RSS
 

Archive for the ‘Scenarios’ Category

Korean War’s 63rd Anniversary No Cause To Celebrate

25 Jun

Today marks the 63rd anniversary of the beginning of the Korean War.  The war in Korea was an unusual and unique conflict in many regards, not the least of which is the fact that the war technically never ended, but is only on a hiatus with an armistice.  And, unlike many other more “typical” wars, the non-outcome of the Korean War continues to haunt East Asia, the United States, and, in a sense, the whole world.

When North Korea’s Communist dictator, Kim Il-Sung launched his invasion of South Korea on June 25, 1950, he set in motion a conflict that would engage much of the world.  By the end of 1950, the United States and over a dozen other nations, including the United Kingdom, France, Canada, Australia, Turkey, and other members of the so-called Free World, were fighting to preserve South Korean independence under the authority of the United Nations.  Also, by the end of 1950, the world’s most populous nation, China, entered the war on the Communist side.  And, as this conflict was a significant component of the new Cold War, the Soviet Union was heavily involved, providing material, moral, and diplomatic support for the Communist war effort.  In a little-known fact, Soviet pilots were aiding the North Koreans by flying North Korean warplanes as they battled the UN air forces.  All this made the Korean War a potential starting point for a new World War, with potentially disastrous consequences as both the U.S. and the Soviets possessed atomic bombs by then.

The Korean War, while very significant historically, is often left out of the popular consciousness in America because it is sandwiched between the Second World War and the Vietnam War.  This is despite the opinion that in many ways, the Korean conflict, and the fact that it never truly ended, has had more far-reaching effects on world history and the current world situation than the Vietnam War or most of the other Cold War conflicts fought by the U.S. and her allies.  For example, the survival of the North Korean regime allowed the Kim family dynasty of dictators to develop nuclear weapons, with which they now threaten and harass not just South Korea, but also Japan and the United States.  In addition, the North Koreans are known proliferators of their nuclear technology, with known links to the nuclear programs of Pakistan, Iran, and Syria.

Every few years, actual combat breaks out between North and South Korean forces, always as a result of a North Korean provocation.  In the 1960s, the U.S. and South Korean troops along the Demilitarized Zone (DMZ) separating the two warring Koreas waged a defensive war against North Korean infiltrators for several years in what is now called “The DMZ War.”  In 1968, North Korean forces seized a U.S. naval ship, the USS Pueblo, and held the crew captive for nearly a year.  In the 1970s, North Korean troops attacked some American soldiers with axes.  In the 1980s, a North Korean submarine landed a large force of commandoes inside South Korea, leading to running gun battles throughout the South Korean countryside.  In the 21st Century, North Korea has sunk a South Korean naval ship, and bombarded a South Korean island with an artillery barrage.  While all this

North Korea is now ruled by a Kim of the third-generation of dictators.  Under the latest Kim, frequent threats of war against the United States, South Korea, and Japan are an almost monthly occurrence.  The Korean War began in the hills and fields of Korea 63 years ago.  It is still being fought in many ways today, June 25, 2013.  Except that while the weapons of 1950 were for the most part leftovers from World War Two, the weapons of today, with which Kim Jong-Un, the latest North Korean tyrant threatens to use on his neighbors and enemies, are the weapons of the long-feared Third World War.

 

Sources on the Korean War’s ongoing issues, from Historyguy.com:

http://www.historyguy.com/korean_border_conflicts.htm

http://www.historyguy.com/korean_nuclear_crisis.htm

http://www.historyguy.com/korean_naval_battle_2009.htm

 

Is the World On the Brink of Major War?

20 Aug

What on earth is the world coming to?  We now live in a time of war, and rumors of war, and the rumors just keep coming!  A recent article in the magazine Foreign Policy actually postulates what may occur if China and Japan were to fight a naval war over the disputed Diaoyu/Senkaku Islands.  Back when we lived through the Cold War, in a bipolar world, (that means that there were two main superpowers in the world), and most conflicts in the world revolved around the Soviet-American rivalry, the basic calculus was simple:  The two superpowers would keep their allies and satellites in check, and, barring some extraordinarily crazy sparking event, the chances of an actual war between the superpowers would likely not happen due to the threat of mutually assured nuclear destruction.  That also meant that if America’s ally Israel got the upper hand over Soviet-allied Egypt and Syria in the latest Middle Eastern War, the Americans would rein in the Israelis before they could march on Cairo or Damascus and trigger possible Soviet intervention.  Similarly, it was fairly certain that the Soviets would convince Syria to not use its stockpile of chemical weapons on Israel for similar fear of an American intervention.  In many ways, the Cold War rivalry between the U.S. and the Soviet Union kept a lid on many possible conflicts that could have sparked a bigger war.

Well, the Soviet Union is gone now, and we are faced with a multi-polar world.  Make no mistake, the U.S. is still the only legitimate superpower around.  The U.S. can project power literally anywhere in the world with a high degree of certainty of tactical victory.  For example, on a month’s notice in 2001, American and allied forces launched an invasion/liberation of Afghanistan (literally on the other side of the planet from the U.S.), following the 9/11 terrorist attacks.  But other, regional powers are flexing their muscles and making threatening noises, and this will continue to be a reality as those regional powers (such as China, Iran, Saudi Arabia, Turkey, Israel, Japan, Russia, India, and others), come into conflict with their neighbors.  Notice that several of the nations named above are neighbors with each other, or at least inhabit the same neighborhood.

In August of 2012, a look at the current wars, border conflicts, and potential international problems that are currently being discussed, and reported on in the news:

Israel is openly debating whether or not to attack Iran.  The Iranians, for their part, continue to develop their controversial nuclear program, while simultaneously we hear their leaders call for the destruction of Israel.

–The United States continues to place increased military forces in the regions surrounding Iran, just in case there is an Israeli-Iranian War.  If such a war breaks out, the U.S. will almost certainly be drawn in.

–The ongoing Syrian Civil War is getting bloodier, and the Assad regime may be getting more desperate.  Speculation has arisen over the possibility of Assad using his stockpile of chemical weapons on either the rebels or on the nations that support them, namely Turkey and Jordan.  Of course, Assad could also just use them on Israel, hoping to gain traction with his own people or with other Arab nations.  All of the above-named anti-Assad nations are friends of the U.S., which has made no bones about intervening if Assad were to use his weapons of mass destruction.

Israel is openly preparing for a possible intervention of their own in Syria if they believe that Assad is going to transfer his chemical weapons to his Hezbollah allies in Lebanon.

Egypt is engaged in a low-level but growing battle to re-assert authority in the Sinai, where Islamic militants are launching more frequent and more deadly attacks on Egyptian, Israeli, and American forces. (The Americans are in the Sinai as part of the Multinational Force & Observers, which has helped keep the peace between Egypt and Israel since the Camp David Accords).

-China, Vietnam, the Philippines, and other Southeast Asian nations are engaged in name-calling and posturing over the contested Spratly Islands.  China has increasingly asserted authority on the islands, even to the point of setting up a small city on one of them.  The military forces of several nations are in the area.  The main reason for this conflict is the belief that the area is rich in oil and natural gas. The United States is a close ally of the Philippines, and is increasingly establishing strong military and diplomatic ties with Vietnam, and any military conflict over these islands would almost certainly the U.S. against the Chinese.

–Similarly, China and Japan are currently engaged in serious name-calling and worse over their contested islands, which the Chinese call the Diaoyu Islands, and the Japanese call the Senkaku Islands.  Some respected publications like Foreign Policy are posting articles speculating on the outcome of a possible Sino-Japanese Naval war in 2012.  Of course, the United States is a close ally of Japan, and any military conflict would almost certainly bring the U.S. on the Japanese side.

–American military forces are still heavily engaged against Taliban forces in Afghanistan, while other U.S. assets continue to deploy against al-Qaida and other Islamist forces throughout the world.

–In Yemen, American trainers continue to aid the Yemeni government while occasional U.S. drone attacks take out al-Qaida operatives.  Several terrorist attacks against American targets have originated out of Yemen in recent years.

— U.S. drone attacks against al-Qaida and other Islamist targets in Pakistan continue unabated.  One estimate places the number of dead from these attacks since 2004 at over 3,000.

–U.S.-funded allies, actively aided by American air and naval forces (and of course, more drone attacks), provide the military muscle in the Somali government’s war against the Islamist and al-Qaida allied Shabab rebels.  These allies include Uganda, Kenya, Burundi, and Ethiopia.

–Following the successful campaign by NATO and other allied nations (Qatar among them), to aid rebels in overthrowing Muammar Gadhafi’s tyrannical regime, several thousand Taureg mercenaries previously employed by Gadhafi went home to northern Mali (with the nice weapons Gadhafi gave them), and commenced to defeat the Malian army and establish a de facto Taureg homeland in northern Mali.  These Taureg (that is the name of their ethnic group) have been infiltrated by the North African branch of al-Qaida and other Islamist groups.  Several other West African nations are contemplating sending a military force to Mali to defeat them.  The United States and other Western nations would likely end up supporting such an intervention with funds, material, and possibly troops.  Oh, and probably drones, as well.

There are a few more international issues that are on the back burner as well, but this list gives a pretty good idea of the precarious situation the world is in right now.  And that is not even mentioning the perpetual worries over Korea!  And, as the Democratic and Republican parties in the United States prepare for their presidential nominating conventions, not a single one of these issues is a major item of discussion for the two presidential candidates.  In fact, a quick look at major news stories in America during the middle of August show a fascination with GOP Vice-Presidential candidate Paul Ryan’s fitness regimen and his six-pack abs.  The major political story on August 20 involves a Republican Senate candidate’s idiotic remarks about rape and conception.  Hardly any mention was made in the news about the recent coalition deaths in Afghanistan, and certainly no debate over the ongoing war there. 

The world is a deadlier place in 2012 than it seemed in 1992, just after the end of the Cold War.  We are on the brink of not just one possible regional war, but several, all with calamitous effects on the world economy, and on world security.

 

 

 

Does Terror Attack in Bulgaria Give Israel Cause for War With Iran?

18 Jul
Israeli Tourist Bus Bombed in Bulgaria

Israeli Tourist Bus Bombed in Bulgaria

Several Israeli tourists died in a terrorist attack on a tourist bus in Bulgaria that Israeli authorities say lead back to an Iranian plot to kill Israeli citizens.  At least six Israeli tourists died in the explosion, at least 30 other civilians sustained wounds.  The bus, which was leaving the airport at Burgas with 154 passengers, most of them Israelis, was headed for a resort popular with Israeli vacationers.

Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin “Bibi” Netanyahu placed the blame for the attack squarely on Iran, citing other recent attempted terror attacks that he also blamed on Iran.   

“In the past months we saw Iranian attempts to attack Israelis in Thailand, India, Kenya and Cyprus,” Netanyahu said, added, “This is an Iranian terror offensive that is spreading throughout the world.”  Netanyahu also added that Israel would respond with force. 

Recent tensions between Israel, Iran, and the United States, have caused much speculation as to whether an attack on Iran, which is developing a nuclear program, will occur soon.  Iran has blamed Israel for assassinations of Iranian nuclear scientists and for cyber-attacks on nuclear facilities.  Iran and Israel have a very harsh history of hostile relations, with Iran conducting terror attacks on Israelis in the past, arming Israeli enemies such as Hezbollah and Hamas, and for supporting the Assad regime in SyriaIsrael claims that Iran’s nascent nuclear program’s end goal is to develop nuclear weapons that would be used on Israel

Given all this recent tension, why would Iran strike at Israeli targets now?  One theory is that a war with Israel would detract pro-democracy activists in Iran and strengthen the current regime.  Another theory is that the United States and other Western allies would be able to convince Israel to not attack now.  Or, this is a ploy by factions within Iran (i.e. the Revolutionary Guards) to discredit other factions of the regime. 

Whatever the reasons for the Iranian attack, it is clear that if Israel truly wanted a Cassus Belli (a cause for war), they now have it.

