Tuesday, April 30, 2013


This is coolbert:

That name Tamerlan having been so prominent in the news recently, I thought is perhaps useful to reflect upon that other Tamerlane from a far previous era [1300's].

Islamic conqueror and central Asian empire builder, warrior ruler victorious over all those who stood in his path, also undeniably a despot and SADIST!

Tamerlane, Timur the Lame!

 "Timur, Tarmashirin Khan, Emir Timur . . . historically known as Tamerlane . . . a Turkic ruler. He conquered West, South and Central Asia and founded the Timurid dynasty."

This depiction of Tamerland true to life! The tomb of the man having been recently opened, the skeletal remains examined, the facial features reconstructed in the manner of a criminal forensic investigation. This is how Tamerlane appeared! Bow and make supplication!

A ruler whose mind envisioned a world-wide Islamic empire the conquest of which was to be done in the manner of a Genghis Khan!! Brutal, savage, unremitting and cruel!

"Timur envisioned the restoration of the Mongol Empire of Genghis Khan. As a means of legitimating his conquests, Timur relied on Islamic symbols and language, referring to himself as the Sword of Islam and patronizing educational and religious institutions. He converted nearly all the Borjigin leaders [Borjigin that clan of Genghis]  to Islam during his lifetime. His armies were inclusively multi-ethnic. During his lifetime Timur emerged as the most powerful ruler in the Muslim world after defeating the Mamluks of Egypt and Syria, the emerging Ottoman Empire and the declining Sultanate of Delhi. Timur had also decisively defeated the Christian Knights Hospitaller at Smyrna, styling himself a Ghazi." [ghazi a raider, a Muslim on holy jihad!]

Everyone and anyone who stood in the way of Timur defeated, his armies unchallenged and using methods of terrorism, entire populations in opposition put to the sword as the term is used!

"Timur's armies were feared throughout Asia, Africa, and Europe, sizable parts of which were laid to ruin by his campaigns. Scholars estimate that his military campaigns caused the deaths of 17 million people, amounting to about 5% of the world population."


In the year 2000 Timur rated as among the ten worst dictators of the last thousand years. Timur not only a conqueror but possessing that SADISTIC streak, the man liked to inflict pain.

Consider thanks to the StrategyPage CIC entry # 83 that army of Timur and his army:

"The loot from Tamerlane's sack of Delhi in 1398 was so great that the Mongol Army, normally capable of an easy 40 miles a day, could make no more than four miles a day on its march home."

So great was the LOOT, the TREASURE, the SLAVES as carried home by the soldiers of Timur, a severe impediment to movement.

Such is the nature of great rulers of the past. Lord of his realm and just don't get in his way!


Sunday, April 28, 2013

Don C. Faith Jr.

This is coolbert:

"Five days of hell.
A gentle breeze.
A warming sun."

From the Chicago Tribune today:

Thanks to the article by Greg Jaffe.

"Keeping faith with a fallen hero"

"Afghanistan-era leaders salute their Korean War predecessor"

Don C. Faith Jr.

Lt. Colonel Don Carlos Faith Jr. from the era of the Korean War has been laid to rest. Having been awarded posthumously the Medal of Honor [MoH] for his gallant behavior at the Chosin reservoir, November 1950, body only recovered 2004 and ONLY identified this very month, the remains of Colonel Faith buried with ceremony at Arlington, as due a person of his status.

That procession at Arlington, the remains of Colonel Faith laid to rest. In the background left you can see the blue flag standard with thirteen stars emblematic of a MoH winner. Image thanks to Colonel George Rasula.

From that Tribune article:

"For four days, they fought to stay alive. On the fifth day, Faith led his men on a desperate retreat. Enemy troops pounded their fleeing column. U.S. warplanes mistakenly hit them with napalm. Faith charged a Chinese roadblock armed with only a pistol and hand grenades. Shrapnel tore through his chest. He died alone."

Died alone and buried in an unmarked grave, his remains again repatriated in 2004 and just identified this month. Sixty-two years after the fact!!

This account only in part doing justice to the events as they transpired on the east side of Chosin reservoir, November 1950. That U.S. Army Regimental Combat Team 31 [RCT31] moving northward in pursuit of those remnants of the North Korean Peoples Army, RCT31 ambushed by overwhelming numbers of Chinese communist forces [CCF], the situation dire, catastrophe and annihilation of RCT31 a possible.

Colonel Faith having assumed command of the regiment PERSONALLY LEADING TROOPS FORWARD such a senior commander doing so an indication of how precarious the conditions were.

From the citation awarding the MoH to Colonel Faith:

"Lieutenant Colonel Faith personally led counterattacks to restore the position . . . Lieutenant Colonel Faith . . . and personally directed, the first elements of his command across the ice-covered reservoir and then directed the movement of his vehicles which were loaded with wounded until all of his command had passed through the enemy fire . . . Lieutenant Colonel Faith . . . personally led the fire attack as it blasted its way through the enemy ring . . . Lieutenant Colonel Faith organized a group of men and directed their attack on the enemy positions on the right flank. He then placed himself at the head of another group of men and in the face of direct enemy fire led an attack on the enemy roadblock, firing his pistol and throwing grenades."

Personally led, personally led, personally led!!

Of those 2,400 men of RCT31 that moved north along the east side of the Chosin reservoir, five days later only 400 emerging alive but hardly unscathed. So intense was the nature of the fighting, the figures speak for themselves.



This is coolbert:

Thanks to the Chicago Tribune and and Stephen Benzkofer the headlines as reporting the Battle of Chancellorsville, the Ameican Civil War, one hundred fifty years ago:

Headlines from May 6, 1863.



"Terrific Fighting of Saturday and Sunday."






"Important Federal Successes."




"His Men Storm the Heights with Heavy Loss."


"An Important Rumor from Gen. Stoneman."

"Chancellorsville: Lee's genius, U.S. Army's double shame"

"The Battle of Chancellorsville, widely considered Gen. Robert E. Lee's greatest victory, saw the Rebel army under Lee and Gen. Thomas 'Stonewall' Jackson rout a Yankee force more than twice its size. The Northern defeat would be masked, the Tribune declared, by a 'deception practiced by the War Department on the loyal people of the Union.'"

One hundred fifty years ago this last week of April the Confederate Army of Northern Virginia ONCE YET MORE victorious over the Union Army of the Potomac. Federal forces put to rout in a decided fashion humiliatingly so.

As stated in the Tribune article and generally as accepted by the historians, Chancellorsville considered: "Gen. Robert E. Lee's greatest victory".

Not until over one week later after the battle had concluded the news as reported in the Chicago Tribune, the true nature of what actually occurred not made apparent.

And in victory also a significant loss, the death from "friendly fire" of the Confiederate General Thomas 'Stonewall' Jackson shot by one his own men in the aftermath of the battle, a command presence for which there WAS NEVER A REPLACEMENT!!


Saturday, April 27, 2013


This is coolbert:

I had forgotten all about this one. VERY germane considering the most recent allegations the Syrian central government of the dictator Assad waging chemical warfare against his own populace.

From almost five decades ago now another alleged but perhaps not so alleged use of poison gas.

The Yemeni civil war. Interventionist Egyptian forces accused of using poison gas on a number of occasions, Yemeni tribesmen neither understanding or prepared in the slightest manner for chemical warfare the target. Chemical warfare not on an unlimited and widespread basis, but nonetheless occurring.

