Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

U.S. May Deploy Troops in Korea Region
AP ^ | February 3, 2003 | PAULINE JELINEK

Posted on 02/03/2003 2:11:12 PM PST by Indy Pendance

WASHINGTON (AP) -- The Pentagon is considering new deployments in the Pacific Ocean to signal North Korea that the United States remains capable of blunting an attack in Korea despite its focus on possible war in Iraq.

No decision has been made, but Defense Secretary Donald H. Rumsfeld is considering options including sending an aircraft carrier to the waters off the Korean peninsula and adding bombers in Guam, officials said Monday.

The United States has 37,000 troops stationed in South Korea, where it has maintained a force since the 1950-53 Korean War ended in a truce. Tension between Washington and Pyongyang over North Korea's nuclear program has been rising since October, however, and officials said they want to deter the North from provocations during any war to remove Saddam Hussein as Iraq's president.

White House spokesman Ari Fleischer said President Bush still believes the North Korean standoff can be resolved peacefully. "That doesn't mean the United States won't have contingencies and make certain those contingencies are viable," Fleischer told reporters.

American officials disclosed Friday that spy satellites had detected what appeared to be trucks moving spent fuel rods from a North Korean nuclear facility. It was viewed as a possible sign Kim Jong Il's government might be preparing to process the rods to produce nuclear weapons, which would be an escalation of the confrontation that has developed with the United States since October.

The Navy has long had a carrier deployed to the Pacific region, home-ported in Yokosuka, Japan. But because of the possibility that the carrier there, the USS Kitty Hawk, could be ordered to the Persian Gulf, officials were considering sending another to the Korean area - possibly the USS Carl Vinson, which is on exercises in Hawaii, or the USS Nimitz, which is in port in San Diego.

In that sense, a carrier in the region would not be an addition, although having it on station off the Korean coast would be uncommon, one official said.

Officials also are considering sending B-1 and B-52 bombers to the Pacific island of Guam, which would be additions.

The administration has said it favors a diplomatic rather than military solution to problems on the peninsula and has tried to play down the crisis. The dispute has been growing since October, when U.S. officials said the North had admitted having begun a second nuclear program despite a 1994 agreement with Washington that was to have stopped such activity.

Washington and its allies suspended oil shipments to North Korea in November that had been promised by the Clinton administration deal. The oil was to have compensated for electricity production lost when North Korea ended its nuclear weapons program and mothballed its reactor at Yongbyon, north of the capital, Pyongyang. The Bush administration stopped shipments after learning that North Korea had restarted development of nuclear weapons.

In response to the suspension, Pyongyang has moved to restart its first nuclear program, which was suspected of being used to make atomic weapons, and expelled U.N. monitors and pulled out of a global nuclear arms control treaty.

At the Yongbyon complex, North Korea has stored some 8,000 spent rods that, if reprocessed, could produce enough plutonium to make four or five nuclear weapons, U.S. officials have said.


TOPICS: Extended News; Foreign Affairs; Government; News/Current Events
KEYWORDS:

1 posted on 02/03/2003 2:11:12 PM PST by Indy Pendance
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | View Replies]

To: Indy Pendance
Wow
2 posted on 02/03/2003 2:14:07 PM PST by anobjectivist
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Indy Pendance
The Pentagon is considering new deployments in the Pacific Ocean to signal North Korea that the United States remains capable of blunting an attack in Korea despite its focus on possible war in Iraq.

Why? Are we wanting to discourage them? Have them wait till they get strong enough to threaten us on our mainland? I say let them attack if they're that sutpid. Then anihilate them. Just finally get rid of the problem completely.

3 posted on 02/03/2003 2:18:07 PM PST by templar
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: anobjectivist
IMHO, The North Koreans will ramp up their invective and spew out more hate and try to 'scare us' over Radio Pyongyang and KCNA and Rodong Shimun.

They will, however, not commit (right now I believe) to a sudden movement of troops, to back up their words. Watch the troops not the words. Watch for missile testing preparation, too. The moment they start to move on troops, or assemble a Taepodong for launch, then we escalate it a notch.

Brinksmanship, I know, but otherwise we are going to get locked into another lousy, meaningless, State Department engineered Clinton/Carter type 'agreement' with North Korea.

Poor General Douglas MacArthur would be turning in his grave in Norfolk, VA over this, some 60 years later on the anniversary of our Great Mexican Standoff on the Korean peninsula.

4 posted on 02/03/2003 2:20:42 PM PST by AmericanInTokyo (And, it wouldn't hurt to 'rumor' to the DPRK that visiting knucklehead peacefreeks WERE ' G-2')
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: Indy Pendance
* "That doesn't mean the United States won't have contingencies and make certain those contingencies are viable,"*

Thank goodness we have a President who recognizes the importance of contingencies and has the guts to put them in place.
5 posted on 02/03/2003 2:20:46 PM PST by prairiebreeze ("We won't deny, ignore or pass our problems along to other Presidents" --GWBush)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: AmericanInTokyo
Yup, lil' kim was already going on and on about how we were planning an invasion, and now we're moving in.

Japan obviously is closely watching NK, I remember the article saying they threatened the use of pre-emptive action if they saw NK fueling their weapons.
6 posted on 02/03/2003 2:27:25 PM PST by anobjectivist
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 4 | View Replies]

To: Indy Pendance
Bang bang bang, the war gun just keeps on firing
7 posted on 02/03/2003 2:38:58 PM PST by Marines981 ("Rattle the big dogs cage and get your a** bit")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: anobjectivist
Japan obviously is closely watching NK, I remember the article saying they threatened the use of pre-emptive action if they saw NK fueling their weapons

Followed by their "gee, I wonder where all that plutonium went" statement...

8 posted on 02/03/2003 2:52:15 PM PST by ThinkDifferent
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 6 | View Replies]

To: AmericanInTokyo
Except that McArthur wanted nuclear war and tried to ursurp command from the President.
9 posted on 02/03/2003 3:11:40 PM PST by Stavka2 (Setting the record.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 4 | View Replies]

To: Indy Pendance
***An Informative Discussion on FREEREPUBLIC.com regarding a NEWS.SBS.CO.KR News Article. TOPIC:"REMOVAL OF RODS @ NUKE PLANT TOUCHES OFF INCREASE OF US FORCES NEAR KOREAN PENINSULA (Developing)Removal of Rods @ Nuke Plant Touches Off Increase of US Forces Near Korean Peninsula (Developing)" (February 3, 2003)

NewsMax.com: HOT TOPICS: "NORTH KOREA"

YAHOO! News - Articles - Topic: "NORTH KOREA"

NORTH KOREA DAILY News Online

GLOBAL SECURITY.org: YONGBYON [NYONGBYON]

IAEA.org - INTERNATIONAL ATOMIC ENERGY AGENCY: Press Releases

10 posted on 02/03/2003 3:14:55 PM PST by Cindy
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Cindy
Thanks for the heads up.
11 posted on 02/03/2003 3:45:57 PM PST by Indy Pendance
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 10 | View Replies]

Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson