermeasures, including shooting down U.S. bombers, even if they were not in its air space.

 

In a show of force on Saturday, U.S. Air Force B-1B Lancer bombers escorted by fighters flew east of North Korea, in what the Pentagon said was the farthest north of the Korean Demilitarized Zone that any U.S. fighter jet or bomber has flown in the 21st century.

 

The supersonic B-1B bombers have elaborate electronic countermeasures and are usually escorted by four F-15 fighters, which are likely to prevail in any air combat with North Korea's aging air force, said Bruce Bennett, a military expert at the Rand Corporation think tank.

 

"(And) if the North Koreans try to overwhelm the F-15 escorts by sending up dozens of their fighters, the United States will know that is happening, and would have the option of flying away from North Korea and heading towards Japan," Bennett said.

 

North Korea could attempt to fire surface-to-air missiles at the U.S. aircraft, but its systems would barely have the range to strike targets outside of North Korean airspace, missile experts said.

 

"If U.S. planes remain off-shore, they would be reasonably safe," said Michael Elleman, a missile expert at the International Institute for Strategic Studies.

 

UNAWARE OF U.S. PATROL?

 

Much less shoot them down, it is not even clear whether North Korea would be able to detect some modern-day U.S. aircraft.

 

In 1969, North Korea MiG-21 aircraft did shoot down a U.S. Navy EC-121 aircraft on a reconnaissance mission, which crashed 90 miles off the North Korean coast and killed all 31 Americans on board.

 

But that aircraft was of an aged design based on the Constellation airliner dating back to the 1940s.

 

The latest U.S. fighter jets have stealth capability designed to avoid detection and North Korea's military is known to be incapable of operating radar systems around the clock because supplies of energy are low, South Korean government official said, asking not to be identified.

 

"Due to hurdles from sanctions and oil shortages, I'm not sure whether fighters would be able to even return from a mission," said Park Dae-kwang, an expert on North Korea's air defence at South Korea's state-run Korea Institute for Defense Analyses.

 

North Korea has roughly 810 fighter planes, according to South Korea's 2016 defence ministry white paper. But officials and experts say most of these, largely of old Soviet and Chinese origin, are severely outdated and have been plagued with accidents.

 

In 2014, three aged North Korean fighter jets crashed in training over the course of two months, according to South Korean officials at the time.

 

"I doubt very much that any of the North Korean aircraft would be successful taking on our fighter escorts," said David Maxwell of Center for Security Studies, the Walsh School of Foreign Service, Georgetown University.

 

Last week, North Korea seemed to be unaware that the U.S. B-1B bombers had even been dispatched as it took no action to counter the U.S. patrol at that time, a South Korean lawmaker who was briefed by South Korea's spy agency said on Tuesday.

 

Washington appeared to have disclosed the flight path of its B-1B bombers intentionally after the non response, the lawmaker said.

 

A Pentagon spokesman said: "We won't confirm what North Korea did or did not know about our B-1B flight on the 23rd, but the mission was completed without incident."

 

BEST SHOT?

 

In 1981, the North Koreans tried but failed to shoot down a U.S. SR-71 Blackbird spy plane with a surface-to-air missile.

 

North Korea's best chance of shooting down a U.S. plane would likely be with its KN-06 surface-to-air missile system, which its leader Kim Jong Un declared "perfect" in May after previous defects in earlier testing had been addressed.

 

The KN-06 appeared to be based on Russia's S-300 system with a range of about 150 km (93 miles), said George Hutchinson, managing editor of the International Journal of Korean Studies, and a former U.S. Air Force officer.

 

Hutchinson said it was a more advanced system and "presents concerns because it is a road-mobile transportable system — it can be moved around to enhance its effectiveness and survivability."

 

However, it is not known how reliable the system is given it has only recently gone into operation, analysts said.

Another missile system, the SA-5, has a longer range of 250 km (155 miles) but it relies on old technology which U.S. aircraft could beat, Rand Corp's Bennett said.

 

North Korea has deployed SA-5 and SA-2 surface-to-air missile systems near the inter-Korean border and on its east and west coasts, according to South Korea's defence ministry.

 

Some analysts said North Korea's comments on Monday may have been aimed more towards where the B-1B bombers usually come from - the U.S. military base on the Pacific island territory of Guam, which Pyongyang has threatened to attack with its intermediate-range Hwasong-12 missiles.