From that wiki entry:

"The first use of gas took place on June 8, 1963 against Kawma, a village of about 100 inhabitants in northern Yemen, killing about seven people and damaging the eyes and lungs of twenty-five others . . . There were no reports of gas during 1964, and only a few were reported in 1965. The reports grew more frequent in late 1966. On December 11, 1966, fifteen gas bombs killed two people and injured thirty-five. On January 5, 1967, the biggest gas attack came against the village of Kitaf, causing 270 casualties, including 140 fatalities.The target may have been Prince Hassan bin Yahya [Royalist], who had installed his headquarters nearby."

"On May 10 [1967], the twin villages of Gahar and Gadafa in Wadi Hirran, where Prince Mohamed bin Mohsin [Royalist] was in command, were gas bombed, killing at least seventy-five . . . The gas attacks stopped for three weeks after the Six-Day War of June [1967], but resumed on July, against all parts of royalist Yemen. Casualty estimates vary, and an assumption, considered conservative, is that the mustard and phosgene-filled aerial bombs caused approximately 1,500 fatalities and 1,500 injuries."

These poison gases to include choking, blister and perhaps blood agents [cyanogen bromide]?

Poison gases NOT as necessarily sophisticated and deadly as nerve agent but very effective against Yemeni tribesmen totally unprepared and unequipped.

Since that time of the Great War [WW1] the major world powers possessing poison gas with the exception of the Japanese and Italians have employed chemical munitions on a limited basis and very discretely only when the circumstances were felt to be favorable, detection and retaliation highly unlikely.



Friday, April 26, 2013


This is coolbert:

"with some degree of varying confidence"

Thanks to the Israeli web site YNet we have some updates on the alleged use of chemical munitions that Syrian dictatorship of Assad resorting to the most drastic measure, again, so it is alleged.

1. "Obama: Syrian government use of chemical weapons a 'game changer'".

"Obama dubs chemical arms use 'game changer' as White House reiterates 'all options to respond' in Syria still on the table; however, pending further assessments, administration still reluctant to present timetable "

Allegation of Syrian chemical weapon use [sarin nerve gas] hard to prove?

"However, assertions of chemical weapon use in Syria made by Western and Israeli officials citing photos, sporadic shelling and traces of toxins fail to meet the standard of proof needed for a UN team of experts waiting to gather their own field evidence."

 "Weapons inspectors from the Hague-based Organisation for the Prohibition of Chemical Weapons (OPCW) will only determine whether banned chemical agents were used if they are able to access sites and take soil, blood, urine or tissue samples and examine them in certified laboratories"

I would strongly suspect that NO SUCH obtaining sample and testing in a "certified" laboratory is EVER going to occur.

The descriptions of the victims, those Syrian rebels subject to attack alleged having dilated pupils and foaming at the mouth. The classic signs and symptoms of nerve gas poisoning.

2. "Hagel: Syria has used chemical weapons"

"Speaking to reporters in Abu Dhabi, defense secretary[Hagel" says US intelligence concluded with
However, assertions of chemical weapon use in Syria made by Western and Israeli officials citing photos, sporadic shelling and traces of toxins fail to meet the standard of proof needed for a UN team of experts waiting to gather their own field evidence."

"US intelligence has concluded 'with some degree of varying confidence,' that the Syrian government has used sarin gas as a weapon in its two-year-old civil war, Defense Secretary Chuck Hagel said Thursday."

"Following Hagel's comments, US Secretary of State John Kerry said on Capitol Hill that there were two instances of chemical weapons use. that Assad regime used sarin gas"

Three international "red lines" have now been drawn and one of them crossed?

Those three "red lines" being:

* Iran will not be allow to have nuclear weapons.

* North Korea will not be allowed to become a nuclear power.

* Syria will not be allowed to use chemical weapons.

The indicators have suggested for some time the Syrian dictator contemplating the use of deadly chemical munitions on his own populace.

Indicators to include:

* Purchase of 3 million gas masks from Russia.
* Deployment of chemical munitions from depot to the field.
* Issuance of chemical suits to the loyal Syrian army.
* Issuance of nerve gas antidote by the Israeli to the Syrian rebels.

AND NOW casualties exhibiting the traditional and classic symptoms of nerve gas poisoning.

And if the "red line" is crossed, the response will be? If it is as if the Syrian dictator is daring you. He is taunting you an pushing the limits to the very edge and beyond, but so far in a measured and calculated manner, attempting to gauge the response.


Intervention by a major power or combination of major powers only INVITING A MORE MASSIVE AND UNPREDICTABLE USE OF CHEMICAL MUNITIONS?

All options are open but none of them are good. Assad too very clever and cagey, using chemicals in a discrete way, not openly and massively, guileful and malevolent once at the same time.

P.S. "TO MY KNOWLEDGE SARIN OR VX NERVE GAS HAS NEVER BEEN USED IN A COMBAT SITUATION!" In this regard I might be wrong. It may be nerve agent was employed against the Kurd during the Halabja Massacre. The Iraqi used a variety of chemical weapons that might have included nerve agent. But this seems unclear?

"Survivors said the gas at first smelled of sweet apples . . . It is believed that Iraqi forces used multiple chemical agents during the attack, including mustard gas and the nerve agents tabun, sarin and VX some sources have also pointed to the blood agent hydrogen cyanide."


Saturday, April 20, 2013

West TX.

This is coolbert:

Ammonium nitrate explosion! Catastrophe!

Large portions of the city of West, Texas, USA leveled by the spontaneous and accidental [?] detonation of an ammonium nitrate factory, the product of which is a fertilizer having a rather explosive potential.

I am sure the experts are most concerned about the possibility of sabotage here? At least I would hope so. Even there existing a connection to terrorism?

Thanks to the English Telegraph:

"Texas explosion: firefighters missing after huge blast"

"Rescue workers are searching the wreckage of a fertilizer plant for survivors of a huge explosion likened to a nuclear bomb that killed as many as 15 people.

That "explosion" and "huge blast" having the force of a tactical nuclear weapon!!

As to the aspect of terrorism and sabotage consider:

"The explosion came two days before the 20th anniversary of a fire in nearby Waco that engulfed a compound inhabited by David Koresh and his followers in the Branch Davidian sect, ending a siege by federal agents. About 82 members of the sect and four federal agents died at Waco."

Explosions of fertilizer factories and cargoes of same as carried by merchant vessels not normal but no so uncommon as one might think. In ALL case the results always catastrophic in the extreme.

And in the modern era the sabotage and detonation of such facilities as an act of terrorism CANNOT BE RULED OUT!!

To my knowledge the  last time one of these plants manufacturing ammonium nitrate fertilizer blew sky-high was in 2001, in the aftermath of the 9/11 attacks. The French AZF plant again spontaneously and accidentally destroyed by a cataclysmic detonation the origins of which were NEVER conclusively established, an ACT OF TERRORISM HOWEVER NOT BEING RULED OUT!

"AZF . . . was the name of a chemical factory in Toulouse, France, which exploded on 21 September 2001."

"The disaster caused 29 deaths (28 from the factory, 1 secondary school pupil from a neighbouring school), 2,500 seriously wounded, and 8,000 light casualties . . . 70 eye wounds and several thousand wounds which had to be sutured."

Hassan Jandoubi the suspected culprit dressed in a manner [as determined post-mortem] indicative of an "Islamic militants going into battle or on [a] suicide mission". NO GUILT ever fully established!!

