Boss of the Week!
Check out this sign on a fan at the drivethru- it says the fan is too keep the registers cold-"not you"Classic!
Monday, October 30, 2006
Check out this sign on a fan at the drivethru- it says the fan is too keep the registers cold-"not you"Classic!
The Big Truck Show
Thanks to everybody who turned out at The Big Truck Show!
Check out the Dancing Backhoes from JCB!
My kids sure loved the show and the day! (from left Taylor Coffman, Joni Coffman, Cain Coffman)
Thursday, October 26, 2006
Monday, October 23, 2006
New Tango Theatres open by Thanksgiving!
Tango Theatres in Agana Shopping Center will be open by Thanksgiving. Thanks to Shelly Gibson here's a little slideshow movie of the look around I took this morning!
tangosmall.mov
Saturday, October 21, 2006
Great Article from Listener on the Power of Portions
October 11, 2006
Seduced by Snacks? No, Not You
By KIM SEVERSON
Ithaca, N.Y.
PEOPLE almost always think they are too smart for Prof. Brian Wansink’s
quirky experiments in the psychology of overindulgence.
When it comes to the slippery issues of snacking and portion control, no
one thinks he or she is the schmo who digs deep into the snack bowl
without thinking, or orders dessert just because a restaurant plays a
certain kind of music.
“To a person, people will swear they aren’t influenced by the size of a
package or how much variety there is on a buffet or the fancy name on a
can of beans, but they are,” Dr. Wansink said. “Every time.”
He has the data to prove it. Dr. Wansink, who holds a doctorate in
marketing from Stanford University and directs the Cornell University
Food
and Brand Lab, probably knows more about why we put things in our mouths
than anybody else. His experiments examine the cues that make us eat the
way we do. The size of an ice cream scoop, the way something is packaged
and whom we sit next to all influence how much we eat. His research
doesn’t pave a clear path out of the obesity epidemic, but it does show
the significant effect one’s eating environment has on slow and steady
weight gain.
In an eight-seat lab designed to look like a cozy kitchen, Dr. Wansink
offers free lunches in exchange for hard data. He opened the lab at
Cornell in April, after he moved it from the University of Illinois at
Urbana-Champaign, where he spent eight years conducting experiments in
cafeterias, grocery stores and movie theaters. Dr. Wansink presents his
work to dieticians, food executives and medical professionals. They
use it
to get people to eat differently.
His research on how package size accelerates consumption led, in a
roundabout way, to the popular 100-calorie bags of versions of Wheat
Thins
and Oreos, which are promoted for weight management. Although food
companies have long used packaging and marketing techniques to get
people
to buy more food, Dr. Wansink predicts companies will increasingly use
some of his research to help people eat less or eat better, even if it
means not selling as much food. He reasons that companies will make
up the
difference by charging more for new packaging that might slow down
consumption or that put seemingly healthful twists on existing
brands. And
they get to wear a halo for appearing to do their part to prevent
obesity.
To his mind, the 65 percent of Americans who are overweight or obese got
that way, in part, because they didn’t realize how much they were
eating.
“We don’t have any idea what the normal amount to eat is, so we look
around for clues or signals,” he said. “When all you see is that big
portions of food cost less than small ones, it can be confusing.”
Although people think they make 15 food decisions a day on average, his
research shows the number is well over 200. Some are obvious, some are
subtle. The bigger the plate, the larger the spoon, the deeper the bag,
the more we eat. But sometimes we decide how much to eat based on how
much
the person next to us is eating, sometimes moderating our intake by more
than 20 percent up or down to match our dining companion.
Much of his work is outlined in the book “Mindless Eating: Why We Eat
More
Than We Think” (Bantam), which will be published on Tuesday. The book is
his fourth over all, but his first directed at a general audience. It is
peppered with his goofy, appealing Midwestern humor and practical diet
tips. But the most fascinating material is directly from his studies on
university campuses and in test kitchens for institutions like the
United
States Army.
An appalling example of our mindless approach to eating involved an
experiment with tubs of five-day-old popcorn. Moviegoers in a Chicago
suburb were given free stale popcorn, some in medium-size buckets,
some in
large buckets. What was left in the buckets was weighed at the end of
the
movie. The people with larger buckets ate 53 percent more than people
with
smaller buckets. And people didn’t eat the popcorn because they liked
it,
he said. They were driven by hidden persuaders: the distraction of the
movie, the sound of other people eating popcorn and the Pavlovian
popcorn
trigger that is activated when we step into a movie theater.
Dr. Wansink is particularly proud of his bottomless soup bowl, which he
and some undergraduates devised with insulated tubing, plastic
dinnerware
and a pot of hot tomato soup rigged to keep the bowl about half full.
The
idea was to test which would make people stop eating: visual cues, or a
feeling of fullness.
People using normal soup bowls ate about nine ounces. The typical
bottomless soup bowl diner ate 15 ounces. Some of those ate more than a
quart, and didn’t stop until the 20-minute experiment was over. When
asked
to estimate how many calories they had consumed, both groups thought
they
had eaten about the same amount, and 113 fewer calories on average than
they actually had.
Last week in his lab seven people were finishing lunch while watching a
big-screen TV. Cartoons on the TV served as a distraction so
participants
would not be influenced by what and how much those nearby ate.
Because he does not take money from food companies and is a newcomer at
the university, the lab runs on the cheap. The menus, like the one on
this
day, are often built from Beefaroni, applesauce, M&M’s and Chex Mix:
simple, inexpensive food that subjects are familiar with and that can be
easily manipulated.
He prefers to experiment on graduate students or office workers, whom he
sometimes lures with the promise of a drawing for an iPod. “It’s easy to
find undergraduates to participate, but with the guys nothing makes
sense
because they all eat like animals,” he said.
On this day he is testing how much people eat depending on whether they
have exercised. Over the past several weeks they have sent subjects,
some
who have exercised and some who have not, through an unlimited buffet
line. By measuring the difference between how much and what people eat
depending on whether they have exercised, Dr. Wansink hopes to prove
that
even moderate exercise makes us think we are entitled to many more
calories than we actually burned.
“Geez Louise, you can’t believe how much people eat to
overcompensate,” he
said.
Those kinds of things — intuitive bits we know about food but think
we are
either immune to or don’t think about — are the spine of “Mindless
Eating.” In it he outlines an eating plan based on simple awareness.
Employ a few tricks and you can take in 100 to 300 fewer calories a day.
At the end of a year you could be 10 to 30 pounds lighter.
For example, sit next to the person you think will be the slowest eater
when you go to a restaurant, and be the last one to start eating. Plate
high-calorie foods in the kitchen but serve vegetables family style.
Never
eat directly from a package. Wrap tempting food in foil so you don’t see
it. At a buffet put only two items on your plate at a time.
His dieting methods aren’t as fast as the Atkins plan or even Weight
Watchers, and have little to do with matters that consume nutrition
researchers or even culinarians. Dr. Wansink is not that guy.
Although he
has studied to be a sommelier and keeps a mental list of his 100 best
meals, he drinks vats of Diet Coke and will inhale a box of Burger King
Cini-mini rolls with no apologies. He doesn’t think that his work will
solve the obesity problem, but it’s a start.
“It’s like a big pyramid,” he said. “The people at 30,000 feet can look
down and say we need a wholesale change in our food system, in school
lunches, in the way we farm.” At the bottom of the pyramid, he said, are
the nutritionists and the diet fanatics who think the problem will be
solved by examining every nutrient and calorie.