 

The Pentagon said the B-1B bombers came from Guam and their fighter escorts came from Okinawa, Japan.

 

"They will probably try to strike U.S. aircraft if they ever enter North Korean airspace, but their anti-aircraft missiles are limited," said Kim Dong-yub, a military expert and analyst at South Korea's Institute for Far Eastern Studies.

 

"I feel this is more closely linked to North Korea's previous threat they would hit the waters near Guam."

 

Missile expert Elleman said his main concern was that any North Korean defensive move could quickly lead to all-out conflict.

 

"What I worry about is North Korea 'painting' a U.S. plane with a radar as if it were about to launch a weapon," he said.

 

"That might prompt a defensive reaction to suppress the air defences of North Korea, either electronically or kinetically. If North Korea fires something, the risks of miscalculation, escalation, grow enormously."

 

(Reporting by Christine Kim in SEOUL and David Brunnstrom in WASHINGTON, Additional reporting by Cynthia Kim in SEOUL and John Walcott in WASHINGTON; Editing by Soyoung Kim and Grant McCool)

 

-- © Copyright Reuters 2017-09-27

[darksidedog]

Kim "The US will cower in awe of our state of the art defence systems."

[boomerangutang]

The OP is an opinion piece patched together by some Reuters employees. 

Everyone is entitled to their opinion.  

 

Iraq I War showed how wrong the US was, to worry about whether, in that case, Iraqi defenses could hamper vanguard USAF tech.  

On the other side of the coin.  Prior to and during the VN war, the US military had no doubt its superior tech would force Viet Cong to capitulate in a short time.   How wrong was the Pentagon on that call?  56,000 dead young American men wrong.  

 

War is many things, but always unpredictable. N.Korea won't be able to shoot down stealth US aircraft, but that's a relatively small component in what would ensue in a war there.  

 

It's like a homeowner, when he hears a prowler breaking into his house:  the homeowner puts on a bulletproof vest and says to his wife, "that prowler won't be able to pierce this vest and plunge a knife into my chest, isn't that great?!"    The wife knows there are a whole lot of other harmful things a prowler can inflict.

 

[craigt3365]

3 hours ago, boomerangutang said:

The OP is an opinion piece patched together by some Reuters employees. 

Everyone is entitled to their opinion.  

 

Iraq I War showed how wrong the US was, to worry about whether, in that case, Iraqi defenses could hamper vanguard USAF tech.  

On the other side of the coin.  Prior to and during the VN war, the US military had no doubt its superior tech would force Viet Cong to capitulate in a short time.   How wrong was the Pentagon on that call?  56,000 dead young American men wrong.  

 

War is many things, but always unpredictable. N.Korea won't be able to shoot down stealth US aircraft, but that's a relatively small component in what would ensue in a war there.  

 

It's like a homeowner, when he hears a prowler breaking into his house:  the homeowner puts on a bulletproof vest and says to his wife, "that prowler won't be able to pierce this vest and plunge a knife into my chest, isn't that great?!"    The wife knows there are a whole lot of other harmful things a prowler can inflict.

 

Times have changed dramatically since Iraq and definitely since VN.  Impossible to make comparisons to back then.

 

I'm sure there are people who know exactly what NK has in terms of hardware.  And that info won't be made public.

[BuaBS]

Aaaand that why NK needs much more rockets & nukes. To be a real deterrent , he needs at least a couple of hundred ready to go nukes + all the bio & chemical he can muster.

Leave NK alone and things will settle down.

[smotherb]

6 hours ago, darksidedog said:

Kim "The US will cower in awe of our state of the art defence systems."

Not wise to underestimate an enemy. Our intelligence can be and has been misinformed; remember WMDs in Iraq? However, I doubt KJU would risk an attack on the US; I would be more concerned he will find a more zealous anti-US customer for his nuclear devices and delivery systems--all the better for him to sit back and smile while someone else takes the brunt of US retaliation.

[smotherb]

2 hours ago, craigt3365 said:

Times have changed dramatically since Iraq and definitely since VN.  Impossible to make comparisons to back then.

 

I'm sure there are people who know exactly what NK has in terms of hardware.  And that info won't be made public.

So, you are saying our intelligence was faulty in Vietnam and Iraq, but cannot be now?

