OF THE
TIMES
U.S. military options for confronting North Korea's nuclear and missile development programs are fraught with grave risks, unlike recent strikes in Syria and Afghanistan.I'm sure the U.S. military has thought out the consequences. Ooops! Where's the Carl Vinson? Off the coast of Indonesia? Wrong-way Trump!“Realistically, anything is on the table,” said Dean Cheng, a senior research fellow at the Heritage Foundation, a Washington think tank. “It depends on what price you are willing to pay.” The basic problem: It’s unlikely a U.S. strike could wipe out North Korea’s nuclear arsenal completely or prevent the country's unpredictable leader, Kim Jong Un, from launching a devastating artillery and missile attack on prosperous South Korea in retaliation. Seoul, the capital, is a mere 35 miles from the demilitarized zone separating the two countries, and its metropolitan area has a population of about 25 million. “North Korea has demonstrated a willingness to do things like sink a South Korean warship without provocation,” Cheng said. “If you give them provocation we don’t know what their response is.” North Korea is suspected of firing a torpedo at the ship in 2010.
Comment: Be reassured, dear readers: the U.S. is now relatively confident that Russia is not trying to annex Alaska: Thank the Lord!