Dr. Wansink does his research for the person in the middle, the guy
on the
sofa who can appreciate a good meal, whether it is from Le Bernardin
or Le
Burger King.
“Will being more mindful about how we eat make everyone 100 pounds
lighter
next year?” he said. “No, but it might make them 10 pounds lighter.”
And the best part, he promises, is that you won’t even notic
<
War Games in Korea-listeners keep us informed!
Hafa Adai Trav!
Flora shouldn't worry; every option has been considered for over five decades. Plus, worst case scenario, it would be over for all of us in 2 seconds, no? It's all M.A.D. (Mutually Assured Destruction)...
Worse yet, the Pentagon plan has U.S. Army reinforcements all arriving through a single port, Pusan, in the far south—again a target for Northern missiles. And after disembarking, the Americans would have only two good roads up the length of the peninsula, roads that would be packed with fleeing civilians and presumably under bombardment.
The Pentagon has worked like crazy trying to improve South Korea’s defenses. There has been a huge effort, for example, to set up sensor-communications-counterfire systems so each of those North Korean artillery pieces, as soon as it fires a single shell, can be pinpointed and destroyed faster than it can be rolled back into its cave. Current plans rely on massive U.S. airpower against targets in the North: stealth aircraft, cruise missiles and precision-guided munitions (a.k.a. “smart bombs). They also include a detailed outline for action on the ground, such as placing U.S. Marines deep inside the North to threaten Pyongyang. But none of these expedients looks remotely likely to cut the butcher’s bill to an acceptable level.
In May of this year, Bush signed a directive assigning the U.S. Strategic Command the task of overseeing and coordinating all U.S. plans to counter threats of WMD proliferation worldwide. Bad idea. As overseer of America’s nuclear forces, STRATCOM at once set about doing what it knows how to do, which is to plan for nuclear strikes. Duly it hatched a concept—notional, global, and nowhere near as detailed as a plan—for nuclear strikes against proliferators who are judged to pose an impending threat to the United States. The proposal inevitably leaked and was quickly quashed. Now everyone has gone back to the drawing board—except Kim’s scientists. They’re doing just fine.
Warm regards,
BJ
Flora shouldn't worry; every option has been considered for over five decades. Plus, worst case scenario, it would be over for all of us in 2 seconds, no? It's all M.A.D. (Mutually Assured Destruction)...
A Script for Doomsday
Why the military option is not an option against Kim Jong Il and his nuclear program.
By John Barry
Newsweek
Updated: 6:41 p.m. ET Oct. 19, 2006
Oct. 19, 2006 - Kim Jong Il doesn’t need the bomb to defend his country. If military force were an acceptable option against Pyongyang, you probably would have forgotten the North Korean dictator’s name long ago—if you ever knew it in the first place.
The Pentagon has been bracing for trouble on the peninsula ever since the 1953 armistice. The basic plan, in place for almost 50 years, is predicated on a North Korean invasion of the South. But in the early 1990s, that plan was expanded. Titled OPPLAN 5027, it now lays out a campaign in which, the invading North Korean Army having been destroyed, U.S. and South Korean forces invade the North and topple the regime. The Pentagon even has a contingency plan for taking out all known nuclear facilities in the North.
Kim shouldn’t lose sleep over it.
Not that he should dream of invading the South. Defeating such a move would be bloody but relatively simple, the Pentagon’s planners expect. “We will halt the North Korean Army in the passes,” Colin Powell, then chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, assured the Clinton administration in 1993. “Then we will kill them.” By passes, Powell meant Kaeson and Chorwon, the only two corridors from the North broad enough to allow the movement of formations the size of North Korean divisions. Those places would be killing grounds.
But repelling an invasion has never been the problem. The real issue is Seoul, a city-sprawl of 22 million—almost half of South Korea’s entire population—within range of North Korean bombardment. The U.S. military reckons that two thirds of the North’s 11,000 artillery pieces and multiple-rocket launchers are deployed in hardened shelters just behind the DMZ, with at least half within range of Seoul, capable of pounding the South with 500,000 rounds per hour for several hours. The South Korean capital is Kim Jung Il’s hostage.
The North’s attack strategy is assumed to be nothing fancy: a massive barrage on Seoul, causing a tidal wave of refugees and (supposedly) forcing the South’s government to surrender quickly under threat of further destruction of the capital. Defending the South against such a blitzkrieg would be tough. The Pentagon’s plan has U.S. air reinforcements pouring in at six main airbases, ready to fly more than 3,000 sorties a day. All of those fields are vulnerable to strikes by Northern missiles armed with chemical warheads or cluster munitions. And the fields are all near the coast. The North’s special forces (nominally more than 100,000 strong) are known to have been practicing submarine-launched assaults, and the airbases would presumably be key objectives of such assaults.
Worse yet, the Pentagon plan has U.S. Army reinforcements all arriving through a single port, Pusan, in the far south—again a target for Northern missiles. And after disembarking, the Americans would have only two good roads up the length of the peninsula, roads that would be packed with fleeing civilians and presumably under bombardment.
The Pentagon has worked like crazy trying to improve South Korea’s defenses. There has been a huge effort, for example, to set up sensor-communications-counterfire systems so each of those North Korean artillery pieces, as soon as it fires a single shell, can be pinpointed and destroyed faster than it can be rolled back into its cave. Current plans rely on massive U.S. airpower against targets in the North: stealth aircraft, cruise missiles and precision-guided munitions (a.k.a. “smart bombs). They also include a detailed outline for action on the ground, such as placing U.S. Marines deep inside the North to threaten Pyongyang. But none of these expedients looks remotely likely to cut the butcher’s bill to an acceptable level.
And so far we’re only talking about confronting an attack from the North.
Bill Clinton and William Perry, his Defense secretary, considered going to war against Pyongyang in 1994. On May 19 of that year, Perry, along with the then Joint Chiefs chairman, John Shalikashvili, and the commander of U.S. forces in South Korea at the time, Gen. Gary Luck, briefed the president on the anticipated costs of such a war: roughly 52,000 U.S. military killed or wounded; 490,000 South Korean military ditto, and untold numbers of Northern dead and civilian casualties, all in the first 90 days of conflict—together with a U.S. price tag of more than $61 billion. Luck later calculated the ultimate toll at more than 1 million dead, possibly including as many as 100,000 Americans, and a final bill to U.S. taxpayers in excess of $100 billion—not to mention more than $1 trillion in damage to South Korea’s economy.
Which helps explain why Clinton opted instead to make a deal with Pyongyang, despite the deficiencies of the 1994 Framework Agreement. “We all knew it wasn’t a solution,” says one senior Defense Department official involved in those discussions. “But it staved off war. And it bought time.” The 1994 casualty estimates “haven’t changed,” says a senior Pentagon official. “A major war on the Korean peninsula would have a disastrous effect on the region’s economies,” Maj. [now Lt. Col.] Daniel Orcutt warned in a study published by the U.S. Air Force Academy in 2004. In particular, he wrote: “War would obliterate South Korea’s goal of becoming a top-ten economic power.”
Even so, the prospect of North Korea getting the bomb worried the Pentagon sufficiently that in 1994 it launched another study, this time asking whether a way could be found to destroy the North’s known nuclear facilities without triggering all-out war on the peninsula. The Americans could obliterate the targets in short order, using long-range bombers and carrier-based aircraft to avoid implicating the South. The main thing, as described by one of those involved in drawing up the scenario, would be to make clear to the North’s leadership that the attacks were intended only to eliminate Pyongyang’s nuclear capability, not to overthrow the regime. But the Northerners would also be put on notice: if they responded by attacking the South, the regime would become a target. The scheme—it never got as far as a plan—was scrapped. Pyongyang’s reaction was simply too hard to predict.