[craigt3365]

5 minutes ago, smotherb said:

So, you are saying our intelligence was faulty in Vietnam and Iraq, but cannot be now?

Just saying you can't compare them.  Things change, intelligence is improved (or not), and different issues crop up.  Who knows what the big problem will be in the next war.

[Thaidream]

Intelligence during the Vietnam era and Iraq era did not have the electronic capabilities that are currently available nor the resources -  the less resources or capabilities the lower level of reliability of Intelligence gathering.

 

During the Vietnam war- had the US had intelligence capabilities that we have now- the Gulf of Tonkin incident  would have been instantly realized as a non event. Instead, it led America fully into a major war with resultant deaths.  The Iraq war was similar- there were no weapons of mass destruction and I believe had the US had proper intelligence gathering  methods- that war may not have happened.  How many Americans could even speak Vietnamese or Arabic during these times- virtually none.

[smotherb]

12 minutes ago, craigt3365 said:

Just saying you can't compare them.  Things change, intelligence is improved (or not), and different issues crop up.  Who knows what the big problem will be in the next war.

Exactly, no one knows it all, not even our intelligence community. It is the height of foolishness to underestimate an enemy.

[craigt3365]

1 minute ago, smotherb said:

Exactly, no one knows it all, not even our intelligence community. It is the height of foolishness to underestimate an enemy.

They know more than we ever will.  But mistakes happen.  the intelligence community is very good, but not perfect.

[Publicus]

36 minutes ago, smotherb said:

So, you are saying our intelligence was faulty in Vietnam and Iraq, but cannot be now?

 

40 minutes ago, smotherb said:

Not wise to underestimate an enemy. Our intelligence can be and has been misinformed; remember WMDs in Iraq?    <<snip>>

 

South Korean intelligence on North Korea is eminently reliable and definitive. While differences in language dialect and cultural barriers preclude agents infiltrating NK, the South's intelligence agents spend a lot of time going in and out of NK to personally scope things. SK technological intelligence is all over 'em besides.

 

With the Thaad radars in SK now both Pyongyang and Beijing are mortified and for every reason that each fears and knows. The sophisticated and powerful radars can compare the temperature of the morning tea of each Xi and Kim. Word is Kim likes his tea nuclear hot. Xi knows the Thaad radars are reading his entire nuclear capabilities to include his missiles.

 

Sun Tzu would be headed for the hills by now.

 

Edited September 27, 2017 by Publicus
Words of Mass Deception

[1sickpuppy]

10 hours ago, boomerangutang said:

The OP is an opinion piece patched together by some Reuters employees. 

Everyone is entitled to their opinion.  

 

Iraq I War showed how wrong the US was, to worry about whether, in that case, Iraqi defenses could hamper vanguard USAF tech.  

On the other side of the coin.  Prior to and during the VN war, the US military had no doubt its superior tech would force Viet Cong to capitulate in a short time.   How wrong was the Pentagon on that call?  56,000 dead young American men wrong.  

 

War is many things, but always unpredictable. N.Korea won't be able to shoot down stealth US aircraft, but that's a relatively small component in what would ensue in a war there.  

 

It's like a homeowner, when he hears a prowler breaking into his house:  the homeowner puts on a bulletproof vest and says to his wife, "that prowler won't be able to pierce this vest and plunge a knife into my chest, isn't that great?!"    The wife knows there are a whole lot of other harmful things a prowler can inflict.

 

I think the VN would have capitulated if the Govt asswipes had left it to the military, try reading the bright shining lie

[quadperfect]

I dont think trump plans to bog down america in another long drawn out war. If kim crosses that line i think there will be 23 million less north koreans.

 

[BuaBS]

5 hours ago, quadperfect said:

I dont think trump plans to bog down america in another long drawn out war. If kim crosses that line i think there will be 23 million less north koreans.

 

Let's hope Kim can retaliate with everything he's got.

[otherstuff1957]

If a second Korean war starts the USAF really doesn't have to worry about casualties. 

 

 

The casualties will be tens of thousands or possibly millions of Koreans - both North and South.

Kim doesn't need the capability to shoot down US planes, he just needs to be able to lob one of his new nukes at Seoul.

[craigt3365]

9 hours ago, BuaBS said:

Let's hope Kim can retaliate with everything he's got.

So if Kim initiates the warfare, you're hoping he kills many people?  Sick.