"Media interest was further aroused by the results of his [Jandoubi] autopsy, which was carried out by a doctor who had worked in the Middle East for the international aid organisation Médecins du Monde. The medical examiner noted that Jandoubi was wearing two pairs of trousers and four pairs of underpants, which reminded her 'of the apparel worn by some Islamic militants going into battle or on suicide missions'".

Also: [attire] "arranged 'in the manner of kamikaze fundamentalists.'"

And last but hardly not least we have of course the Texas City disaster of 1947. A merchant vessel being loaded with fertilizer of the ammonium nitrate variety [2,300 tons (approximately 2,100 metric tons)] spontaneously detonating, the entire town of Texas City obliterated from the face of the earth.

Described as:  "the deadliest industrial accident in U.S. history, and one of the largest non-nuclear explosions".

A blast the force of which by might be obtained from the detonation of a nuclear weapon!

Let me remind you the ANFO bomb [ammonium-nitrate fuel oil] a favorite of the Irish Republican Army. One particular detonation near the City of London causing $2 billion of property damages [no lives lost]!

Give me ammonium nitrate and give me death?


Friday, April 19, 2013

Round House!

This is coolbert:

For one week now, the United States military has been at DEFCON 3!

For those readers to the blog military and non-military some clarification of that term DEFCON required?

DEFCON describing a readiness status, the current situation in the Far East necessitating an increased readiness status, an enhanced military posture.

From the wiki:

"A defense readiness condition (DEFCON) is an alert posture used by the United States Armed Forces . . . It prescribes five graduated levels of readiness (or states of alert) for the U.S. military, and increase in severity from DEFCON 5 (least severe) to DEFCON 1 (most severe) to match varying military situations."

Within the historical context also according to the wiki:

* "The highest confirmed DEFCON ever was Level 2. During the Cuban Missile Crisis on October 22, 1962, the U.S. Armed Forces were ordered to DEFCON 3. On October 26, Strategic Air Command (SAC) was ordered to DEFCON 2, while the rest of the U.S. Armed Forces remained at DEFCON 3."

 * "The U.S. Armed Forces were at DEFCON 3 status during the 1973 Yom Kippur War."

 * "The third time the United States reached DEFCON 3 was during the September 11 attacks of 2001."

AND NOW that fourth time in reaction to the bellicose and very heated rhetoric as emanating from Pyongyang.

Again, the American public in general [including myself until just a few hours ago] totally oblivious of this increased DEFCON status or unaware of the significance thereof?

Concern is the order of the day but not excessively so!




This is coolbert:

The weed that needs pulling?

As originally from a number of months ago thanks to the English Guardian:

"US intelligence teams to track wildlife poachers in Africa and Asia"

Presumably these are teams subordinate to the American military AFRICOM?

Poaching of elephant tusks and rhinoceros horns by heavily armed gangs now on the radar screen as an international security threat?

That level of poaching having accelerated and become much more organized, villains ON HORSEBACK ARMED WITH AK AND RPG SLAUGHTERING ELEPHANTS for a valuable commodity, the tusks.

"It is one thing to be worried about the traditional poachers who come in and kill and take a few animals, a few tusks, a few horns, or other animal parts,"

"It's something else when you've got helicopters, night vision goggles, automatic weapons, which pose a threat to human life as well as wildlife."

"Poachers were crossing national borders at will, stoking concerns among US security officials that the conduits used by the traffickers in Asia and Africa to get their goods to market could also be used to smuggle drugs or arms for terrorist organisations."

Correct! A level of sophistication greatly endangering entire herds of elephants, the species to become extinct or close to being so if measures of a military nature not taken! AND perceived as a threat to international security, money as obtained from the sale of tusks used to foment violence and rebellion of an unseemly nature.

And from just recently as posted by DEC at the Jungle Trader:

"Poachers kill at least 89 elephants in Chad"

"Yaoundé, Cameroon - At least 89 elephants were killed by poachers last week in Chad, according to local officials, in one of the region’s worst poaching incidents since the massacre of over 300 elephants in Cameroon’s Bouba N’Djida National Park in February 2012."

 "The poachers, which rode on horseback, numbered around 50 and spoke Arabic, the officials said, adding that the Chadian army had been dispatched to stop these criminals."

These poachers are janjaweed? Totally immoral and criminal thugs from the Sudan infamous for their scorched earth and genocidal activities persons released from prison by the central government in Khartoum, having previously accomplished their dirty deeds in Darfur NOW ranging far and wide on horseback [seems like a throwback to olden times] in search of loot and wealth in the form of elephant tusks?

[it is reputed that it takes about thirty to forty rounds from an AK to bring down an adult elephant!]


Demented Rants?

This is coolbert:

Thanks to the tip from DEC at Jungle Trader we have the pronouncements of B.R. Myer on the current Korean situation.

B.R. Myer not a stranger to the blog, his observations at this exact moment even more relevant and pertinent.

"Translating North Korea's rhetorical rage"

"SEOUL, South Korea. For years, B.R. Myers has immersed himself in the paranoid nationalist propaganda of North Korea, the world's most secretive nation. Parsing TV news reports, cartoons, movies, posters, school textbooks and novels, Myers has cracked the code of the xenophobic histrionics emanating from Pyongyang."

"Where others see demented rants, cartoon dictators and a brainwashed nation of lemmings, the author of 'The Cleanest Race: How North Koreans See Themselves - and Why it Matters,' deconstructs how North Korea has come to see itself as 'the better Korea,' an oasis of purity and civilization under constant threat from barbarians, starting with the 'Yankee colony' on its southern flank."

Korea as it has been in the past, the "Hermit Kingdom" and as it is today [at least the perspective as seen from Pyongyang?

Read the whole article, I recommend it highly without qualification.


[this as gleaned from the interrogation of captured North Korean soldiers from during the Korean war]



This is coolbert:

From the DEBKAfile some items as extracted dated a week ago now but still germane:

1. "Kerry: US will not accept a nuclear-armed North Korea

"April 12, 2013. The US Secretary of State John Kerry made this statement on arrival in Seoul Friday as intelligence from Japan, US and South Korea indicated Friday that a North Korean missile test may be imminent. DEBKAfile reported earlier that the US had raised its nuclear alert status to DEFCON 3, Condition Yellow (out of 5 levels)"

When you tell the North Korean they will not be allowed to possess nuclear weapons you ONLY MAKE THEM MORE DESIROUS HAVE IN THE INVENTORY AND STOCKPILE ATOMIC MUNITIONS?

Also, ANYONE HEAR OF THIS BEFORE? THE U.S. MILITARY HAS GONE TO A HEIGHTENED STATE OF READINESS, DEFCON 3? Not any mention of that on the evening nightly news.

2. "Tokyo said warned as first NKorean nuclear target"

"12 April. North Korea has reportedly warned Japan that Tokyo would be the first target of a nuclear attack, in response to Japan’s orders to its armed forces to shoot down any North Korean missile that heads toward its territory"

North Korea attempting to split the allies apart, threatening one and offering negotiations to another? Cagey and clever Pyongyang. Kim is not crazy but perhaps his approach is too crude to be seen as anything else?

3. "US raises nuclear alert. China mobilizes army"
"12 April. US nuclear alert status was raised Friday, April 12, to DEFCON 3, stating “There are currently no imminent nuclear threats against the United States. However the situation is fluid and can change rapidly.”