A few things have changed since the mid-1990s. In those days America had more ground troops in South Korea than it has now, and the United States wasn’t fighting even one war back then, let alone a pair of them. Today the Pentagon could muster just about enough air and sea power to defend South Korea if the North invaded, according to the Joint Chiefs of Staff’s latest annual “apportioned forces” estimate. But doing the job would take pulling every Marine out of Iraq without delay and sending them all straight to Korea.
In May of this year, Bush signed a directive assigning the U.S. Strategic Command the task of overseeing and coordinating all U.S. plans to counter threats of WMD proliferation worldwide. Bad idea. As overseer of America’s nuclear forces, STRATCOM at once set about doing what it knows how to do, which is to plan for nuclear strikes. Duly it hatched a concept—notional, global, and nowhere near as detailed as a plan—for nuclear strikes against proliferators who are judged to pose an impending threat to the United States. The proposal inevitably leaked and was quickly quashed. Now everyone has gone back to the drawing board—except Kim’s scientists. They’re doing just fine.
Warm regards,
BJ
Thursday, October 19, 2006
Wednesday, October 18, 2006
Stonehenge makes list in new seven wonders vote on Yahoo! News
Stonehenge makes list in new seven wonders vote
Tue Oct 17, 8:34 AM ET
Only one of the ancient wonders of the world still survives -- now history lovers are being invited to choose a new list of seven.
Among 21 locations shortlisted for the worldwide vote is Stonehenge, the only British landmark selected.
The 5,000-year-old stones on Salisbury Plain, Wiltshire, will be up against sites including the Acropolis in Athens; the Statue of Liberty in New York; and the last remaining original wonder, the Pyramids of Giza in Cairo.
An original list of nearly 200 sites nominated by the public was narrowed to 21 by the organizers and experts, including the former director general of Unesco Professor Federico Mayor.
The vote is organized by a non-profit Swiss foundation called New7Wonders which specializes in the preservation, restoration and promotion of monuments, and the results will be announced on July 7, 2007, in Lisbon.
About 20 million votes have already been lodged, including many from India, for the Taj Mahal; China, for the Great Wall and from Peru for Machu Picchu, the fortress city of the Incas.
The other original seven wonders of the ancient world were the Hanging Gardens of Babylon; the Statue of Zeus at Olympia; the Temple of Artemis at Ephesus; the Mausoleum at Halicarnassus; the Colossus of Rhodes and the Lighthouse of Alexandria.
Tia Viering, spokeswoman for New7Wonders, said: "Apart from the Pyramids, the seven ancient wonders of the world no longer exist."
The only criteria for the new list is that the landmarks were built or discovered before 2000.
"People of England, it is now your turn to be heard," added Viering. Support Stonehenge to become one of the New Seven Wonders of the World."
Votes can be made online, at www.new7wonders.com.
The 21 finalists for the New Seven Wonders of the World, alphabetically:
1 Acropolis, Athens, Greece
2 Alhambra, Granada, Spain
3 Angkor Wat temple, Cambodia
4 Chichen Itza Aztec site, Yucatan, Mexico
5 Christ the Redeemer, Rio de Janeiro, Brazil
6 Colosseum, Rome
7 Easter Island Statues, Chile
8 Eiffel Tower, Paris
9 Great Wall, China
10 Hagia Sophia church, Istanbul, Turkey
11 Kyomizu Temple, Kyoto, Japan
12 Kremlin/St.Basil's, Moscow
13 Machu Picchu, Peru
14 Neuschwanstein Castle, Fussen, Germany
15 Petra ancient city, Jordan
16 Pyramids of Giza, Egypt
17 Statue of Liberty, New York
18 Stonehenge, Amesbury, United Kingdom
19 Sydney Opera House, Australia
20 Taj Mahal, Agra, India
21 Timbuktu city, Mali
Copyright © 2006 Reuters Limited. All rights reserved. Republication or redistribution of Reuters content is expressly prohibited without the prior written consent of Reuters. Reuters shall not be liable for any errors or delays in the content, or for any actions taken in reliance thereon.
| Copyright © 2006 Yahoo! Inc. All rights reserved. Questions or Comments Privacy Policy -Terms of Service - Copyright/IP Policy - Ad Feedback |
Hillarious Lies from Hillary!
http://www.nytimes.com/2006/10/17/nyregion/17hillary.html?ex=1161748800&en=6d194e932dd396a9&ei=5070&emc=eta1
Hillary, Not as in the Mount Everest Guy
For more than a decade, one piece of Senator Hillary Rodham Clinton’s informal biography has been that she was named for Sir Edmund Hillary, the conqueror of Mount Everest. The story was even recounted in Bill Clinton’s autobiography.
But yesterday, Mrs. Clinton’s campaign said she was not named for Sir Edmund after all.
“It was a sweet family story her mother shared to inspire greatness in her daughter, to great results I might add,” said Jennifer Hanley, a spokeswoman for the campaign.
In May 1953, Sir Edmund and his Sherpa guide, Tenzing Norgay, became the first men to reach the summit of Mount Everest. In 1995, shortly after meeting Sir Edmund, Mrs. Clinton said that her mother, Dorothy Rodham, had long told her she was named for the famous mountaineer.
“It had two l’s, which is how she thought she was supposed to spell Hillary,” Mrs. Clinton said at the time, after meeting Sir Edmund. “So when I was born, she called me Hillary, and she always told me it’s because of Sir Edmund Hillary.”
Even though Bill Clinton repeated the story in his 2004 autobiography, “My Life,” Hillary Clinton did not mention it in her own autobiography, “Living History,” which was published in 2003.
But one big hole has been poked in the story over the years, both in cyberspace and elsewhere: Sir Edmund became famous only after climbing Everest in 1953. Mrs. Clinton, as it happens, was born in 1947.
Tuesday, October 17, 2006
Big Show listener describes the tax benefits of a Guam fallout shelter
travis
if anyone is fearful that the north koreans will attack guam. one should build a fallout shelter and the government of guam offers a tax break for such fallout shelter.
GUAM CODE ANNOTATED
TITLE 11. FINANCE & TAXATION.
DIVISION 2. TAXES
CHAPTER 24. REAL PROPERTY TAX
ARTICLE 4. EXEMPTIONS.
TITLE 11. FINANCE & TAXATION.
DIVISION 2. TAXES
CHAPTER 24. REAL PROPERTY TAX
ARTICLE 4. EXEMPTIONS.
Current through P.L. 28-063 (2005)
§ 24408. Fallout Shelter Exemption.
The owner of a fallout shelter shall be entitled to an exemption in determining the value thereof for the purpose of assessing real property taxes to the following extent:
The first Seven Hundred Fifty Dollars ($750.00) of the appraised value of improvements, consisting of any structure used as a fallout shelter and any building of which the shelter is a part, and the land on which it is located, the exemption being applied first to improvements and the balance, if any, to the land. The exemption granted herein is in addition to the home exemption provided in § 24402 and nothing herein shall be construed to diminish an owner's right to such home exemption.
(a) Definitions. As used in this Section.
(1) Fallout shelter means any structure certified by the Director of Civil Defense as meeting the minimum national standards of protection against nuclear fallout.