 

Wikigeddon Is Upon Us. Oh My!—What The SOPA/PIPA Controversy May Mean

17 Jan

 

Stop SOPA and PIPA

Stop SOPA and PIPA Logo

Wikigeddon Is Upon Us.  Oh My!—What The SOPA/PIPA Controversy May Mean

By Roger Lee, the History Guy

As the world prepares for Wikigeddon, also known as the “Blackout” of Wikipedia and Reddit, and other, less significant websites over proposed anti-piracy legislation, the question comes up, just what is SOPA and PIPA going to do to the internet if passed by Congress and signed by President Obama?

Depending on what sources you look at, these bills will either wipe out freedom on the internet, including Wikipedia, YouTube, Reddit, and many other popular sites, or, it will merely prevent off-shore websites from selling fraudulent goods by allowing courts to order domain servers to shut down those offending sites.

For proponents of SOPA and PIPA, as well as for their opponents, there appears to be no middle ground.  But what would they do if passed into law?  Not being a lawyer, I daresay I don’t really know, and most of the pundits on the internet do not know either, but they prefer not to admit that uncomfortable truth.  What I DO know about our legal and political system, is that regardless of whatever the law’s proponents say now, only the court system will actually be able to tell us what the consequences may be, and that will only happen after someone, or some internet entity, has suffered actual damages  as a result of SOPA/PIPA enforcement. 

As I sat down to weigh the pros and cons of this blackout set for January 18, I came to the conclusion that from a purely selfish point of view, the Wikipedia blackout could benefit my own website, Historyguy.com, because Wikipedia is one of Historyguy.com’s main competitors for website visitors.  Many of the historyguy.com pages are at or near the top of the Google Search Results Pages, and often, if not for Wikipedia, my pages would get the better ranking.  For example, a Google search for “Gulf War,” puts Wikipedia’s entry as the first search result, and the Historyguy.com page on the Gulf War as the second result.  If, as the naysayers predict, SOPA passes, and sites like Wikipedia are in peril, then logically, the Historyguy.com site, which is 95% original content (the rest being public domain items like the 1707 Act of Union Between England and Scotland), would benefit. 

Despite this supposition, the fact that the internet has grown and developed to the point where it now shapes daily life, lifestyles, news, politics, industry, and so much more, is largely due to the freedom of individuals to experiment, dream, and develop new ideas without fear that the government will shut them down due to a piece of legislation allegedly designed to halt online piracy, theft, and fraud.  Those problems are real, and need to be addressed by legislation designed with a more narrow and specific focus.  Congress should scrap SOPA and PIPA, return to the drawing board, and create new proposals that do not put the fear of authoritarian government crackdowns on those who publish, create, develop new ideas on the internet.  Stop SOPA!

 

 

 

War With Iran? Look at Wars of 1812 and 1912 First

02 Jan

Looking at a possible Iran War in 2012 with a look back at 1812 and 1912

By Roger Lee, The History Guy

New Year’s Day, 2012, opened with Iran’s announcement that Iranian nuclear scientists had produced Iran’s first nuclear fuel rod and that the Iranian navy had test-fired a new medium-range surface-to-air missile.  All this while Iran conducted war games in the Strait of Hormuz designed to test its ability to close those straits to international oil shipping.  All this while the U.S. and the other Western powers continue to declare that they will not allow a disruption to the oil shipping, and Israel watches nervously and prepares for war

Iranian war games in the Strait of Hormuz

Iranian war games in the Strait of Hormuz

As the world seems to quickly slide toward war, n look back at events 200 and 100 years ago seems in order.  2012 marks the bicentennial of the War of 1812, in which the U.S. took on the much more powerful British Empire and managed to survive to talk about it.  In 1912, the world was on the brink of a devastating World War, which was still two and a half years away, but events in 1912 set the stage for a war that everyone thought would be quick and sharp, but proved to be out of everyone’s control as soon as it began.

