Asia, Government, North Korea, United Nations, United States

Pentagon warns North Korea, ‘You will be destroyed’

NORTH KOREA

DONALD TRUMP’S military chief has warned North Korea that action against the United States would ‘lead to the end of its regime and the destruction of its people’.

Pentagon head Jim Mattis said that Kim Jong-Un would lose any arms race or conflict it started after Pyongyang threatened to strike the American territory of Guam.

Earlier, the US President had declared that his nuclear arsenal was ‘far stronger and more powerful than ever’.

Mr Mattis said that, while Washington was pursuing a diplomatic solution, the military power of the US and its allies was the most robust on Earth. Mr Trump had sent a shudder through Asia this week, threatening to unleash ‘fire and fury like the world has never seen’ against Kim Kong-Un’s regime.

Mr Trump’s comments came after US intelligence concluded that the Korean dictator had developed a nuclear warhead small enough to fit inside a ballistic missile – years sooner than expected.

Supersonic bombers from the American air force then carried out a ten-hour mission over the Korean peninsula, prompting Pyongyang to brand the US ‘nuclear war maniacs’.

The Korean People’s Army said it was ‘carefully examining’ a plan to strike the island of Guam in the Western Pacific – where US bombers are stationed.

Amid fears of nuclear war, Mr Trump continued to boost of his country’s military power on Twitter.

He posted: ‘My first order as president was to renovate and modernise our nuclear arsenal.

‘It is now far stronger and more powerful than ever before. Hopefully we will never have to use this power, but there will never be a time that we are not the most powerful nation in the world!’

However, US Secretary of State Rex Tillerson sought to ease tensions and said there was no imminent threat from North Korea.

Mr Trump’s chief diplomat suggested that the president’s sabre-rattling had been deliberately robust – because it was the only language that Kim would understand.

He said: ‘I think Americans should sleep well at night, have no particular concerns about this particular rhetoric of the last few days.’

Mr Tillerson’s comments came as his plane refuelled in Guam, which is 2,131 miles from North Korea, on the way to the US after a trip to Asia.

He added: ‘Nothing I have seen and nothing I know of would indicate that the situation has dramatically changed in the last 24 hours.

‘What the President is doing is sending a strong message to North Korea in language that Kim Kong-Un would understand, because he doesn’t seem to understand diplomatic language.’

Tensions over the North Korean peninsula heightened as Pyongyang tested two intercontinental ballistic missiles.

It was understood they were capable of hitting Alaska, but not the US mainland.

But earlier in the week it was reported that intelligence agencies were convinced North Korea has produced a miniaturised nuclear warhead that could fit on one of its ballistic missiles.

The Defence Intelligence Agency’s assessment suggested Kim’s quest to turn North Korea into a fully-fledged nuclear power had been accelerated by several years.

Officials also increased estimates of the number of nuclear bombs in Kim’s arsenal to 60.

And they revised expectations of how soon the regime could mount a nuclear strike on the American mainland.

Critics countered that they did not believe North Korea has yet mastered the technology required to prevent its long-range missiles burning up in the atmosphere during re-entry from space.

Asia experts claim Mr Trump’s combative language is playing into the hands of Kim by allowing him to convince his people that he is protecting them from a real US threat to their existence.

Although analysts tend to believe North Korea’s ruler does not want war, they have warned he is willing to push tensions with the US as far as possible.

Mr Tillerson said he hoped international pressure – including from Russia and China – could persuade North Korea to reconsider and begin talks.

Britain’s Foreign Office said it would work to ‘maintain pressure on North Korea’.

COMMENT

FOR the second time this year, the escalating tensions in the Korean peninsula are a cause for serious concern.

Over Easter, random missile tests by Pyongyang and US sabre rattling alerted the world to how potentially dangerous the situation in this volatile region could be.

When the stand-off ended, there was at least some hope that North Korea would end its provocative weapons tests.

But instead, the country’s unhinged dictator Kim Jong-Un has doubled down, pressing ahead with the development of Intercontinental Ballistic Missiles which he now claims can hit the US mainland.

According to reports sourced to US intelligence, North Korean scientists have overcome a critical technological hurdle in the production of a miniaturised nuclear warhead that can fit inside its missiles.

If true, this rogue state is close to having the power to inflict unimaginable death and destruction, and now presents the gravest of threats to the region and the West.

Whatever individual feelings are of President Trump, most people should accept that under such circumstances no president of the world’s most powerful democracy could stand by and do nothing. Mr Trump’s stance is in stark contrast to the softly-softly approach of the Obama administration, which arguably allowed the situation to dangerously escalate.

Yes, Trump is guilty of using inflammatory rhetoric when he says threats against the US will be met with ‘fire and fury like the world has never seen’. But the message is at least unequivocal, and expressed in language the North Korean regime cannot fail to understand as it threatens a missile strike against the US territory of Guam in the South Pacific.

The problem with such rhetoric, however, is that if the President fails to deliver on his threat, he will seem weak.

What is needed now is not more bellicose language but calm thinking by diplomats and Mr Trump’s senior generals, some of whom have impressive pedigrees. What is also vital is that the Chinese, who could have imposed reform on North Korea – effectively their client state – years ago, now behave responsibly and sensibly.

To their credit, they and Russia have supported the new UN sanctions against Pyongyang. Those sanctions must now be given the chance to work.