(2) Owner refers to natural persons, corporations, associations, partnerships, and means any person who is liable for the payment of the real property tax imposed on the fallout shelter.
(3) Appraised value means appraised value as defined in item (f), § 24102.
(2) Owner refers to natural persons, corporations, associations, partnerships, and means any person who is liable for the payment of the real property tax imposed on the fallout shelter.
(3) Appraised value means appraised value as defined in item (f), § 24102.
(b) One exemption shall be allowed to every structure qualifying as a fallout shelter.
(c) Any person claiming an exemption under this Section shall submit to the assessor a certification by the Director of Civil Defense that the structure involved is a fallout shelter.
(d) It shall be the duty of the Director of Civil Defense or his delegate to examine any shelter upon the request of the owner thereof and if warranted to certify that said shelter meets the minimum national standards of protection against nuclear fallout.
SOURCE: GC § 19330.7.
Anti Slot Machine group applauds anti slot candidates
FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE
CANDIDATES UNITED AGAINST PROP B
Gubernatorials, Congresswoman Bordallo Against Prop B
Hagatna, Guam – October 17, 2006. The NO ON PROP B Committee has completed its candidates survey and is releasing the results on those candidates who have demonstrated leadership and wisdom in taking a position on Proposal B.
Both Gubernatorial Teams of incumbent Governor Felix Camacho-Senator Mike Cruz and former Congressman Robert Underwood-Senator Frank Aguon oppose Proposal B.
Congresswoman Madeleine Z. Bordallo is speaking out in television commercials against Prop B.
Republican senatorial candidates (in Election Ballot order) opposing Proposal B are:
1. Joe Mesa
2. Senator Ray Tenorio
3. Sam Souza
4. Jim Espaldon
5. Telo Taitague
6. Speaker Mark Forbes
7.
8. Senator Tony Unpingco
9. Vic Gaza
10. Senator Jesse Lujan
11. Frank Ishizaki
12. Frank Blas, Jr.
13. Chris Duenas
Senator Eddie Calvo has refused to take a public position on the Proposal B. In 2004, then candidate Calvo opposed Proposal A, the casino gambling initiative.
Democratic senatorial candidates (in Election Ballot order) opposing Proposal B are:
1. Judi Guthertz
2.
3.
4. Senator Judi Won Pat
5. Senator Rory Respicio
6. Former Speaker Ben Pangelinan
7. Angel Sablan
8. Tina Muna Barnes
9.
10. Dave Duenas
11. Romeo Hernandez
12. Former Speaker Don Parkinson
13. Angela Santos
14. Senator Adolpho Palacios
15. Trini Torres
Candidate Jose Terlaje has refused to take a public position on the initiative. Candidates Jose Chargualaf and Dave Shimizu did not return phone calls.
Attorney General Candidates:
Incumbent Attorney General Doug Moylan (write-in) is the only candidate to take a public position, opposing Proposal B.
Candidates Alicia Limtiaco and Vern Perez refuse to take a public position on the initiative.
The NO ON PROP B Committee applauds the leadership and wisdom exhibited by the candidates who are demonstrating their opposition to the legalization of gambling at Greyhound. The voters of Guam will have additional knowledge to make an informed choice on which leaders they will select November 7.
The NO ON PROPOSAL B Group is a broad-based alliance of civic, religious, legal, medical, education, business, tourism and government groups who have reviewed Proposal B, and concluded that it does not revitalize tourism and that it harms Guam’s economic and social development.
One hateful little man!
Read the Article
The weird and scary saga of how an isolated, bankrupt nation went nuclear—and how the United States failed to stop it.
By Michael Hirsh, Melinda Liu and George Wehrfritz
Newsweek
Oct. 23, 2006 issue - Great historical events can spring from small slights. Kaiser Wilhelm never forgave the French for not treating him to a parade in Paris. "The monarchs of Europe have paid no attention to what I have to say," the German emperor whined before setting the Continent aflame in 1914. By many accounts, North Korea's Kim Jong Il also suffers from a tender ego. For one thing the 5-foot-3 dictator is sensitive about his height (hence, one suspects, his bouffant hairstyle and elevator shoes). After ordering the kidnapping of a South Korean actress, Choe Eun Hee, in 1978 to help him start up a national film industry, the first thing the movie-mad Kim jokingly asked her at a welcoming dinner was: "Well, Madame, what do you think of my physique?" More painfully, he fears that in the eyes of his countrymen and allies, he can never match the achievements of his revered father, the "Great Leader" Kim Il Sung (who was close to six feet tall and who led a guerrilla army against the Japanese occupiers in the 1930s). By many accounts, the young Kim is fed up along with his top aides, who often reflect his views. "What I hear is, Big Brother is telling Little Brother, 'Don't do that'," the North Korean vice minister of Foreign Affairs, Kim Gye Gwan, complained when Beijing urged Kim Jong Il to cancel his planned missile tests in July. "But we are not boys. We are a nuclear power."
Interested in Volcanoes???
Interested in Volcanoes? Follow this link from one of the Big Show Listeners!
Andy Rooney of 60 Minutes on North Korea
[Audio available] http://www.cbsnews.com/stories/2006/10/13/60minutes/
rooney/main2087893.shtml
I served in the United States Army for four years during World War
II, so I never feel I have to worry about sounding unpatriotic when
I’m critical of something my country does.
Right now, I don't understand why we think it is OK for us to have
nuclear weapons but it isn't all right for some other countries to
have any. I don't think any country should have a nuclear weapon. And
that includes ours.
Seven countries admit having them. They are The United States, Great
Britain, Russia, France, China, India and Pakistan. Israel may have
them, but hasn't said so.
North Korea has recently set off a nuclear bomb of some kind, and the
leaders of the countries with the bomb - that includes us -are in a
tizzy about that.
We're a little late getting exercised about this. North Korea has
always been more of a threat to world peace than Iraq ever was and if
we were going to attack someone three years ago to make the world
safer, we should have attacked North Korea, not Iraq.
We're not so much afraid that North Korea will use the bomb against
us as we are that they'll sell their nuclear technology to some
little country or group of individuals who will use it on us. It
could happen.
It's not hard to understand why North Korea wants the bomb. If we
Americans lived in North Korea instead of here, do you think we'd be
in favor of our little country having it? You’re darn right we would.
President Bush did the right thing when he presented the United
Nations with our complaint against North Korea instead of declaring
war on them. I'm not a big fan of the U.N. It's been an ineffectual
organization but we've got to give it more power and the way to give
it more power is to give it more responsibility. The U.N. should take
the bomb away from North Korea; we should not.
I've said it, and I'm glad.
Monday, October 16, 2006
Is North Korea equipped to attack the United States?
Is North Korea equipped to attack the United States?
by Julia Layton
North Korean leader Kim Jong-il
On October 11, 2006, the newly nuclear North Korea took its rhetoric up a notch when it threatened to attack the United States, which has been "pestering" the country ever since it conducted its internationally rattling nuclear test to declare itself a member of the club. North Korean officials are demanding a one-on-one meeting with the United States, but the latter refuses. Instead, the United States insists on multilateral talks and envisions harsh sanctions if North Korea doesn't cooperate. And North Korea has promised to launch a nuclear-tipped missile if the United States doesn't do something to solve the impasse. But does North Korea have the capabilities to carry out its threats against the United States?
Not really. And, yes, kind of.