In 1812, the world was in the throes of an earlier version of world war, with Britain, Russia, Spain, and other nations in a death-match with Napoleon’s French-dominated empire.  The United States did not have a dog in that fight, so to speak, but had long-standing problems with the British.  Ever since the American Revolution, the Americans felt that Britain did not respect the U.S. as a true sovereign nation.  British agents aided the Native Americans who resisted American encroachment along the frontier, and British ships regularly disrespected American shipping on the high seas, leading to violent naval confrontations and the forcible boarding of U.S. ships to “impress,” or illegally (in the U.S. view) draft  sailors into the British navy. The United States basically felt they had to put up or shut up in terms of their problems with Britain.  Also, some expansionist elements in the government and elsewhere eyed the prospect of invading and “liberating” Canada from the British. 

Thus, a somewhat naïve and woefully unprepared America declared war on the most powerful nation on earth and commenced to invade British Canada.  Long story short, the U.S. got it’s rear-end kicked out of Canada and throughout most of the eastern seaboard by the British.  Not until the Battle of New Orleans in 1815, could the U.S. claim any meaningful victory on land.

How does this situation relate to the current tension with Iran?  In this case, in 2012, the smaller nation feeling no respect is Iran, and the most powerful nation in the world is obviously the U.S.  Some analysts, and some Iranian spokesmen themselves, say that if Iran is pushed around too much (sanctions, U.S. drone flights, covert warfare, assassinations, etc.), it may retaliate by closing the Strait of Hormuz to international shipping, which would be a cassus belli for the Western Powers.  Of course, the fact that Iran is clearly pursuing nuclear weapons makes Israel and the West quite nervous, and if Israel truly believes that Iran is close to getting The Bomb, then war is likely inevitable.  One thing about the War of 1812 that applies to this situation is that when the U.S. chose war with Britain (and with Canada), the assumption was that the war would be quick, and that Britain was too distracted by its other wars to put much effort into another war.  Iran may be thinking the same thing, to everyone’s detriment. 

The situation in 1912 was a bit different. The former major power in the eastern Mediterranean region, the Ottoman Empire (also known as Turkey), was fading fast, and the vultures were beginning to gather to pick at the soon to be expired Ottoman carcass.  Italy attacked Ottoman Libya in 1911, and in October, 1912, the Ottomans sued for peace and gave up their last piece of territory in North Africa.  The day following the conclusion of the Italian-Ottoman War, the Balkan alliance of Serbia, Greece, Montenegro, and Bulgaria launched an attack on the Ottoman possessions in Europe.  The Ottomans lost that war, but that First Balkan War, and a Second Balkan War that broke out right after the first one, helped set the stage for World War One, which erupted in the summer of 1914.  In the wars of 1912, we see several smaller nations take on the ancient bogeyman from their past; no longer strong, but feeble and weak.  And the little guys won.  In the modern era, the little guys can be seen as Saddam’s Iraq, Khaddafy’s Libya, Assad’s Syria,  Iran, and North Korea.  They all have a bad history with the Western powers.  They all, at one point or another, had challenged the West, and survived those initial conflicts.  But they took that feeling of victory and invulnerability too far, challenged the West one too many times, or refused to bow down when faced with invasion and war.  Saddam is now dead. Khaddafy is dead.  Assad is under siege, and North Korea is still the great unknown.  Iran is the linchpin.  If they truly see themselves as the relatively small but tough challenger to U.S, and Western influence in the Muslim world, then they may push the envelope enough to cause a military response from either Israel or the U.S.

Unintended Consequences of War:   The British Burn Washington

Unintended Consequences of War: The British Burn Washington

In the 1912 analogy, the smaller nations were victorious initially, but when the big dogs got into the fight beginning in 1914, Serbia, and Montenegro were almost destroyed.  Bulgaria lost even more land.  The war did not go as any of them anticipated, which is usually the way of war.  The same held true in the War of 1812.  The U.S. expected a fairly easy war against the British in Canada, and instead, the Americans saw their own nation invaded and Washington, D.C burned down by the invaders.  In both examples from 100 and 200 years ago, the little guys faced down against the big guys, and once war started, it went in directions no one wanted or anticipated.   If a war with Iran is in store for 2012, the decision-makers on all sides need to keep that historical fact in mind before it is too late.