When Senator Tammy Duckworth returned from a recent trip to South Korea and Japan, she brought back a sobering message: “Americans simply are not in touch with just how close we are to war on the Korean peninsula.” In a speech at Georgetown University, she laid out the U.S. military maneuvers over the past several months—including a nuclear-powered submarine heading to South Korea, the movement of three aircraft carriers to the Western Pacific, and the Army testing out “mobilization centers” for deploying troops and training soldiers to fight in tunnels like those beneath North Korea—that inform this worry. In an interview with me, she said the U.S. military seems to be operating with the attitude that a conflict “‘will probably happen, and we better be ready to go.’” ...
The U.S. military, she said, is “beyond the training stage. They’re at the getting ready for operational readiness state, with—and I heard this time and time again—hope that they never have to” fight.
Well, I admit that I pay attention more than most people. But I think it has been obvious. And honestly, I'd bet that most Americans (wrongly) think that of course we have long had the capability to strike North Korea.
The real story is that it is taking so much effort to restore the ability to take action. Eight years of military readiness neglect created this particular problem.
On a point of order, the senator of course blames Trump for the risk of war. Given that North Korea has claimed America has been preparing to invade and conquer that Pearl of Northeast Asia for 50 years should disabuse her of the notion that we send dangerous signals with our preparations. North Koreans hear "dog whistle" signals of war regardless of what we do or who is president.
And the reason that we have this problem is that North Korea is aggressive and pursuing nuclear weapons in defiance of the sainted international community's opinion. If Duckworth is unhappy that it has fallen to Trump to enforce the international consensus that North Korea must not have nukes, perhaps she should ask why Obama didn't deal with the problem when his superior nuance could have been applied.
Of course, it may be that the Obama administration tried but that the North Koreans were unwilling to pretend to give up WMD ambitions as the Syrians (chemical weapons) and Iranians (nuclear weapons) were when they signed deals that in no way prevent them from gaining (and in Syria's case, using) WMD.
Mind you, I'm not seeking to blame Obama for this situation. This is a problem that goes back through Bush 43 and Bill Clinton, so it is a bipartisan failure.
Further, I'm not even saying that it was a bad idea to hope that North Korea could collapse before going nuclear. It didn't work out, but it was not the worst bet to make given the problems of taking action that could prompt the conventional destruction of Seoul.
But that gamble failed and here we are with a nuclear-armed North Korea soon to have weapons that can reach the United States.
The bright side is that the delay in doing something means the North Korean conventional options are far more limited due to the massive degradation of their military power. So if we can knock out the small North Korean nuclear force and industrial base, the price North Korea might be able to impose for America taking action could be far less than what it would have been 5, 15, or 25 years ago.
So yeah, right now we are getting ready to go to war. What other option do we have if China won't deal with the problem before we are ready to go?
Remember, the only reason we are getting ready to go is that North Korea is going nuclear. Where the world will go with that capability should scare the Hell out of everyone.
Have a super sparkly day.