There is actually no evidence that North Korea has a nuclear weapon, only that it has a nuclear device. A device capable of a nuclear explosion is one thing; delivering that device to a specific location by way of a missile is a whole different story. Most experts believe that North Korea has not yet developed the technology to weaponize its nuclear capability. It could presumably deliver a weapon by dropping it from a plane, but planes are relatively easy to shoot down before they near their target. North Korea's ability to shrink a nuclear device to the size necessary to fit it onto a missile is considered pretty much out of the question at this point in time.
Could North Korea declare War on the US? One expert works out possible scenarios
Rense.com
N Korea Military Tactics In A War With US A Strategy Of Massive
Retaliations Against US Attacks
By Han Ho Suk
Director Center for Korean Affairs
4-24-3
North Korea has not only the military power but also the political
will to wage total war against the United States.
(An English abstract of a paper)
1. North Korea Can Engage the US in Total War
North Korea is one of the few nations that can engage in a total war
with the United States. The US war planners recognize this fact. For
example, on March 7, 2000, Gen. Thomas A Schwartz, the US commander
in Korea at the time, testified at a US congressional hearing that
"North Korea is the country most likely to involve the United States
in a large-scale war."
North Korea, which can and is willing to face up to the sole military
superpower of the world, cannot be called a weak nation.
Nevertheless, Western press and analysts distort the truth and depict
North Korea as an "impoverished" nation, starving and on the brink of
imminent collapse. An impoverished, starving nation cannot face down
a military superpower. Today few nations have military assets strong
enough to challenge the US military. Russia, though weakened by the
collapse of the Soviet Union, has enough assets to face up to the US.
China, somewhat weaker than Russia, too, has strong military that can
challenge the US. However, both Russia and China lack the political
will to face down the US.
In contrast, North Korea has not only the military power but also the
political will to wage total war against the United States. North
Korea has made it clear that it will strike all US targets with all
means, if the US mounted military attacks on North Korea. That North
Korea's threat is no bluff can be seen from the aggressive actions
taken by North Korea since the Korean War armistice, most recent of
which is North Korea's attempt to capture an American spy plane. In
the morning of March 1, 2003, an American RC-132S spy plane, Cobra
Ball, took off from a US airbase in Okinawa, and cruised along the
East coast of North Korea collecting electronic signals. The US
intelligence suspected that North Korea was about to test a long-
range missile and the plane was there to monitor the suspected
missile launch.
When the US plane reached a point about 193 km from the coast of
North Korea, two MiG-29 and two MiG-21 fighter planes showed up
unexpectedly. The North Korean planes approached within 16 m and
signaled the US plane to follow them. The US pilot refused to follow
the command and left the scene posthaste. The US plane was tailed by
the hostiles for about 22 min but let the US spy plane go. There are
two key points to be observed here.
First, the hostile planes waited for the US plane at the Uhrang
airbase, located about 200 km from the point of air encounter. They
knew that the US plane was coming. The North Korean planes flew 200
km to intercept the US plane. Did the US plane see them coming? If it
did, why no evasive action? After intercepting the US plane, the
hostile planes dogged it for 22 min. Why no American planes for the
rescue? The US crew must have informed the base of the danger they
were in, but no action was taken by the base. If Kim Jong Il had
given the command, the MiGs would have shot down the US plane and
returned to their base before the US could have scrambled war planes.
Second, North Korea intercepted an American spy plane flying 200 km
from its coast. According to the international norm, a nation's
territorial air space extends 19 km from its coast line. The US is
the exception and claims air space of 370 km from its coast line; any
foreign airplane violating this extended air space is challenged or
shot down by the US military.
2. North Korea's Massive Retaliation Strategy
North Korea's war plan in case of an US attack is total war, not the
'low-intensity limited warfare' or 'regional conflict' talked about
among the Western analysts. North Korea will mount a total war if
attacked by the US. There are three aspects to this war plan.
First, total war is North Korea's avowed strategy in case of US
preemptive attacks. The US war on Iraq shows that the US can and will
mount preemptive strikes in clear violation of international laws,
and the United Nations is powerless to stop the US. Any nation that
is weak militarily may be attacked by the US at will. It is
reasonable for North Korea to deter US attacks with threats of total
war.
Second, North Korea expects no help from China, Russia, or other
nations in case of war with the US. It knows that it will be fighting
the superpower alone. Nominally, China and Russia are North Korea's
allies but neither ally is expected to provide any assistance to
North Korea in case of war. Neither nation can or is willing to
protect North Korea from attacks by the US, and North Korea alone can
and will protect itself from US attacks. This principle of self-
defense applies to all nations.
Third, North Korea's total war plan has two components: massive
conventional warfare and weapons of mass destruction. If the US
mounts a preemptive strike on North Korea's Yongbyon nuclear plants,
North Korea will retaliate with weapons of mass destruction: North
Korea will mount strategic nuclear attacks on the US targets. The US
war planners know this and have drawn up their own nuclear war plan.
In a nuclear exchange, there is no front or rear areas, no defensive
positions or attack formations as in conventional warfare. Nuclear
weapons are offensive weapons and there is no defense against nuclear
attacks except retaliatory nuclear attacks. For this reason, North
Korea's war plan is offensive in nature: North Korea's war plan goes
beyond repulsing US attackers and calls for destruction of the United
States.
The US war plan '5027' calls for military occupation of North Korea;
it goes beyond the elimination of North Korea's weapons of mass
destruction. The US military regards North Korea its main enemy and
likewise North Korea regards the US its main enemy. South Korea, too,
regards North Korea its main enemy but North Korea does not regard
South Korea its main enemy because South Korea is a client state of
the United States and has no ability or power to act independent of
the US. North Korea's war plan is not for invading South Korea but
for destroying the US.
3. North Korea's Military Capability
All nations keep their military capability secret. North Korea is no
exception and it is not easy to assess North Korea's military power.
The US claims that it knows North Korea's military secrets. The
United States collects intelligence on North Korea using a variety of
means: American U-2, RC-135, EP-3 and other high-altitude spy planes
watch over North Korea 24 hours 7 days a week. The US 5th Air
Reconnaissance Squadron has U-2R, U-2S, and other advanced spy planes
at the Ohsan airbase in South Korea. In addition, the US has 70 KH-11
spy satellites hovering over North Korea.
In spite of such a massive deployment of intelligence collection
assets, the US intelligence on North Korea is faulty at best. Donald
Gregg, a former US ambassador to Seoul and a 30-year CIA veteran, has
admitted that the US intelligence on North Korea has been the longest
lasting story of failure in the annals of US intelligence. Gregg said
that even the best spy gadget in the US arsenal cannot read what's on
Kim Jong Il's mind. US Secretary of Defense Rumsfeld said that North
Korea uses underground optical fibers for military communication and
that it is nearly impossible to plant human agents in North Korea.
Although North Korea's military secrets are impervious to US spy
operations, one can draw some general pictures from information
available in the public domain.
a) North Korea makes its own weapons
North Korea has annual production capacity for 200,000 AK automatic
guns, 3,000 heavy guns, 200 battle tanks, 400 armored cars and
amphibious crafts. North Korea makes its own submarines, landing
drafts, high-speed missile-boats, and other types of warships. Home-
made weaponry makes it possible for North Korea to maintain a large
military force on a shoestring budget. North Korea defense industry
is made of three groups: weapon production, production of military
supplies, and military-civilian dual-use product manufacturing.