[boomerangutang]

18 hours ago, craigt3365 said:

Times have changed dramatically since Iraq and definitely since VN.  Impossible to make comparisons to back then. I'm sure there are people who know exactly what NK has in terms of hardware.  And that info won't be made public.

I don't agree.  War makers can learn a whole lot from historic conflicts.  I've subscribed to a mag called Military History which articulates battles from near cave-man times to Mosul.  Articles are very well-written and detailed.  There are thousands of parallel issues connecting battles across the ages, from Hittites to Green Berets.   From slinging stones, to computer viruses which cause Nuke centrifuges to spin too fast and self-destruct.

 

I doubt even the N.Koreans themselves know all the armnaments they have, where they're all stored, and their fighting condition.  US fighting forces have made mistakes in the past, and they will make mistakes in the future.  The biggest mistake the US military is making right now, is having an ignorant hot-headed dufus in charge.

[craigt3365]

3 minutes ago, boomerangutang said:

I don't agree.  War makers can learn a whole lot from historic conflicts.  I've subscribed to a mag called Military History which articulates battles from near cave-man times to Mosul.  Articles are very well-written and detailed.  There are thousands of parallel issues connecting battles across the ages, from Hittites to Green Berets.   From slinging stones, to computer viruses which cause Nuke centrifuges to spin too fast and self-destruct.

 

I doubt even the N.Koreans themselves know all the armnaments they have, where they're all stored, and their fighting condition.  US fighting forces have made mistakes in the past, and they will make mistakes in the future.  The biggest mistake the US military is making right now, is having an ignorant hot-headed dufus in charge.

100% agree you learn from your mistakes.  And that's my point.  Mistakes made in the past "typically" are rectified in the future.  Typically. LOL

 

Trump may be the commander in chief, but he can't call all the shots.  Listen to Mattis.  Ignore Trump.

 

[smotherb]

15 hours ago, Publicus said:

 

 

South Korean intelligence on North Korea is eminently reliable and definitive. While differences in language dialect and cultural barriers preclude agents infiltrating NK, the South's intelligence agents spend a lot of time going in and out of NK to personally scope things. SK technological intelligence is all over 'em besides.

 

With the Thaad radars in SK now both Pyongyang and Beijing are mortified and for every reason that each fears and knows. The sophisticated and powerful radars can compare the temperature of the morning tea of each Xi and Kim. Word is Kim likes his tea nuclear hot. Xi knows the Thaad radars are reading his entire nuclear capabilities to include his missiles.

 

Sun Tzu would be headed for the hills by now.

 

Sun Tzu would have had spies to determine the actual intelligence; however, since technology today is a bit further advanced than in Sun Tzu's day; it leaves all options open, including misinformation. Are you a proponent of underestimating an enemy?

[boomerangutang]

1 hour ago, craigt3365 said:

100% agree you learn from your mistakes.  And that's my point.  Mistakes made in the past "typically" are rectified in the future.  Typically. LOL  Trump may be the commander in chief, but he can't call all the shots.  Listen to Mattis.  Ignore Trump.

                    Trump's is 'the decider'.  Because he's prez, every utterance of his has to be taken seriously.  That's why media has been abuzz non-stop 24-7 since the election with the insane circus revolving around Trump.  If he had lost the election, the media would give him no more focus than they give to a failed real estate dealer from NYC.  How much do we hear from Romney nowadays?    Similarly, because he's officially 'Commander in Chief', every utterance/tweet from him, has to be taken seriously.  It's a sad state of affairs for the USA (and the world), but that's the way the pyramid of power was designed.

 

                The only way his rants and stupidity (re; N.Korea) won't be acted upon, is if one or more top brass around him refuse to follow an order.  Then, that officer would immediately be in trouble for insubordination or worse. 

 

                                I feel it's inevitable that serious bombs/missiles will be flying over the Korean peninsula within weeks.  Kim and Trump keep ratcheting up the tensions.   Trump is looking stupider, each time he makes a comment.   Should we expect any better from an Alex Jones fan?

 

[craigt3365]

3 minutes ago, boomerangutang said:

Should we expect any better from an Alex Jones fan?

 

[boomerangutang]

1 hour ago, smotherb said:

Sun Tzu would have had spies to determine the actual intelligence; however, since technology today is a bit further advanced than in Sun Tzu's day; it leaves all options open, including misinformation. Are you a proponent of underestimating an enemy?

