(H/T, many thanks, and a plea to reopen registration – Allahpundit)
Item #1 – The New York Times reports that both the Red Chinese and South Koreans will continue to maintain significant business deals with North Korea. Indeed, the ChiComs are refusing to inspect cross-border commerce (I’m shocked, SHOCKED that they would refuse this after demanding that such inspections be made voluntary).
As for the South Koreans, we should no longer concern ourselves with the fate of Seoul when considering whether to do the one thing that will disarm Krazy Kim the Younger (forced regime change). Indeed, we should pull our troops out of South Korea and conduct the operation as an amphibious/air campaign. Glad to see the SKs are practicing their duck-and-cover technique over on Fox; the next time, it probably will be for real regardless of what else happens.
Item #2 – The Daily Telegraph reports that the Royal Navy, once the unrivaled master of the seas and the victim of 9 years of ‘Rat-style cutbacks under the Labour Party, has been so emaciated that they will be no more than bit players in any naval blockade. And for you lefties out there; all of these cuts were planned before Iraq:
- The attack submarine force is down 17% (to 10), and will shortly be losing another one for 2 years while the first-in-class HMS Astute (which is due to replace the HMS Sovereign, scheduled to be decommissioned no later than January 2007) undergoes sea trials.
- The surface “tin-can” fleet is down 29% to 25 hulls, with only 8 destroyers (with no effective short-range anti-aircraft/missile defense) and 17 frigates (specializing in anti-sub warfare, containing short-range but no long-range anti-aircraft/missile defense).
- The baby-carrier fleet has been cut from 3 to 2, with HMS Invincible put in mothballs last year. While the Telegraph bemoans the loss of the Sea Harrier squadrons, they have been replaced by the more-capable Harrier GR.7 and GR.9.
Hmmm, any lessons to be learned here? I do note that the ‘Rats want to draw down our military in a similar fashion. I further note that the last time the Royal Navy was drawn down, the Argentines thought it would be a good time to go grab the Falklands.
Item #3 – The Washington Post reports that the policy chief for Japan’s ruling party is opening questioning whether Japan should remain non-nuclear.
Japan has a LOT to worry about from a nuclear Korea. Before the Rape of Nanking, there was the 30+-year rape of Korea, which continued until the end of World War II. Like much of the rest of the world, the Koreans have long memories and aren’t exactly forgiving. Even if Krazy Kim the Younger does eventually disappear without nuking Tokyo, if a reunited Korea is nuclear, it’s only a matter of time before Japan gets nuked again if they don’t take the “15 minutes” that it would take for them to go nuclear.
Speaking of that, does anybody doubt that there would be actual sanctions imposed on Japan if they were to take that step? Heck, if it wouldn’t be for the US’ veto seat and the 7th Fleet, it may well face UN-sanctioned military action.