North Korea has 17 plants for guns and artillery, 35 plants for
ammunition, 5 plants for tanks and armored cars, 8 plants for
airplanes, 5 plants for warships, 3 plants for guided missiles, 5
plants for communication equipment, and 8 plants for biochemical
warheads - 134 plants in total. In addition, many plants that make
consumer products are designed so that they can be made to produce
military items with minimum modification. About 180 of defense
related plants are built underground in the rugged mountainous areas
of Jagang-do. Several small to medium hydro-power plants serve these
plants so that it would be nearly impossible for the US to cut off
power to the plants.
b) North Korea has its own war plans
North Korea is mountainous and its coasts are long and jagged. The
Korean peninsula is narrow on its waste. North Korea's weapons and
war tactics are germane to Korea's unique geography. North Korea has
developed its own war plans unique to fighting the US in a unique
way. North Korea's military is organized into several independent,
totally integrated and self-sufficient fighting units, that are ready
for action at any time.
c) North Korean soldiers are well indoctrinated
The US commanders admit that North Korean soldiers are highly
motivated and loyal to Kim Jong Il, and that they will fight well in
case of war. Karl von Clausewitz said that people's support for war,
military commanders' ability and power, and the political leadership
are the three essentials for winning war. He failed to include the
political indoctrination of the soldiers, which is perhaps more
important than the other factors cited.
During the Iraq War just ended, the main cause of Iraq's defeat was
the low moral of its soldiers. Iraqi soldiers had no will to stand
and fight, and they ran away or surrendered without fight. Iraqi
soldiers believed in Allah protecting them and became easy preys to
the US military. North Korean soldiers are taught to fight to the
bitter end. In September 1996, a North Korean submarine got stranded
at Kangrung, South Korea, and its crew abandoned the ship. Eleven of
the crew committed suicide and the rest fought to the last man except
one who was captured. In June 1998, another submarine got caught in
fishing nets at Sokcho and its crew killed themselves. Such is the
fighting spirit of North Korean soldiers.
d) North Koreans are combat ready
One cannot fight war without military preparedness. North Korea's
regular army is for offensive actions whereas its militias are
homeland defense. North Korea's regular army consists of 4 corps in
the front area, 8 corps in the rear area, one tank corps, 5 armored
corps, 2 artillery corps, and 1 corps for the defense of Pyongyang,
South Korea has 19 infantry divisions whereas North Korea has 80
divisions and brigades.
A North Korean infantry division has 3 infantry regiments, 1
artillery regiment (3 battalions of 122 mm rocket launchers and 1
battalion of 152 mortars), one tank battalion of 31 tanks, one anti-
tank battalion, one anti-aircraft battalion, one engineer battalion,
one communication battalion, one light-infantry battalion, one recon
battalion, and one chemical warfare battalion.
North Korea's militias consist of 1.6 million self-defense units,
100,000 people's guards, 3.9 million workers militia, 900,000 youth
guard units. These militias are tasked to defend the homeland. The
militias are fully armed and undergo military trainings regularly.
i) Artillery
North Korea has 2 artillery corps and 30 artillery brigades equipped
with 120mm self-propelled guns, 152mm self-propelled mortars, 170mm
guns with a range of 50 km, 240 mm multiple rocket launchers with a
range of 45 km, and other heavy guns. North Korea has about 18,000
heavy guns. North Korea's 170mm Goksan gun and 240mm multiple-tube
rocket launchers are the most powerful guns of the world. These guns
can lob shells as far south as Suwon miles beyond Seoul. The big guns
are hidden in caves. Many of them are mounted on rails and can fire
in all directions. They can rain 500,000 conventional and biochemical
shells per hour on US troops near the DMZ. The US army bases at
Yijong-bu, Paju, Yon-chun, Munsan, Ding-gu-chun, and Pochun will be
obliterated in a matter of hours.
The US army in Korea is equipped with Paladin anti-artillery guns
that can trace enemy shells back to the guns and fire shells at the
enemy guns with pin-point accuracy. However, it takes for the
Paladins about 10 min to locate the enemy guns, during which time the
Paladins would be targeted by the enemy guns Gen. Thomas A Schwartz,
a former US army commander in Korea, stated that the US army in Korea
would be destroyed in less than three hours.
ii). Blitz Klieg
North Korea has tanks, armored cars, and self-propelled artillery for
blitz klieg. North Korea has one tank corps and 15 tank brigades. The
tank corps has 5 tank regiments, each of which has 4 heavy tank
battalions, 1 light-tank battalion, one mechanized infantry
battalion, 2 self-propelled artillery battalions.
US tanks are designed to operate in open fields. In 1941, Rommel of
Germany defeated British troops in North Africa with tanks. The
largest tank battle was fought at Kursk in 1943, in which the Soviets
defeated Germans. In 1973, Egypt defeated Israeli tanks with anti-
tank missiles. All of these tank battles were fought in open fields.
The Gulf War and the recent war in Iraq saw US tanks in open fields.
American and Western tank commanders do not know how to fight tank
battles in rugged terrains like those of Korea. Tank battles in Korea
will be fought on hilly terrains without any close air cover, because
North Korean fighters will engage US planes in close dog fights.
North Korea has developed tanks ideally suited for the many rivers
and mountains of Korea. These tanks are called "Chun-ma-ho", which
can navigate steep slopes and cross rivers as much as 5.5 m deep.
North Korea's main battle tanks - T-62s - have 155 mm guns and can
travel as fast as 60 km per hour. The US main tanks - M1A - have 120
mm guns and cannot travel faster than 55 km per hour. North Korean
tanks have skins 700 mm thick and TOW-II is the only anti-tank
missile in the US arsenal that can penetrate this armored skin.
North Korea began to make anti-tank missiles in 1975 and has been
improving its anti-tank missiles for the past 30 years. North Korea's
anti-tank missiles are rated the best in the world and several
foreign nations buy them. The US army in Korea relies on 72 AH-64
Apache attack helicopters to kill North Korean tanks. Each Apache has
16 Hell-Fire anti-tank missiles. As shown in the recent Iraq war,
Apaches are fragile and can be easily shot down even with rifles.
North Korea has about 15,000 shoulder-fired anti-air missiles ("wha-
sung") and Apaches will be easy targets for wha-sung missiles. On
December 17, 1994, a wha-sung missile brought down an American OH-58C
spy helicopter which strayed north of the DMZ.
North Korea has 4 mechanized corps and 24 mechanized brigades. Each
brigade has 1 tank battalion (31 tanks), 1 armored battalion (46
armored cars), 4 infantry battalions, one 122mm battalion (18 guns),
one 152 mm battalion (18 guns), one anti-aircraft battalion (18
guns), anti-tank battalion (9 armored cars with anti-tank missiles
and 12 anti-tank guns), one armored recon company (3 light armored
cars, 7 armored cars, and 8 motor-cycles), one mortar company (6
mortars), one engineer company, one chemical company, and one
communication company. The US army has A-10 attack planes to counter
North Korea's mechanized units. In case of war, the skies over Korea
will be filled with fighters in close dog-fights and the A-10s would
be ineffective.
The bulk of North Korea's mechanized and tank units are positioned to
cross the DMZ at a moment's notice and run over the US and South
Korean defenders. The attackers will be aided by SU-25 attack planes
and attack helicopters. In addition, North Korea has 600 high-speed
landing crafts, 140 hovercrafts, and 3,000 K-60 and other pontoon
bridges for river-crossing. North Korea has 700,000 troops, 8,000
heavy guns, and 2,000 tanks placed in more than 4,000 hardened
bunkers within 150 km of the DMZ.
iii. Underground Tunnel Warfare
North Korea is the world most-tunneled nation. North Korea's
expertise in digging tunnels for warfare was demonstrated during the
Vietnam War. North Korea sent about 100 tunnel warfare experts to
Vietnam to help dig the 250 km tunnels for the North Vietnamese and
Viet Gong troops in South Vietnam. The tunnels were instrumental in
the Vietnamese victory.
