I actually wonder if US SF are actually already in country.
It wouldn't be surprising.
Maybe there are some very brave people lying extremely still in the hills above those launch sites...

I don't know where all this "wonky missile" crap comes from. A quick google search of SA 200 missile shows clearly the rocket motor noses mounted at an angle ...

I was intrigued by the words of the North Korean minister who said they would deliver a nuclear attack "in their own style and own way" given their use of midget subs, Hughes 500 etc.

Are we being a bit traditional in our thinking what would stop them parking a sub with a nuclear device in a us or Asian harbour and hitting the sun switch?

Dagenham, that indeed was a proposal by the Royal Navy back in the late 50s or early 60s.

Now? Much better ASW capability.

China mostly. Korea exports a whole bunch of coal to China resulting in lots of cash. That's why Trump and company are trying so hard to enlist the help of China. If they turned off the tap, the DPRK would dry up and blow away.

It would surprise me. Several Tomahawk TLAMs would do much more damage than any kind of light infantry, even special forces ones, and with far far less risk.

I think that tartare meant that they are keeping very still observing and forwarding intelligence.

Correct.
Over the years have seen that way, way in advance of conflicts blowing up special forces have subsequently been revealed to be on the ground in surprising places.

Gee...if the White House cannot keep track of where the US Navy is....how is North Korea going to do so?

SAS, disinformation?

Ken

Your #45 - and Mr Trump could export his coal surplus to China. 'Win-Win'

Arc

Allegedly this already happening.

Where again?

GR, what? ,

I tend to agree. Even if shipping US coal to China makes the coal a bit more expensive than the Korean coal, it would probably be way way cheaper for Trump to subsidize that coal and economically strangle Korea for a few years to get them to the bargaining table than just about any other option. And seeing as Trump met with China's Xi recently, that may very well have been a topic of discussion.

KenV:
And following your line of thought, such an undertaking would bolster a certain campaign promise made regarding coal and jobs.

Indeed. And it further fits in rather well with the EOs and blls Trump signed a few weeks back that removed rules Obama put in place days before his departure that placed some onerous restrictions and requirements on coal mining. There's clearly a lot of moving parts to the overall picture.

Ken

They'll bundle that up as:

1. Making North Korea toe the line and show them that the US means business
2. Improving trading relations with China
3. Helping the balance of payments
4. Meeting the 'jobs and coal' election promise
5. Making the world a safer place
6. Justifying the recent announcement of increased US defence spending
7. Making Russia realize we mean what we say............
8. Making Russia realize that we have other world partners who we can deal with............
9. Making Mr Trump out to be the architect of the deal and a great statesman 'who understands how the world works'

A reasonably large percentage of which is true................... anything that avoids a non-objectives defined, long range war against yet another third world country gets my vote though.

Arc

China can have UK coal. Apparently, we do not want home sourced energy.:confused:

OAP