In response to:

'Proportional' Response

johnm h Wrote: Apr 09, 2013 8:50 AM
Nuke our own embassy? That's from Fail Safe, a liberal novel from the 50's, crazy. Carter had no credibility there was nothing he could do except invade with special forces immediately. He couldn't even pull that off. Had the marines shot the first folks over the fence, it would have ended, Obama has no credibility either so there is nothing he can do short of war to regain it. And even then it will be seen, correctly as an election strategy so it will have no wider impact. We just have to get him out of there and hold our breath in the mean time.
Since when has it been considered smart to tell your enemies what your plans are?

Yet there on the front page of the April 8th New York Times was a story about how unnamed "American officials" were planning a "proportional" response to any North Korean attack. This was spelled in an example: If the North Koreans "shell a South Korean island that had military installations" then the South Koreans would retaliate with "a barrage of artillery of similar intensity."

Whatever the merits or demerits of such a plan, what conceivable purpose can be served by telling the North Koreans in advance that they...

Related Tags: North Korea