North Korea's army runs on company-size units. Tunnel warfare is
conducted by independent company-size units. Tunnel entrances are
built to withstand US chemical and biological attacks. Tunnels run
zig-zag and have seals, air-purification units, and safe places for
the troops to rest. It is believed that North Korea has built about
20 large tunnels near the DMZ. A large tunnel can transport 15,000
troops per hour across the DMZ and place them behind the US troops.
iv. Special Forces
North Korea has the largest special forces, 120,000 troops, in the
world. These troops are grouped into light infantry brigades, attack
brigades, air-borne brigades, and sea-born brigades - 25 brigades in
total. These troops will be tasked to attack US military
installations in Korea, Japan, Okinawa and Guam.
North Korea has the capacity to transport 20,000 special force troops
at the same time. North Korea has 130 high-speed landing crafts and
140 hovercrafts. A North Korean hovercraft can carry one platoon of
troops at 90 km per hour. Western experts pooh-pooh North Korea's
ancient AN-2 transport planes as 1948 relics, but AN-2 planes can fly
low beneath US radars and deliver up to 10 troops at 160 km per hour.
North Korea makes AN-2s and has about 300 in place. In addition,
North Korea has hang-gliders that can carry 5-20 men each for short
hops.
North Korea has developed special bikes for mountain warfare. Special
forces use these bikes for fast deployments on mountains. Switzerland
is the only other nation that has bike-mounted special forces trained
for mountain warfare. The rugged terrains of the Korean Peninsula are
ideally suited for special forces operations. North Korea's special
forces will attack US targets in Japan, Okinawa, and Guam as well.
Japan's self defense units are being reorganized to counter this threat.
How good are North Korea's special forces? In September 1996, a North
Korean submarine was stranded near Kang-nung and the crew were forced
to abandon the ship and land on South Korea. The sub had two special
forces agents who had finished a mission in South Korea and were
picked up by the sub before the sub ran into a rock. The two men
fought off an army of South Korean troops and remained at large for
50 days, during which they killed 11 of the pursuers.
4. Weapons of Mass Destruction
a. Missile Readiness
North Korea is a nuclear state along with the US, Russia, China, the
Great Britain, France, India, Pakistan, and Israel. North Korea has
succeeded in weaponizing nuclear devices for missile delivery. North
Korea has operational fleets of ICBM and intermediate-range missiles
equipped with nuclear warheads. I have written on this subject
previously and will not replicate the details here.
It was May of 1994, nine years ago, when the US military planners had
first realized that North Korea had the bomb and devised nuclear
attack plans under William Perry, the then US Secretary of Defense.
Perry had estimated that North Korea would have about 100 nuclear
warheads by 2000. Dr. Kim Myong Chul, an expert on Kim Jong Il's war
plans, has recently confirmed that North Korea has more than 100
nukes including hydrogen bombs.
North Korea can produce about 100 missiles a year. It began to make
missiles in 1980 and has about 1,000 missiles of various types in
place, about 100 of which have nuclear warheads. These missiles are
hidden in caves and underground launching pads. At present, the US
has no fool-proof defense against North Korean missiles, and in case
of war, North Korean missiles can do serious damages: several
hundreds of thousands of US troops will die, and scores of US bases
and carrier battle groups will be destroyed. The Patriot anti-missile
missiles are deployed in South Korea but as shown in the recent Iraq
war, the Patriots are not 100% accurate or reliable even under ideal
conditions.
b. Biochemical Warfare
North Korea has a large stockpile of biochemical weapons. Each Army
corps has a chemical company and each regiment has a chemical
platoon. In the May 1994 nuclear crisis, Perry warned North Korea
that the US would retaliate with nuclear weapons if North Korea used
chemical weapons on US troops.
North Korean troops and citizens are well-prepared for bio-chemical
attacks.
5. North Korea's Defense Against US Attacks
a. Fortification
North Korea began to build fortifications in 1960s. All key military
facilities are built underground to withstand American bunker-buster
bombs. North Korea has 8,236 underground facilities that are linked
by 547 km of tunnels. Beneath Pyongyang are a huge underground
stadium and other facilities. About 1.2 million tons of food, 1.46
million tons of fuel, and 1.67 million tons of ammunition are stored
in underground storage areas for wartime use.
Most of the underground facilities are drilled into granite rocks and
the entrances face north in order to avoid direct hits by American
bombs and missiles. The B-61 Mod 11 is the main bunker buster in the
US arsenal. A recent test showed that this buster could penetrate
only 6 meters of rock. The latest GBU-28 laser-guided bunker-buster
can penetrate to 30m. North Korean bunkers have at least 80 m of top-
cover of solid rocks. North Korea has many false caves that emit
heats that will misdirect unwary GBU-28/37 and BKU-113 bunker-busters.
The US military targets enemy command and control centers based on
the doctrine of chopping off "the head of the snake." With the top
commanders eliminated, the rank and file would be demoralized,
leaderless and would surrender. North Korea's extensive underground
fortification makes this strategy unworkable. In addition, the
underground facilities make US spy planes and satellites impotent.
b. Air Defense
North Korea has a large number of ground-to-air missiles. It has SA-2
and SA-3 missiles against low-flying enemy planes, and SA-5 missiles
for high-altitude planes. SA-5 missiles have an effective range of
250 km. SA-5 missiles can hit enemy planes flying over the middle of
South Korea.
North Korea has reengineered US shoulder-fired anti-aircraft missiles
captured in Vietnam, and designed its own missile, wha-sung. North
Korea began to manufacture wha-sung missiles in 1980. Wha-sung comes
in two models: SA-7 that has an effective range of 5 km and SA-16
with 10 km range. North Korea has more than 15,000 wha-sung missiles
in place.
In addition to the missiles, North Korea has 12,000 anti-aircraft
guns, including 37mm twin-barrel guns, 23 mm automatics, 57mm, 87mm,
and 100mm heavy guns. These are mostly manually operated and thus not
subject to electronic warfare.
c. Coastal deferens.
North Korea's coastlines are long and jagged. Coastal guns are placed
in fortified tunnels along the coastline. North Korea has six ground-
to-ship missile bases. North Korea has anti-ship missiles of 95km
range, and of 160km range. The latter are for hitting US carrier
battle groups over the horizon. North Korean anti-ship missiles can
hit ships anchored at Inchon on the west and Sokcho on the east.
America's main defense against anti-ship missiles, the Arleigh Burke
class Aegis destroyers are ineffective outside 20-50 km from missile
launch pads.
d. Sea Battles
North Korea has two fleets - the West Fleet and the East Fleet. The
West Fleet has 6 squadrons of 320 ships and the East Fleet has 10
squadron of 460 ships. The navy has a total manpower of 46,000. North
Korean ships are sheltered from US attacks in about 20 bunkers of
200-900 m longs and 14-22 m wide. North Korean ships are small and
agile, designed for coastal defense. North Korean ships carry 46km
range ship-to-ship missiles and 22-channel multiple rocket launchers.