Kim’s Target:

guam-map

Protecting the island is the US military’s Terminal High-Altitude Area Defense, or THAAD, used to shoot down ballistic missiles.

. Andersen Air Force Base, located in the south-west of the island, hosts B-52 bombers, as well as B-1B Lancer bombers and B-2 Stealth bombers.

. Guam is a 210-square mile volcanic island in the Western Pacific.

. It has a population of just 160,000 with some 6,000 US troops stationed there.

. 4 nuclear submarines. A Naval Base is located in the north-east of the island.

 

Standard
Arts, France, History, Photography, United States

Photography: Colleville-sur-Mer, France

Colleville

A man pays tribute at the Normandy American Cemetery and Memorial on the 73rd anniversary of D-Day on June 6.

June 6 marked the 73rd anniversary of the D-Day landings, which saw 156,000 troops from the Allied countries, including the U.K. and the U.S., join forces to launch an audacious attack on the beaches of Normandy, France.

Many people gather each year in Normandy to mark the anniversary of this landing, a turning point in the World War II battle for Europe.

During the early days of the Normandy invasion, the small bridge and causeway over the Merderet River – along with a nearby bridge and causeway at Chef du Pont – were critical objectives for both sides. For the Germans, they were essential to breaking up the American landing at Utah Beach. And the Americans needed to control the river crossing to expand their beachhead in Normandy. Even though the Americans were lightly armed, the Germans were never able to cross the bridge.

U.S. Army General Curtis M. Scaparrotti who attended a wreath-laying ceremony this week, said: ‘Several hundred airborne warriors seized a causeway that helped free a continent and end a war.’

The national commander of the American Legion, Charles Schmidt, noted that each of the attendees and participants who gathered at the ceremony stood in the same place as those who fought and died for the liberation of Normandy during World War II.

He said: ‘Our promise is that no matter how many years pass, the world will never forget their sacrifices… We as a nation are committed to this memory.’

Standard
Climate Change, Environment, Europe, Government, Politics, Society, United States

The Paris Climate Accord teeters on the brink thanks to Trump

PARIS CLIMATE AGREEMENT

Donald Trump’s recent announcement that he was pulling the United States out of the Paris Climate Accord was met with dismay by many around the world. But Mr Trump has done what few politicians are capable of by actually doing what he pledged prior to being elected. Many businesses would agree with President Trump, saying that the agreement was ‘a self-inflicted major economic wound.’

The UN Climate Change conference in Paris in November 2015 was a last-ditch and desperate attempt to get any kind of agreement and by getting the reluctant developing nations on board. These annual climate conferences have been going on now for over 22 years. Each symposium, in mostly exotic locations, have seen tens of thousands of delegates flying in for the gatherings and creating thousands of tonnes of additional and unnecessary emissions. Their personal carbon footprints are the polar opposite of what they claim to be aiming for, a reduction in greenhouse gases to prevent the calamities of global warming.

The Paris Accord had many objectives, among them an agreement for nations to have targets in reducing emissions. But these were written into the treaty as being voluntary, not legally binding, and there are no penalties for failure. That of course does not include the UK and Scotland who recklessly passed legally-binding Climate Change Acts in 2008. China, one of the world’s biggest polluters through its heavy use of fossil fuels, said it would not be reducing its emissions until after 2030.

Scientists have said that the ‘promises’ made in Paris amount to less than half of what is essentially needed to stop a litany of runaway global disasters. We may be inclined to ask where the rest is to come from? Population control? Consider the statistical data: 1995 – 5.7billion; 2017 – 7.5billion; 2050 – 9.7billion; 2100 – 11.2billion.

A key aspect of getting the developing nations to agree to the Paris Accord was the commitment from the richest nations to contribute £78billion every year to the Green Climate Fund. This was aimed in helping poorer countries make the costly shift to cleaner energy sources and to shore up defences against the impact of climate change. The UK promised £720million but President Trump has now withdrawn America’s £2.3billion.

Already, many East European states – amongst them Poland, Hungary, Slovakia and the Czech Republic – are mounting a behind-the-scenes revolt against the Paris Agreement.

America is now energy independent, with its abundance of shale gas. Mr Trump’s desire to un-mothball many coal mining sites in the US by making them fully operational again is vindicated if we consider the enormous tonnage of coal exported to Europe, America’s best customer. Europe relies, too, on Russian gas for one-third of all its supplies. Coal, oil and gas are the nemesis of the green lobby.

China, which accounts for 30 per cent of global emissions, is deliberately leaving its coal reserves in the ground for a rainy day. Meanwhile, it is importing coal from America and Africa. A host of countries – China, India, Japan, Germany, South Korea, South Africa, Turkey, the Philippines, as well as countries within the EU – have plans to build an additional 1,892 coal-fired plants to the existing 3,722.

The theory of global warming and climate science has become almost a religion with a cult following, while the renewables revolution has been an environmental disaster. EU countries are planning to significantly increase the number of trees they cut down and burn, thus greatly reducing the forest carbon sink they would otherwise provide. They have completely ignored the fact that new trees will take 20 years to grow before they absorb the equivalent of the CO2 released by burning.

Crucially, without American financial support the Paris Agreement will collapse. It will do so because other Western countries will be unwilling to shoulder a share of the £2.3bn that the U.S. will no longer contribute.

Standard