4. "Israel passes antidote to Syrian rebels as chemical war looms"

"13 April. The Syrian army has distributed protective suits to units in southern Syria and the Golan, amid evidence that chemical weapons have already been used in the Damascus region. As signs abound of both sides’ readiness for chemical warfare, Israeli troops have started handing out atropine antidotes against sarin and VX nerve agents to Syrian rebels on the Golan and along the Israel-Syrian border,"

More indications of either chemical munition use by the Syrian or potential use of chemical munitions by the Syrian. AND THE ISRAELI HANDING OUT THE ANTIDOTE TO NERVE GAS POISONING TO THE SYRIAN REBEL FORCES. ABSOLUTELY UNPRECEDENTED!

AND in response to the Israeli action [passing out the nerve gas antidote to the Syrian rebels] the Syrian engaging Israeli targets for the first time IN THIRTY-FOUR years. "Syrian shell fire for the first time in 34 years at an IDF Golani patrol on duty Friday night, April 12, in the northern Golani area of Kibbutz El-Rom."

Say what you will about DEBKA but at least from my perspective.they seem to be right on the ball willing to report in a way others are not.


Thursday, April 18, 2013

Apocalypse III.

This is coolbert:


Thanks to a serendipitous discovery we have this regarding the massive artillery barrage [rocket artillery included] - - that "Sea of Fire" as promised by the North Korean:

Emphasis in all cases mine! Massive artillery barrages extraordinary and sustained, apocalyptic in nature, literally earth shattering:

"In the introduction to his book, The Red God of War, British military analyst Chris Bellamy vividly
describes some of the effects of massive artillery barrages. Basing his description on eyewitness reports from several wars, he recounts the 'sheer horror' and the 'sense of hopelessness' artillery barrages create among those on the receiving end. For soldiers subjected to massive artillery barrages, artillery is a 'monstrous, apparently unstoppable machine, slicing mechanically through earth, rock, flesh, bone and spirit.' The 'psychological effect multiplies its cold lethality many times.'"

Bellamy continues:

"Artillery oppresses, jars, stuns and disorientates the enemy and lifts the morale of its own troops.
Artillery and rockets provide the greatest firepower and sear a path for infantry, mechanized forces and armour both physically and spiritually. Throughout the centuries, no army has understood this better than the Russian."


Massive artillery barrages the archetypes of which and as might have been found:

* The Spring Offensives of the German [1918].

And as employed by the Soviet [Russian]:

* The Moscow Counter-offensive [1941].

* The crossing of the Oder [1945].

* The crossing of the Teltow Canal [1945]

Massive and overwhelming numbers of artillery pieces, not only that count of tubes firing but ammunition expended in a prodigal manner, almost limitless resources used lavishly and without regard to expenditure. At that crossing of the Teltow Canal the Soviet massing three hundred guns as arrayed per mile [1.6 kilometers]!!

Devoted readers to the blog, you take it from there!


Apocalypse II.

This is coolbert:

From a variety of sources we have some interesting images, North Korean Peoples Army [NKPA] artillery as positioned along the De-Militarized Zone [DMZ] separating North [DPRK] and South Korea [ROK], the preponderance of that NKPA tube artillery NOT able to range and fire on the very downtown of Seoul.

That "Sea of Fire" as threatened by NKPA military planners including of course Seoul AND environs.

ENVIRONS extending from what distance outward from the city [Seoul] outward I cannot say.

NOTE these images not including NKPA rocket artillery of the 240 mm caliber. The NKPA also possessing an antiquated [but still deadly] mobile multiple rocket launcher [MRL] of 200 mm caliber the range of which is significantly [?] less than the 240 mm MRL version

Of all that NKPA tube artillery arrayed on the DMZ ONLY the Koksan 170 mm gun caliber able of ranging as far as Seoul and not even that to the downtown section of the city. NO rocket artillery of the 240 mm caliber included in this image.

Seoul in the lower right hand of this image the Koksan gun able to range to the very outskirts of the city but not beyond. Again this not including rocket artillery fire of the 240 mm caliber. The metropolitan area of Seoul very large and very densely populated, Seoul and environs the target of NKPA weapons fire could cause a mass panic?
NONE of these images taking into account the ranges and numbers of NKPA heavy mortars [caliber of greater than 122 mm]. In the Soviet scheme of things [and as followed by the NKPA but not slavishly so] mortars of large caliber classified as "artillery".

That NKPA tube artillery during the initial stages of a conflict firing from protected positions established long time ago, the ranges to potential targets determined also well in advance. NKPA artillery and MRL mobile displacing further south of course WELL ABLE en masse to range Seoul with ease, that "sea of fire" not only a possible then but a given.

And if and when chemical and perhaps biological rounds used, all bets off!!


Tuesday, April 16, 2013

Apocalypse I.

This is coolbert:

Sea of fire!!

Massive and prodigious numbers of North Korean artillery massively arrayed for concentrated and focused fire missions along the DMZ [Demilitarized Zone] between North and South Korea in a matter of a few hours wreaking havoc on that most densely populated Seoul metropolitan area. Long-range guns and rocket artillery - - thousands of rounds per minute if only firing conventional explosive the results of which can only be described as apocalyptic beyond measure.

"apocalypse - - any universal or widespread destruction or disaster"

The is "the 'sea of fire' scenario".

That often repeated threat of the North Korean regime in Pyongyang to destroy the South Korean [Republic of Korea] capital city of Seoul using artillery as the weapon of choice.  A threat not without substance.

Fact or fiction? Hyperbole or a reasoned and rational assumption?

From two Internet web sites dire warnings perhaps seen and assessed in a more correct manner:

1.  "North Korea Can’t Really Turn Seoul Into a 'Sea of Fire'

"For more than a decade, conventional wisdom has held that North Korea could subject the South Korean capital of Seoul to devastating artillery attack. With a greater metropolitan population of twenty-four million, Seoul has the largest population density of all the OECD countries, eight times more dense than New York City and three times more dense than Tokyo and Yokohama."

"Aimed at Seoul, North Korea’s prodigious amount of artillery, particularly its 170 mm Koksan guns and 240 mm multiple rocket launchers, could kill 'millions of people' in the event of war on the Korean Peninsula."

Most significant is that the North Korean artillery rounds as fired have an amazingly high "dud' rate:

"The most recent dud rate available from any DPRK artillery piece comes from DPRK attack on Yeonpyong Do and yields a dud rate of 25 percent."

2. "Can North Korea Really 'Flatten' Seoul?"

"Many have suggested that North Korean missiles and artillery could "flatten" the city of Seoul. This isn't the clear-cut case, as those who know modern weapons can tell you. Perhaps more importantly, the very idea of destroying an entire city oversimplifies the diplomatic and military aspects of this very real, modern-day threat."

"Even in a worst-case scenario, where both U.S. and South Korean forces are somehow paralyzed or otherwise engaged, and North Korea fires its 170mm artillery batteries and 240mm rocket launchers with total impunity, the grim reality wouldn't live up to the hype. Buildings would be perforated, fires would inevitably rage and an unknown number of people would die. Seoul would be under siege—but it wouldn't be flattened, destroyed or leveled" - - A. Cordesman.

These various "dire" predictions and warnings, admonitions in advance, the obliteration of Seoul expected to be a "done deal" in case of war on the Korean peninsula based upon this particular analysis:

"According to one report, a South Korean security analyst suggested that DPRK artillery pieces of calibers 170mm and 240mm 'could fire 10,000 rounds per minute to Seoul and its environs.' The number of Koksan guns is not publicly reported, but it is reliably reported that North Korea has about 500 long-range artillery tubes within range of Seoul, double the levels of a the mid-1990s. Large caliber self propelled artillery pieces typically have a sustained rate of fire of between four and eight rounds per minute [perhaps more accurately so a round fired every five minutes?]. This suggests a total rate of fire of artillery alone of between 2,000 and 4,000 rounds per minute. The DPRK's two hundred 240mm MRLs fire either 12 or 22 rounds, providing a maximum single salvo of no more than 4,400 rounds."


* An artillery barrage as noted by the "South Korean security analyst" directed against "Seoul and its environs" and not necessarily downtown Seoul. Seoul and ENVIRONS!

* Artillery encompassing tube artillery of the biggest bore [170 mm] AND rocket artillery of 240 mm size. In the Soviet scheme of things all "artillery" to include all mortars of 122 mm and larger and rocket artillery beyond a certain size.

* That 170 mm Koksan gun able to fire a round only once every five minutes?

* Do not assume that ROK and American forces will merely be passive and idle observers and not fight back. The North Korea are going to receive a LOT of counter-battery fire and air strikes.

* That destruction of Seoul "and environs" not guaranteed but rather a devastating artillery barrage also having significance as a terror weapon, creating mass panic and a civilian exodus of Biblical proportions from the city southward, those refugees creating a monumental problem for ROK military planners.

* These cheerful assessments neglect the possible use of chemical or biological rounds being fired. High explosive artillery and MRL alone one thing, chemical and biological weaponry if used the scenario changing dramatically and for the worse.

Apocalypse when?


Saturday, April 13, 2013


This is coolbert:

From that prior blog entry:

"A war 'the likes of which' might very well include the massive use of tactical nuclear weapons."

AND "If the North Koreans used biological and chemical weapons against U.S. troops or South Korean targets, Scott said he would advise the U.S. president to respond with tactical nuclear weapons, provided there were suitable targets".

Regarding the "massive use of tactical nuclear weapons" from we have this excerpt of Trevor Dupuy as originally stated in 1987.

As found in "Understanding War" paragraphs quoted in entirety:

"The most important development, or set of developments [since the end of World War Two], of course, has been in the field of nuclear weapons. While the first such weapons were introduced in the closing day of World War II - - and helped to hasten the end of that war - - they have never been used since and particularly have never been used in tactical combat [my emphasis]."

"The fact that there have been no instances of employment of tactical nuclear weapons in these past forty years years [as written in 1987] supports the argument that such employment is not likely in the proximate future, but no commander can meet his responsibilities to his superiors or to this men unless his combat decisions reflect the ever-present possibility that nuclear weapons might be used against him [we cannot also preclude the possibility of chemical or biological attack]. The nuclear-related context of the his decisions need not necessarily be spelled out at all times, but that context must, at the very least, be deeply rooted in his subconscious as he deals with the dispositions and deployment of subordinate units and individuals. He must not allow himself to be deluded - - as some would suggest - - that nuclear weapons are not significantly different from other weapons, only somewhat more powerful [at least in the tactical sense]. Nor should he be similarly self-deluded by the apparent narrowing of the gap between increasingly smaller yields of nuclear narrowing and the progressive increase in power of so-called conventional weapons [improved conventional munitions]."

"Nuclear weapons differ from conventional weapons not just in power, but in kind [my emphasis]. If their use in tactical battle could be assuredly limited to the fractional kiloton variety, then there might be some validity to the easy assumption that they are merely bigger and better weapons. But any use of even the smallest tactical nuke carries with it the possibility of escalation. Escalation with conventional weapons is relatively finite. Escalation with nuclear weapons has potentialities as close to infinity as the human mind can imagine. Such an eventuality is so far from likely that we can almost ignore it, but since it is possible, it should not be ignored completely."

Trevor Dupuy an experienced combat officer whose branch of service was artillery his understanding of nuclear weaponry perhaps without peer? When Trevor speaks, we all need to listen? Also, however, when General Scott speaks, we should also listen?

With regard to the Korean context, does all this scare you? It ought to!



This is coolbert:

From ABC Nightline:

"Simulation: War on the Korean Peninsula"

As was originally ten years ago but just as relevant now as it was then [2003].

American appraisals [as done in 2003] of the Korean situation and how a war may actually begin and progress, heaven forbid the worse as feared DOES actually occur. The NKPA [North Korean Peoples Army] moves south and in a big way!

Most germane those comments of the retired American general officer [General Scott], a commander with experience in the Korean peninsula. One of those persons whose duties actually would have included countering a massive North Korean invasion of the south [Republic of Korea].

"a war the likes of which we haven't seen since World War II, if then."

 "I recommend you prepare for all-out war, because that is what you're probably going to get,"

A war "the likes of which" might very well include the massive use of tactical nuclear weapons. American forces in a desperate circumstance, a North Korean attack succeeding the only alternative being retaliation and the use of "low-level" atomic weaponry if the proper targets can be found and attacked. Such a possibility cannot be precluded. EVEN MORE SO IF THE NKPA INITIATES THE FRAY WITH WMD [WEAPONS OF MASSIVE DESTRUCTION] OF THEIR OWN! WMD AS USED BY THE NKPA TO INCLUDE  CHEMICAL AND BIOLOGICAL MUNITIONS!

Understanding full well that the use of atomics would create the nightmare scenario many South Korean allied troops and civilians killed, large portions of the landscape also rendered uninhabitable.

The ROK [Republic of Korea], United Nations forces and the American 8th Army obviously not standing still and defending itself with all resources available, the capital of Seoul and environs so close to the DMZ [35 miles/50 kilometers] the ROK however not willing to abandon.

Seoul is INDEED the "heart and soul" of the nation even back 1,000 or more years and will  not be surrendered without a fight. 20 million South Koreans in the path of the NKPA steamroller that destruction and capture of the ROK capital city a major objective the symbolism and value of which obvious to the NKPA commanders..

That traditional method of stopping and defeating the blitzkrieg offensive, layered defense, trading space for time and husbanding your forces for an ultimate and war winning counter-offensive for the ROK either very difficult to do or an unacceptable strategy!!

Read that whole article, again, just as pertinent now as it was ten years ago! Just as worrisome now as it was then, if not MORE SO!

This thought having also occurred to me that both the leader of North Korea [Kim] and South Korea [Miss Park] are just newcomers only recently have assumed the leadership of their respective nations. Novices both north and south at the worst possible moment is also not a good omen?

Does even the possibility of any of this even occurring scare you? It ought to!!


Thursday, April 11, 2013


This is coolbert:

As was covered by CNN this evening:

"N. Korea may be able to deliver nuke, Pentagon intel says"

"Pentagon intel" being: Defense Intelligence Agency [DIA].

"(CNN) -- The Pentagon's intelligence arm has assessed with 'moderate confidence' that North Korea has the ability to deliver a nuclear weapon with a ballistic missile, though the reliability is believed to be 'low.'"

That ballistic missile in question the Musudan? An intermediate range ballistic missile [IRBM] liquid fueled and now in position ready for launch.

*  "A missile was raised to an upright firing position, then lowered"

What is more to the matter and the question that should be asked. is WHETHER OR NOT THE NORTH KOREAN HAS A NUCLEAR WARHEAD RELIABLE THAT CAN BE PLACED ATOP THE MUSUDAN!

North Korea has [?] a nuclear capability but so far it is believed not possessing a weapon that can be delivered by missile to a distant target. So we are told.

* " U.S. official says no indication missiles have been armed with nuclear capability"

That Musudan an improved version of a Soviet submarine launched ballistic missile [SLBM]  R-27 from the far distant Cold War era as carried by the Yankee class of submarine that R-27 design of which is from over forty years ago now.

Presumably the R-27 IRBM [Soviet nomenclature] well known to American intelligence, at least three Yankee on patrol in the waters near Bermuda until the advent of the Delta class Soviet missile boat, those Yankee each and everyone carrying sixteen of the R-27 nuclear armed.

If you know R-27 you know Musudan?

R-27 designed to carry ONLY a nuclear warhead of some potency. Musudan is the same?

R-27 liquid fueled, dissimilar and inert chemicals when mixed having a paragolic and explosive reaction. As with R-27 so it is with Musudan?

Musudan NOT submarine launched but the range placing Japanese and American targets in the western Pacific within range.

Reliability of the Musudan thought by DIA to be "low"?

Reliability of the R-27 however rather high? The wiki entry suggests otherwise?

That delivery system [and undestood as a delivery system at this exact moment only] for an atomic payload now being tested as we speak? Some speak of Musudan as a "game changer" and it very well might be.



Wednesday, April 10, 2013

F-35 Lightning.

This is coolbert:

"Fly before you buy"

From the Chicago Tribune of 21 March 2013, that F-35 Lightning fighter program in peril, not going well but that commitment already made.


"Too costly to fail, warplane lags on"

"How 1 plane for all became a free-for all"

"Conceived in the 1990's, the F-35 program was supposed to use the same airframe to produce planes for the Air Force, Navy and Marine Corps, with only modes t modification. But the services all sought major changes to meet their needs, reducing commonality among the the three variants. Instead of meeting the original plan of being about 70 percent similar, the three versions now are about 70 percent distinct, which has increased costs by tens of billions of dollars and led to yearslong delays"

And from that same article those quotations most germane as to the difficulties as faced by the F-35 program:

"We have three airplane program running in parallel" . . .  "They are very very different airplanes."

"I am - - after many years of frustration and setbacks - - encouraged that the overall program is moving in the right direction."

"It's essential for us," . . . "We don't have another option."

One plane for three services with the intention that commonality be 70 % is now 70 % dissimilarity!

The U.S. Marines wanting a vertical-takeoff-landing [VTOL] and the U.S. Navy wanting a plane with: "larger wind to enable short takeoffs from aircraft carriers".

The U.S. Marines in dire need of a replacement for the Harrier "jump-jet" VTOL seen as a necessity.

And for all three services NO OTHER option besides the F-35 even under consideration.

Export too a consideration, a variety of nations have already [?] made that decision to purchase the F-35.

With regard to the VTOL capability, we have this from an acknowledged aviation authority:

"VTOL uses so much energy just to lift the plane with its fuel that there wasn't much energy/fuel left to fly bombs anywhere."

VTOL an exaggerated and over-rated capability? Short-takeoff-landing [STOL] used most of the time? Those Harriers as used by the British during the Falkland Islands/Malvinas War for the most part not using VTOL? Those "jump jet" "ski-slope" light aircraft carriers more than sufficing for the role as intended, not as commodious as a super-carrier but still performing yeoman service, adequate.

Once more as to the STOL/VTOL problem, as stated by the acknowledged aviation authority:

"The Harriers worked fine.  buy some of them,  put on modern avionics and have at it!"

That F-35 decision to buy before you fly having been already made, an upgraded and improved Harrier is NOT an option, at least for the Marines?

"We don't have another option."


Tank III.

This is coolbert:


Maus und Ratte!!

This stuff has to be seen to be believed!!

Super-heavy German tanks of the Second World War [WW2]!

As proposed and ONLY existing as merely drawing board curiosities and oddities, and thank GOD for it too!!

1. The German Maus. Super-heavy tank very heavily armored and gunned but THERE NOT EXISTING AN ENGINE ABLE TO PROPEL THE BEAST!! Maus but NOT a mouse! Again only proposed but never got beyond the drawing board stage of development.

"the Maus's main armament was a 128 mm KwK 44 L/55 gun (55 calibers long barrel), based on the 12.8 cm Pak 44 anti-tank artillery piece, with a coaxial 75 mm gun."

Here the Maus! TWO MAIN GUNS IN THE SAME TURRET. One gun of super-caliber and bore that second gun less so but that 75 mm weapon nonetheless possessing under normal circumstances a considerable bang and wallop!

2. The German Landkreuzer P. The Land Cruiser. A land warship of super size A NAVAL GUN MOUNTED IN THE TURRET! This too a concept that NEVER got beyond the idea or drawing board stage. I would have to think ONLY a few of these ever could be built and probably too susceptible to breakdown as well!!

"The Landkreuzer P. 1000 Ratte was a design for a super-heavy tank for use by Nazi Germany during World War II. It was designed in 1942 by Krupp with the approval of Adolf Hitler, but the project was canceled by Albert Speer in early 1943 and no tank was ever completed. At 1,000 metric tons [that is about TWENTY times the normal weight of a heavy tank of the era], the P-1000 would have been over five times as heavy as the Panzer VIII Maus, the heaviest tank ever built."

For scale that is a HUMAN on the far left of the image, comparison tanks the Maus and the Tiger to the right!

"It was to be armed with naval artillery and armored with 10 inches (25 cm) of hardened steel, so heavily that only similar weapons could hope to affect it. To compensate for its immense weight, the Ratte would have been equipped with three 1.2 metre (3.9 ft) wide treads on each side with a total tread width of 7.2 metres (24 ft). This would help stability and weight distribution, but the vehicle's sheer mass would have destroyed roads and rendered bridge crossings next to impossible. However, it was anticipated that its height, and its ground clearance of 2 metres (6.6 ft) would have allowed it to ford most rivers with ease."

Right, would have collapsed roads and bridges and perhaps too even stuck on the bottom of a muddy river it attempted to ford. Was not a feasible idea and not even worth of consideration but such wonder weapons for whatever reason usually caught the imagination of Hitler as do-able! NOT SO!

The German during WW2 not even able to field even large numbers of the Tiger tanks to make a significant difference. Resources expended on a Ratte for instance might be better spent in the construction of a multitude of proven winning armor designs, tanks, PAK cannon and assault guns!


Tank II.

This is coolbert:

From that prior blog entry:

"Armor design and engineering development in a rapid state of ferment in those inter-war years [1919-1939]. Indeed, a tank mostly at the time of initial production already antiquated by more sophisticated designs on the drawing board or existing as experimental or prototype versions."

Ferment indeed! Military planners, theoreticians, the general staffs of the various world powers able to make the correct conclusions in the aftermath of the first World War [WW1], armor [tank] development and engineering being conducted at what must have seemed as a fevered pace.

"Military planners, theoreticians" and general staff officers in all instances seeking that correct combination of protection, firepower and mobility as envisioned for mission, task and purpose.

An amazing number of types and varieties of tanks existing during that inter-war [1919-1939] period between the end of the Great War [WW1] and the start of the Second World War [WW2].

So many types, designs and categories as almost to bewilder! It might seem as envisioned and was the perception that NO ONE tank could do it all! That task of combining firepower, mobility and protection in the same package difficult the ideal hard to achieve.

Those categories of tanks thanks to the wiki with type-specimen images:

1. Tankettes. "Baby tanks" more or less  a mobile machine gun position offering slight protection and slightly armed.

Czech AH-IV. This tankette incredibly enough still in active service and used in a combat capacity in 1982! The Ogaden War between Ethiopian and Somalia!

"A tankette is a tracked armoured fighting vehicle resembling a small tank roughly the size of a car, mainly intended for light infantry support or scouting. Colloquially it may also simply mean a 'small tank'."

2. Light. Larger than a "baby tank, useful for reconnaissance and scouting ". LIGHT armor and LIGHT ordnance.

"A light tank is a tank variant initially designed for rapid movement, and now primarily employed in the reconnaissance role, or in support of expeditionary forces where main battle tanks cannot be made available. Early light tanks were generally armed and armored similar to an armored car, but used tracks in order to provide better cross-country mobility."

­Panzer I German light tank of the WW2 era. Armed with the two turret mounted machine guns.

3. Medium. The ALL-PURPOSE tank. That perfect [as best the term understood] compromise of mobility, firepower and protection. THE MODERN TANK IS AN ALL-PURPOSE TANK!

"Medium tank was a classification of tanks, primarily used during World War II. The medium tank, as the name suggests, represented a compromise in features between the reconnaissance and mobility oriented light tanks and the armor and armament oriented heavy tanks"

Soviet WW2 era T-34 tank. Described and generally agreed as being the BEST tank of that period. Still was in combat use [Angola] thirty years AFTER the end of the war [1945].

4. Cavalry, Cruiser or Fast. A tank more than anything part and parcel of an ideal concept of warfare that holistic answer to the stalemated trench warfare of the Great War.. A tank designed with the sole intent of being able to exploit a breakthrough, a breach of enemy defenses. Lightly protected but possessing good mobility and speed and gunned with some robustness.

"The cruiser tank (also called cavalry tank or fast tank) was a British tank concept of the inter-war period. This concept was the driving force behind several tank designs which saw action during the Second World War. In British use, the cruiser formed part of a doctrine paired with the 'infantry tank', a much slower but better amoured design intended to work in concert with the infantry in punching holes through enemy lines for the cruisers to exploit."


British Cruiser Mk I ·tank

"Once gaps had been punched in the enemy front by the infantry tanks, the cruisers were intended to penetrate to the rear, attacking lines of supply and communication in accordance with the theories of J.F.C. Fuller, P.C.S. Hobart, and B.H. Liddell-Hart. The cruiser tank was designed to be used in way similar to cavalry in its heyday and thus speed was a critical factor,"

5. Infantry. Slow and plodding, not so mobile but good firepower and protection. Designed to accompany the infantry during an offensive. ALMOST an all-purpose tank but not quite. These tanks punching a hole in the enemy defenses, allowing for the cruiser tank exploitation.

"The infantry tank was a concept developed by the British and French in the years leading up to World War II. Infantry tanks were tanks designed to support the infantry in the attack. To achieve this they were generally heavily armoured to allow them to operate in close concert with infantry even under heavy gun fire."

­British tank Infantry Mk I, Matilda ·

6. Heavy. Very heavily gunned and protected but not so mobile. Big gun and thick armor.

"A heavy tank was a subset of tank that provided equal or greater firepower as well as armor than tanks of lighter classes, at the cost of mobility and maneuverability."

"Heavy tanks have usually been deployed to breakthrough enemy lines, though in practice have been more useful in the defensive role than in the attack. Design goals have included attacking obstacles, creating breakthroughs, and engaging enemy armoured formations."

Soviet WW2 Joseph Stalin heavy tank.

7. Super-heavy. Very big gun in bore and caliber [that ratio of the barrel length to the bore diameter] both with very thick armor, slow and plodding, hardly even mobile. THESE SUPER-HEAVY TANKS ALMOST WITHOUT EXCEPTION EXISTING AS DRAWING BOARD PHENOMENON AND NOTHING MORE THAN A CONCEPT!

"Super-heavy tanks are armored fighting vehicles of very large size, generally over 75 tonnes. Programs have been initiated on several occasions with the aim of creating an invincible vehicle for penetrating enemy formations without fear of being destroyed in combat"

British TOG2 super-heavy tank. That small girl to the left of the tank left track gives us some sense of scale. Such a "monster" lacking I would think in mobility?

That trend since the end of WW2 armor [tanks] general purpose preferred. The American M48/M60, the Soviet T-54/T-55, the French AMX series, etc.


Monday, April 8, 2013

Tank I.

This is coolbert:

Thanks to the tip from a Finnish reader to the blog some info on tanks of the inter-war era [WW1 & WW2] possessing multiple turrets.

I was aware that these armor designs existed but not in such numbers. Seems having armor [tanks] with multiple turrets was all the rage at one time.

A design feature [multiple turrets] at least antiquated and felt to be passe' from 1939 onward.

Merely for the Soviet Union alone among the world powers we have these versions of tanks all with multiple turrets:

1. T-100. "The T-100 tank sported two turrets placed on a long chassis. The front turret, mounting a 45mm antitank gun, was placed at a lower elevation than the other, and as such had a limited area of fire. The top turret, mounting a 76.2mm gun, was able to turn a full 360 degrees."

T-100 Soviet tank the wiki entry for same suggests the smaller gun was anti-tank and the large main gun used primarily to defeat enemy fortifications, etc.

2. SMK. "The SMK's armament was a short 76.2 mm gun in the upper centrally placed turret and a 45 mm weapon in the forward turret."

SMK that main gun able to counter and defeat enemy armor, the smaller gun used primarily against enemy infantry?

3. T-35. "By July 1932, a prototype of a 35 ton tank with a 76.2 mm tank gun was completed. The first prototype was further enhanced with four smaller turrets, two with 37 mm guns and two with machine guns."

T-35 with five turrets. NOT all so readily discernible in this image!

4. T-28. "The T–28 had one large turret with a 76.2mm gun and two smaller turrets with 7.62mm machine guns"

T-28 tank those two turrets located forward of the main gun able to traverse right and left independently of one another.

Armor design and engineering development in a rapid state of ferment in those inter-war years [1919-1939]. Indeed, a tank mostly at the time of initial production already antiquated by more sophisticated designs on the drawing board or existing as experimental or prototype versions.

"The prototype T-100 tank was briefly tested alongside the other designs in the Soviet invasion of Finland in 1939 without success. It was never put into production, due to the archaic design concept, poor mobility and the availability of a far superior alternative, the KV series."


Saturday, April 6, 2013


This is coolbert:

"And so we unite and go forward to where our beliefs lead us, and through the sacrifice of several thousands of 'Okichis of our era' build a breakwater to hold back the raging waves and defend and nurture the purity of our race, becoming as well an invisible underground pillar at the root of the postwar social order... we are but offering ourselves for the defense of the national polity." - - oath of the Japanese RAA staff!!


From the Asahi Shinbun:

"Declassified papers: Japanese public in ‘great shock’ over misconduct by U.S. occupation forces"

"Much of the country lay in ruins, and Japan's war-weary population had more shocks in store from U.S.-led occupation forces that arrived in late August 1945."