The main enemy of the North Korean navy will be US carrier task
forces. The Russian navy has developed a tactic to deal with US
carriers task forces: massive simultaneous missile attacks. In
addition, Russia has developed the anti-carrier missile, "jun-gal",
that can destroy a carrier. China has developed similar tactics for
destroying US carriers. On April 1, 2003, North Korea test-fired a
high-speed ground-to-ship missile of 60km range. A US carrier task
force of Nimitz class has 6,000 men, 70 planes, and a price tag of
4.5 billion dollars. Destroying even a single career task force will
be traumatic.
A carrier is protected by a shield of 6 Aegis destroyers and nuclear
attack submarines. An Aegis destroyer has an AN/SPY-1 high-capacity
radar system that can track more than 100 targets at the same time.
An Aegis can fire about 20 anti-missile missiles at the same time.
Thus, a career force can track a total of 600 targets at a time and
fire 120 anti-missile missiles at the same time. The anti-missile
missiles have about 50% success under ideal conditions. In actual
battle situations, the hit rate will be much lower and the best
estimate is that the Aegis shield can intercept at most 55 incoming
missiles. Therefore, a volley of about 60 missiles and rockets will
penetrate the Aegis shield and hit the career.
North Korea acquired OSA and KOMAR high-speed missile boats in 1968,
and began to build its own missile boats in 1981. It has more than 50
missile boats, each equipped with 4 missiles of 46km range and
multiple rocket launchers. In addition, North Korea has about 300
speed boats, 200 torpedo boats and 170 other gunboats. In case of
war, North Korea's small crafts and submarines will swarm around US
career task forces and destroy them.
North Korea has 35 submarines and 65 submersibles. These crafts are
equipped with torpedoes and will be used to attack US careers. They
will also lay mines and block enemy harbors. North Korea has a large
supply of mines. North Korean submarines are small but they are
equipped with 8km rocket launchers and 70km anti-ship missiles, and
they could do some serious damage to US careers..
e. Air Combats
North Korea has three air commands. Each command has a fighter
regiment, a bomber regiment, an AN-2 regiment, an attack helicopter
regiment, a missile regiment, and a radar regiment. Each command can
operate independently. North Korea has 70 airbases, which are
fortified against US attacks. Underground hangars protect the planes
and have multiple exits for the planes to take off on different
runways. North Korea has several fake airfields and fake planes to
confuse US attackers.
It is said that North Korea's planes are obsolete and no match for US
planes. North Korea has 770 fighters, 80 bombers, 700 transports, 290
helicopters, and 84,000 men. In case of war, North Korean planes will
fly low hugging the rugged terrains and attack enemy targets. US
planes are parked above ground at bases in Korea, Japan, Okinawa and
Guam, and make easy targets for missile, rocket and air attacks. When
war breaks out, North Korean missiles, rockets and heavy guns will
destroy the 8 US airbases in South Korea, and any plane in the air
would have no place to land.
North Korea's fighter planes are ill-equipped for air-to-air combats
at long distances. but they can hold their own in close-quarter air
combats. MiG-21 fighters from Bongchun and US F-15 from Ohsan would
meet in less than 5 min, assuming they took off at about the same
time. In about 5 min, hundreds of MiG21s and F-15s would be swirling
in the skies over Korea. Ground-to-air missiles and air-to-air
missiles would have hard time telling friends from foes. F-15Es are
equipped with a radar system that lock on at 180 km for large objects
and 90 km for small objects. Sidewinder missiles have an effective
range of 16km, AMRAAM missiles of 50km, and Sparrow of 55km.
Korea is 100 km wide and 125 km long, and so US air-to-air missiles
would be of limited use and effectiveness, because North Korean MiGs
would approach the US planes in close proximity and commingle with US
planes, and air-to-air missiles will become useless and machines guns
will have to be used. MiG19s have 30mm guns, MiG21s have 23mm guns,
and F-14s have 20mm Valkans. North Korean pilots are trained to hug
the enemy planes so that air-to-air missiles cannot be used. In
contrast, US pilots are trained to lock on the enemy at long distance
with radar and fire missiles. US planes are heavily armed with
electronics and less agile than the light, lean MiGs that can climb
and turn faster than the US planes.
F-14s are about 3.3 times heavier than MiG21s, and F-150Es are about
3.6 times heavier. MiG21s are 16.6 m long whereas F-14s are 19.1 m
and F-15Es 19.43 m long. MiG21s cab climb to 18km, whereas F-1A can
climb to 15.8 km and F-16 to 15.2 km. MiGs get upper hands in close-
range dogfights in which agility matters. In Vietnam, US planes were
forced to jettison auxiliary gas tanks and bombs in order to engage
MiGs. F-150 E planes will carry BLU-113 bunker busters that weigh
2,250 kg each in the next war in Korea. Loaded with such a heavy
bomb, F-15s will become easy targets for North Korea's MiGs. US
fighter-bombers will be protected by F-15C fighter escorts.
MiG21s are North Korea's main workhorse. The MiG21 debuted in 1965 in
Vietnam and proved itself as an effective attack fighter. In 1999,
North Korea bought 40 MiG21s from Kazakhstan. During the Vietnam War,
MiG17s shot down dozens of American planes. North Korea sent more
than 200 pilots to fight in the Vietnam War. They were tasked to
defend Hanoi and shot down scores of US planes. North Korea sent 25
pilots to Syria during the 3rd Arab-Israeli war of 1966, and 30
pilots to Egypt and Syria during the 4th Arab-Israeli war of 1973. In
1976, North Korea sent more than 40 pilots to Syria.
f. Electronic Warfare
The United States excels in electronic warfare and no nation comes
anywhere near the US capability. North Korea began developing its own
electronic warfare methods in 1970. It is believed that North Korea
has advanced electronic warfare ability. It has numerous counter
measures for US electronic warfare. During the recent war in Iraq,
the US dropped e-bombs that disabled the Iraqi electronic devices.
North Korea relies heavily on non-electronic command and control
means, and hence US e-bombs will have limited impacts in North Korea.
North Korea trains about 100 hackers a year and has computer virus
battalions in place. These hackers are capable of interrupting US
communication networks. In a war game conducted in 1991 by US war
planners, North Korea came out the victor with and without nuclear
weapons. Kim Jong Il has no doubt that his army can beat the US army.
6. US Military Defeats in the Past
Military power dictates the outcome of war. In assessing the next war
in Korea, the military power of the opponents must be examined
objectively. Until now, North Korea's military power has not been
properly studied. In general, Western experts tend to underestimate
North Korea's military strength. Politicians in America and South
Korea play down North Korean threats for political reasons.
It has been said that North Korean army is large in numbers but their
equipment are obsolete, and hence it is a weak army. The US war
planners assess North Korean army using computer simulations of war
in Korea. US war plan for the recent Iraq war was refined using more
than 40 computer-simulated wars in Iraq. The computer simulation
models use weapon system features among other factors to determine
the outcome.
It is true that the advanced weapons were instrumental in the US
victory in the Gulf War, Yugoslavia, Afghanistan, and Iraq. On the
other hand, the US army was defeated by ill-equipped foes in Korea
and Vietnam. The latter two wars show that superior weapons do not
always lead to a victory. North Korean and Chinese forces in Korea
and the Vietnamese forces fought with superior tactics and stronger
fighting fighting spirits.
In the next war in Korea, the US army will face an enemy much more
determined and better equipped than the army in the Korean War of
1950-53.
http://informationclearinghouse.literati.org/article3099.htm