US Navy is on the move again.
We like to keep an eye on what the US Navy's strike forces are up to, it is a habit I got into many years ago when I knew a couple of people likely to be on them, this became a more intense interest for a few years over the last half decade
anyway, the USS Reagan just set to see, in a bit of a rush, to head for the west Pacific/Middle East. One of those.
Now the Eisenhower is in the Middle East, should be back late summer;
the USS Washington is stationed in Japan and is out on exercises, preparing for their summer cruise;
the USS Stennis was in the west Pacific, but just stopped off in Pearl Harbour before heading back out.
The US Nimitz is in the east Pacific doing quals.
So... should the occasion arise, the US could have three carriers in or near the China sea, very rapidly, possibly five is things were shuffled around a bit.
That also puts a lot of missile cruisers and destroyers out in the Pacific.
Just on the off chance the balloon goes up on a medium sized peninsula somewhere in the vicinity.
This seems, anecdotally, to be a somewhat stronger reaction than the W administration had to the Great Leader's blusters.
Interesting times continue.
To be fair, I don't think Kim Jong Il was ever quite this provocative during the Bush administration.
I agree, though he came close in 2006.
The ship movements are both reassuring and worrying
- it is reassuring that there is low profile moving around, just in case; it is worrying that the admin might think there might actually be a case
Interesting case. Seldom brought to the surface diplomatic fact is that the Korean war hasn't ended.
There has been no formal declaration of peace. Instead there is an armistice. In effect little more than a cease fire backed by over fifty years of non-war. Nobody who knows and understands the goings on in the DMZ, a bloody kabuki dance where people sometimes die by being hacked apart by shovels, and both sides have raised absurd posturing and tunneling to high arts, would call it peace.
Of course, recently Great Leader has renounced the armistice, all previous disarmament agreements, and all attempts at international controls and sanctions. What this means is anyone's guess. If the only diplomatic agreement between open war is an armistice, and then one side denounces this armistice does this mean we are at war?
As I see it there is only a fifty year tradition and the fear of consequences that prevents us from landing cruise missiles in Dear Leader's back pocket and his million man army from deciding to take a stroll south.
As I see it there is only a fifty year tradition and the fear of consequences that prevents us from landing cruise missiles in Dear Leader's back pocket and his million man army from deciding to take a stroll south.
Which has been good for the South Koreans: Seoul is only about 50 km from the DMZ. Resumption of hostilities would be bad news indeed for people who actually live there.
Re: #4
They'll take that stroll when they get hungry enough.