"In just one month, ordinary citizens were in a state of 'great shock' over numerous incidents of misconduct and criminal behavior among U.S. soldiers, according to newly declassified documents from the Foreign Ministry."

From my perspective not so numerous but mostly rather petty stuff American soldiers of the Japan Occupation force behaving badly but NOT on a massive and widespread scale. Concerns nonetheless valid, the feelings of the Japanese having to be assuaged and were.

The chances too of a Japanese citizen being attacked and violated by one of his own kind more than likely much greater than having the same crime committed by an American occupier!!

Rape of Japanese women by the American occupying military a source of major concern, the RAA a system of organized brothels catering to the "needs and wants" of that U.S. serviceman.

RAA to a large extent run by or closely linked to the Yakuza, Japanese organized crime.

"The Recreation and Amusement Association . . . (RAA) was the largest of the organizations established by the Japanese to provide organized prostitution and other leisure facilities for occupying Allied troops immediately following World War II. The system that incorporated the RAA was short-lived, lasting just over four months before it was eliminated in January 1946."

American sailors and soldiers await their turn! Occupation duty in Japan until the time of the Korean War was more or less a dolce vita, the sweet life, one continuous Happy Hour!

That American occupation of Japan and also Germany for that matter rather benevolent and successful, post-war reconciliation and democracy the result, both Japan and Germany quickly recovering from the devastation of war once again counted among the community of nations prosperous, developed and enlightened.



This is coolbert:

Some update and info on those North Korean missiles [Musudan] allegedly moved to the "east coast" [Japan Sea/East Sea] AND the American response.

First from Sharkhunters we have:

"The Navy is believed to be operating at least four Aegis-equipped warships near North Korea that are equipped with SM-3 anti-missile interceptors. The SM-3 is a very capable missile that can knock down most medium-range missiles. The ships’ Aegis battle management system is built around a high-powered phased-array radar that is capable of tracking missiles hundreds of miles from the ships, as well as objects in space.  The SM-3s provide protection from missile attacks for areas in Northeast Asia . . . A classified 2009 State Department cable stated that the Musudan intermediate-range missile is based on Russia’s SS-N-6 submarine-launched missile that has a range of up to 2,400 miles.  The missile is fueled by an advanced liquid propellant that is easier to store in missiles than fuel used in other North Korean long-range rockets.  The fuel allows for longer-range missiles and greater warhead capacity on short-range systems."

These missiles are MOBILE intermediate range ballistic missiles [IRBM] that are based on an original Soviet design over forty years old that response and counter to the Amnerican Polaris submarine launched nuclear tipped missile. Musudan developed to a more robust version in the ground launched mode, that Soviet missile tested repeatedly with a great deal of success and apparently very accurate. As launched from a Soviet Yankee class submarine ONLY tipped with a nuclear munition!!

And from the wiki regarding the Musudan:

"The BM25 Musudan, also known under the names Taepodong X, Nodong / Rodong-B and Mirim, is a mobile intermediate-range ballistic missile developed by the Democratic People's Republic of Korea [DPRK] . . . The Musudan resembles the shape of the Soviet Union's R-27 Zyb submarine-launched missile, but is slightly longer."

"In the mid-1990s, after the collapse of the Soviet Union, North Korea invited the Makeyev Design Bureau's ballistic missile designers and engineers to develop this missile, based on the R-27 Zyb."


* These are not intercontinental ballistic missiles [ICBM] that threaten the United States mainland.

* Are designed to carry a nuclear warhead and that alone more than likely.

* Those American AEGIS warships with the SM-3 is capable of intercepting and destroying the Musudan? At least in the immediate launch and boost phase they are? NOT so sure about destroying an incoming warhead during the dowward ballistic flight.

10 April is now the date as announced by Kim as the day of reckoning. Devoted readers to the blog hold on to the edge of your seat, we are in for a ride, roller coaster like with a lot of up and down and the light is not yet at the end of the tunnel and we are all spectators. Hang on tight!


Friday, April 5, 2013

Sneaky & Creative.

This is coolbert:

“it will be something sneaky and creative"

From the Danger Room and thanks to the tip from intelNews.org:

"Ex-CIA Analyst Expects North Korea to Attack South Korea Before Tensions End"

When this person speaks, we should listen?

"one of the CIA’s former top Pyongyang analysts thinks dictator Kim Jong-un will order a limited strike on South Korea — as a way to actually tamp down hostilities."

“'North Korea will launch an attack,' predicts Sue Mi Terry, a Columbia University professor who served as a senior analyst on North Korea at the CIA from 2001 to 2008. The attack won’t be nuclear, she thinks, nor will it be a barrage from the massive amounts of artillery Pyongyang has aimed south"

But - - something is going to happen? Kim cannot back down now that he has made such bellicose and warlike statements and has seemed to have made ready his preparations?

SOMETHING is going to happen but of a minor nature. [minor as long as long as it is not your ship being sunk or your plane shot down]


1. Has the desire to look tough for internal North Korean consumption and to be able to prove to his general staff that he is a man of leadership in the mold of his father and grandfather?

2. Will walk to the "brink" and then step back and act conciliatory, suddenly an advocate of peace and wanting negotiations? Kim wants to be the center-of-attention and suddenly he IS SO!

A lack of miscalculation and perception is the biggest concern here? Even a minor incident can escalate in an uncontrollable manner. This is the great fear! Especially when considering a person in a leadership position and of such youth as Kim!


Thursday, April 4, 2013


This is coolbert:

The United Nations just now having created and authorized a new fighting force called an intervention brigade, the purpose of which is to counter and go after the various predatory and deadly militias of the Congo area that have wreaked havoc for ALMOST TWO DECADES NOW!!

"U.N. approves new combat force to 'neutralize' Congo rebels"

"UNITED NATIONS (Reuters) - The U.N. Security Council on Thursday approved the creation of a unique new combat force that is to carry out 'targeted offensive operations' to neutralize armed groups in conflict-torn eastern Democratic Republic of Congo."


"The 15-member Security Council unanimously adopted a resolution establishing the so-called intervention brigade . . . as part of the existing 20,000-strong U.N. force in Congo"

That area of Africa where the Congo, Rwanda and Burundi comes together beset with two decades of intermittent warfare and warlord atrocity. In this particular case the militia M23 the main culprit but understood as there existing in the area also entire battalions of militia not beholden to M23.

"It says MONUSCO will 'carry out targeted offensive operations through the Intervention Brigade ... either unilaterally or jointly with the (Congo army), in a robust highly mobile and versatile manner ... to prevent expansion of all armed groups, neutralize these groups, and to disarm them.'"

This intervention brigade a unit of combat arms and NOT strictly peacekeeping troops. Peacemakers in the sense of being able to engage in combat with and defeat the various militias of the region.

"The resolution also states that the intervention brigade will be made up of three infantry battalions, one artillery and one special force and reconnaissance company headquartered in Goma under the direct command of the MONUSCO force commander."

That "brigade" consisting of troops from South Africa, Tanzania and Malawi and perhaps Mozambique.

I hope this works well but to be honest as has been noted by a number of authorities, COALITIONS OF TROOPS HARDLY EVER FIGHT WELL!!

Understand too that during the last two decades that area of the Congo very rich in mineral resources has had to endure WARLORD warfare with the total number of dead estimated at about three million souls. MOSTLY civilians. This figure deemed fairly accurate based on U.N. estimates.