U.S. flies B-52s over South Korea

DanielG - 2013-03-19 11:22 AM http://www.cnn.com/2013/03/19/world/asia/korea-b-52s/index.htmlSubtle? Why? They don't even have to get within SA-2 range. A bunch (flock?) of Buffs with cruise missiles would do quite a bit of a statement.

Not to mention the fact that it's been publicly announced that we are keeping an Ohio-class sub in the vicinity. 24 Trident-II missiles with a total of 192 nuclear warheads is a decent deterrent.

DanielG - 2013-03-19 11:38 AM

mehaner - 2013-03-19 11:36 AM were they singing "love shack" or "rock lobster?"

Gives a whole new meaning to beehive

Looks like North Korea's party has gone out of bounds.

Thanks a lot Meh for putting "rock lobsta!" in my head for the rest of the day...

Maybe I missed something, but do we have confirmation that NK has the ability to direct their ICBMs or would they just be firing at whatever they can?  I mean the only successful test thus far hit its intended target dead-on...Never mind that it is the largest target on the planet (Pacific Ocean). But still, it was a direct hit!

"Instead it was a rock...Lobsta!!!"

Heh yeah... the problem is that they're launching over Japan.  Someday they'll probably hit land by accident.

DanielG - 2013-03-19 10:22 AM http://www.cnn.com/2013/03/19/world/asia/korea-b-52s/index.htmlSubtle? Why? They don't even have to get within SA-2 range. A bunch (flock?) of Buffs with cruise missiles would do quite a bit of a statement.

I'd wager that there are probably regular U2 flights over N.K. as well.

BrianRunsPhilly - 2013-03-19 11:41 AM

DanielG - 2013-03-19 11:22 AM http://www.cnn.com/2013/03/19/world/asia/korea-b-52s/index.htmlSubtle? Why? They don't even have to get within SA-2 range. A bunch (flock?) of Buffs with cruise missiles would do quite a bit of a statement.

Not to mention the fact that it's been publicly announced that we are keeping an Ohio-class sub in the vicinity. 24 Trident-II missiles with a total of 192 nuclear warheads is a decent deterrent.

Only if one is talking about rational prople is it actually a deterrent.

jhouse4 - 2013-03-19 12:41 PM

DanielG - 2013-03-19 10:22 AM http://www.cnn.com/2013/03/19/world/asia/korea-b-52s/index.htmlSubtle? Why? They don't even have to get within SA-2 range. A bunch (flock?) of Buffs with cruise missiles would do quite a bit of a statement.

I'd wager that there are probably regular U2 flights over N.K. as well.

Why bother, they can just use Google Maps

(aim here.jpg)

trinnas - 2013-03-19 9:52 AM

BrianRunsPhilly - 2013-03-19 11:41 AM

DanielG - 2013-03-19 11:22 AM http://www.cnn.com/2013/03/19/world/asia/korea-b-52s/index.htmlSubtle? Why? They don't even have to get within SA-2 range. A bunch (flock?) of Buffs with cruise missiles would do quite a bit of a statement.

Not to mention the fact that it's been publicly announced that we are keeping an Ohio-class sub in the vicinity. 24 Trident-II missiles with a total of 192 nuclear warheads is a decent deterrent.

Only if one is talking about rational prople is it actually a deterrent.

They're rational enough to know that we're not going to drop a nuke right next to Seoul.  And it's just silly posturing since that same sub could easily hit them without leaving the west coast.

trinnas - 2013-03-19 9:52 AM

BrianRunsPhilly - 2013-03-19 11:41 AM

DanielG - 2013-03-19 11:22 AM http://www.cnn.com/2013/03/19/world/asia/korea-b-52s/index.htmlSubtle? Why? They don't even have to get within SA-2 range. A bunch (flock?) of Buffs with cruise missiles would do quite a bit of a statement.

Not to mention the fact that it's been publicly announced that we are keeping an Ohio-class sub in the vicinity. 24 Trident-II missiles with a total of 192 nuclear warheads is a decent deterrent.

Only if one is talking about rational prople is it actually a deterrent.

Exactly.  For 99% of people, death is a pretty big deterrent.  Apparently not for those few suicide bombers...

I'm sure there are a few kooks in that government who would love us to drop a nuke on them (as long as they don't die) just to make Americans look bad in the world's eyes (as if we don't already, apparently).

bwahahahaa!   Over here they've taken to calling him Jin SanPang  (Fat Kim, the third.)

jhouse4 - 2013-03-19 11:41 AM

DanielG - 2013-03-19 10:22 AM http://www.cnn.com/2013/03/19/world/asia/korea-b-52s/index.htmlSubtle? Why? They don't even have to get within SA-2 range. A bunch (flock?) of Buffs with cruise missiles would do quite a bit of a statement.

I'd wager that there are probably regular U2 flights over N.K. as well.

What's Bono got to do with this? 

tuwood - 2013-03-20 10:47 AM

jhouse4 - 2013-03-19 11:41 AM

DanielG - 2013-03-19 10:22 AM http://www.cnn.com/2013/03/19/world/asia/korea-b-52s/index.htmlSubtle? Why? They don't even have to get within SA-2 range. A bunch (flock?) of Buffs with cruise missiles would do quite a bit of a statement.

I'd wager that there are probably regular U2 flights over N.K. as well.

What's Bono got to do with this? 

Well Sonny isn't around anymore, but...

Little man When you stand by my side

Then I know I don't have To hide from anyone

they are probably burning the Midnight Oil trying to find a way to avoid blowing anyone to Smithereens.  

Groan!   But well said none the less.....