                         Intelligence gathering is better, in some ways, than in Sun Tzu's time.  As you say, technologically: yes. 

 

                        However, humint (human acquired intelligence) is no better, and probably worse today, than in ST's time.  Additionally, parsing such intel is important.  Contemporary humans are no better, and arguably worse (at attributing/assessing importance of data) than in ancient times. 

 

                                        Trump has purposefully underfunded and understaffed the US State Dept.  He has equated the CIA with Nazis.  He says he knows more than the generals.  He said he had a secret plan to defeat ISIS - which he would implement in his first weeks in office.  US has an awful record re; humint in the M.East or N.Korea.   Even the one agent (embedded in ISIS) the US had in the M.East was compromised when Trump personally told two Russian agents about that person in the Oval Office. 

 

Trump is single-handedly debilitating US intel capabilities as fast as he can - both unwittingly and purposefully.

[smotherb]

2 hours ago, boomerangutang said:

                         Intelligence gathering is better, in some ways, than in Sun Tzu's time.  As you say, technologically: yes. 

 

                        However, humint (human acquired intelligence) is no better, and probably worse today, than in ST's time.  Additionally, parsing such intel is important.  Contemporary humans are no better, and arguably worse (at attributing/assessing importance of data) than in ancient times. 

 

                                        Trump has purposefully underfunded and understaffed the US State Dept.  He has equated the CIA with Nazis.  He says he knows more than the generals.  He said he had a secret plan to defeat ISIS - which he would implement in his first weeks in office.  US has an awful record re; humint in the M.East or N.Korea.   Even the one agent (embedded in ISIS) the US had in the M.East was compromised when Trump personally told two Russian agents about that person in the Oval Office. 

 

Trump is single-handedly debilitating US intel capabilities as fast as he can - both unwittingly and purposefully.

Of course human gathered intelligence is worse-off today than in Sun Tzu's day and a big reason is today's technology--it is much more difficult to conceal your alliances, previous actions, and affiliations today.

 

The fact that Trump is an ignorant loose cannon seems undeniable--just look at the misinformed statements and actions he has made both domestically and globally and the fact he takes the bait for any challenge or insult.

[hawker9000]

Yeah, shoot one down, fatboy, and watch what happens.   What a psycho.

 

But newsflash:  it isn't really Kim's SAM capability that's causing the big problem here...

 

THAAD radar is a huge tactical step forward to be sure, but they up the ante for Kim as his nuclear capabilities are devalued unless he can now undertake to produce enough of a nuclear arsenal to overwhelm THAAD and BMD, as China could easily do.  I'm not sure what the chosen course of action might be, but I'm certainly hoping Trump doesn't let fatboy even start down that road.  But the world might actually be better off if Kim in one of his delusional fogs tries to send up the balloon, necessitating retaliation, before achieving any of that.

 

As for the bomber sorties, I sort of think the F-15s are going to be expected to take the bullet for those bombers if it comes to that.

 

Edited September 28, 2017 by hawker9000

[boomerangutang]

4 hours ago, hawker9000 said:

Yeah, shoot one down, fatboy, and watch what happens.   What a psycho.

But newsflash:  it isn't really Kim's SAM capability that's causing the big problem here...

THAAD radar is a huge tactical step forward to be sure, but they up the ante for Kim as his nuclear capabilities are devalued unless he can now undertake to produce enough of a nuclear arsenal to overwhelm THAAD and BMD, as China could easily do.  I'm not sure what the chosen course of action might be, but I'm certainly hoping Trump doesn't let fatboy even start down that road.  But the world might actually be better off if Kim in one of his delusional fogs tries to send up the balloon, necessitating retaliation, before achieving any of that.

As for the bomber sorties, I sort of think the F-15s are going to be expected to take the bullet for those bombers if it comes to that.

No one really knows if Thaad will work.  It's tough to test a system like that.  It's not difficult to test out on the sands of Nevada, when you know when a missile is going to be launched and its likely trajectory.   Thaad didn't work recently, when a NK missile launched over Japan's Hokkaido island.   Also, for every defensive system, they're a subsequent way around it.  Never in the history of weapons has there ever been an offensive or defensive weapon that was the end-all.

 

All stealth aircraft leave heat trails.  What does it take to track heat?  Infra red sensors.

