British spy returns to Saudi Arabia

The ever horrible Frank Gardner, an expert in propaganda, who very obviously a British spy, returns to the place where he was shot while trying to recruit Saudi patsies, under the guise of “investigating” the 2004 Khobar towers bombing.

h-ttp://www.bbc.co.uk/news/magazine-22042955 (remove the hyphen)

–

–

–

–

–

–

–

–

–

–

 

Is the US going to sacrifice South Korea to a nuclear wipeout?

The US’s aggressive actions with regards to North Korea (performing an exercise of a nuclear pre-emptive strike against NK) are even more appalling than it’s usual behaviour. Of course NK will see this as a threat. Remember, the US is still the ONLY country ever to use nuclear weapons – and it did so against largely innocent civilians.

It’s generally accepted that NK has a few nuclear weapons. It also has a missiles program. It is a further step to combine the two – to create a nuclear missile. But let’s say it does have a few nuclear armed missiles which I think it fair to say is a rasonable working assumption.

Once more, it is generally accepted that the missile while possibly being able to strike US occupied Hawaii, and perhaps parts of Alaska, but not mainland USA. The US and South Korean ‘threats’ to the north, by conducting yet more military drills – with NK being the obvious target in mind, make NK feel threatened. Afterall, NK was like an early version of Vietnam, the US meddling in the affairs of another country scared it’s influence and power in the region may diminish.

Lets assume the US’s and SK’s stance does threaten NK so much that NK feels it needs to strike, and it does so with a nuclear strike against the south. I think it is more reasonable to think NK will pursue a Mutually Assured Destruction (MAD) policy rather than a limited strike, as no matter what strike it does,i it will be the end of the NK regime, but at least NK would have the ‘compensation’ that the South, who was largely responsible for NK’s predicament, would also be destroyed. A war against a SK that wasn’t destroyed, would certainly see SK being ultimately ‘victorious’, albeit bearing Hiroshima and Nagasaki style scars.

The US is a war economy. The elite profiteering from this would spin cartwheels should a conventional war be launched against NK. It would also allow the pro-US south to assume eventual control right up to China’s  border. and massively boosting any case the US had for a heavy military presence in the area. (no matter how illigimate that ‘case’ may actually be).

Also, SK is trying hard to sell nuclear energy technology across the world. As such it is a serious competitor the US aspirations. SK benefits from being able to hush up a lot of the problems caused by it’s technology, so it’s relatively easy to portray its tech as ‘good’ and ‘clean’ (again marketing can easily bury the realities). And a battered and bruised SK would surely become engaged in US ‘reconstruction’ projects.

China would suffer too, losing an quazi buffering force against US the region.

Recent US aggressive posturing, planning and plotting against NK is defiantely NOT in SK interests, so one is deeply suspicious of US actions in this case.

Given a war with NK would “benefit” the crazy military industrial complex and strategists in the US, the scenario above isn’t that far fetched.

–

–

–

–

–

–

–

–

–

–

–

–

–

–

–