[Publicus]

19 hours ago, smotherb said:

Sun Tzu would have had spies to determine the actual intelligence; however, since technology today is a bit further advanced than in Sun Tzu's day; it leaves all options open, including misinformation. Are you a proponent of underestimating an enemy?

 

(No I have not stopped beating my wife.) 

 

 

The loaded question compels an 'of course' answer. Or it attempts to force a defensive denial. But only if the targeted person receives or accepts the question, that is. Neither am I the pupil here.

 

After you might think on that a bit kindly get back to me plse thx. I look forward to a serious discussion.

Edited September 28, 2017 by Publicus
Never underestimate a poster.

[Publicus]

19 hours ago, boomerangutang said:

                    Trump's is 'the decider'.  Because he's prez, every utterance of his has to be taken seriously. <<snip>>  Similarly, because he's officially 'Commander in Chief', every utterance/tweet from him, has to be taken seriously.  It's a sad state of affairs for the USA (and the world), but that's the way the pyramid of power was designed.

 

                The only way his rants and stupidity (re; N.Korea) won't be acted upon, is if one or more top brass around him refuse to follow an order.  Then, that officer would immediately be in trouble for insubordination or worse. 

 

 <<snip>>

 

 

You reference the central issue. That is, the matter of senior military commanders just following orders from an individual or adhering to their oath as military officers. If the matter ever comes down to being a choice between one or the other. 

 

We find the answer in the oath of each commissioned officer of all the armed forces. The oath is to the Constitution. Only. Exclusively. Institutionally. It is by the officer oath that we know the answer, i.e., which it is. Which rules out the "just following orders" doctrine. 

Unlike the oath taken by enlisted personnel, which includes the president, the military officer oath has no officer of the government included in it. Potus is not in the officer oath. No one is in the officer oath. Each officer of the armed forces assumes the oath to the Constitution and to the Constitution only.

 

The Founders provided for the military officer oath to the Constitution only. The oath of the military officer to the Constitution only was enacted by the First Session of the 1st Congress as Public Law Number 1. The Founders and the 1st Congress acted consistently with General George Washington who, on assuming command of the Continental Army in 1777, proscribed an officer oath.

 

The officer oath is thus an institutional oath. The officer oath is to the three branches of the government: the executive, the legislative, the judiciary. Each branch is a separate and coequal part of the government. The three branches exist in a balance of powers. The Constitution established a system of checks and balances among the three branches. So the oath is not, nor was the officer oath intended to be, to any one person or to any single office holder of the government. Not necessarily and not at all.

 

Thus if the general or admiral in command of the war room in the Pentagon decides in his/her judgment to consult the Secretary of Defense before executing an order from Potus, the general can do exactly that. Or contact the speaker of the House. Or the chief justice. Or another general/admiral. And so on.

 

After all, the title of Commander in Chief is an administrative title. It is an executive title conferred for efficiency of government in the national defense. The title does not establish a Caesar or anything like it. Indeed, the Founders conceived of the existing officer oath as a bulwark against tyranny -- the tyranny of one man. And one can safely say the Founders conceived of the military officer oath as a firewall against a Caligula should a Caligula happen along -- as he indeed has done and as he has indeed put himself upon us. 

Edited September 28, 2017 by Publicus
Technical.

[Scott]

Let's stick a little closer to the topic of North Korea.

 

[smotherb]

5 hours ago, Publicus said:

 

(No I have not stopped beating my wife.) 

 

 

The loaded question compels an 'of course' answer. Or it attempts to force a defensive denial. But only if the targeted person receives or accepts the question, that is. Neither am I the pupil here.

 

After you might think on that a bit kindly get back to me plse thx. I look forward to a serious discussion.

Loaded question, or realistic question? I am somewhat familiar with US intelligence systems; I have seen their strengths and their weaknesses. You seem to be spouting what our intelligence sources publicly say, the Norks are relying on obsolete technology and defense systems. Intelligence also states the best defense the Norks can assemble are their KN-06 missile, which are based-on the early Soviet S-300 missiles. Yet, are we sure they are not improved; and the answer is yes, they have been improved, but are they sufficiently improved to counter our missiles or aircraft?  Well, I posit that we may think not, but are we sure? Thus; are you willing to underestimate the Norks? I do not see that as a loaded question.