North Korea Launches Four Missiles in Two Days

North Korea ratcheted up tensions on the Korean peninsula this weekend with the launch of four (4) short-range guided missiles into the the East Sea (3) and the Sea of Japan (1).

This comes on the tail of months of inflammatory, sabre-rattling rhetoric from North Korea after recent warnings from the communist DPRK of "impending nuclear war."

While North Korea's launching of short-range, tactical missiles is not as alarming as the launching of long-range ballistic missiles, it is further evidence of North Korean leader Kim Jung-un's misunderstanding of global tensions and his backward nation's place in the world.

That these most recent provocations did not result in a shooting war between the two Koreas  is nothing short of a miracle.  

One misstep in Korea could put thousands, if not millions of lives at risk.

Benghazi Highlights the Most Commonly Ignored History Lesson: It's Not the Crime; It's the Cover-up

What are the lessons to be learned from this Benghazi mess?  

At this point, that's not completely clear.

What is clear is that the Obama Administration put politics above the safety of its people and put political considerations ahead of the truth.

How many times must politicians learn the lessons of Watergate:  

The cover-up is almost always worse than the actual misdeed.  

If President Richard Nixon had come clean in the early days of that scandal, it would have been a blemish on his presidency, but he would not have faced impeachment and certainly would not have been forced to resign.

It is a simple, simple lesson, yet our so-called "leaders" seemed destined to repeat history over and over because they always think they're different somehow, that the most basic of political truisms don't apply to them.

And then, they get burned.

Does President Obama himself hold personal responsibility for the mistakes of Benghazi?  We'll probably never know, but the buck stops with him as the Commander in Chief and Head of State.  He might not have made the Benghazi mistakes, but his appointees did, and therefore he is forever tied to those mistakes.

Could military forces have arrived in Benghazi in time to save American lives under terrorist attack?  We'll probably never know that either.

What we DO know is that the politics-first crowd of Obama Administration personnel sought to portray what was clearly a terrorist attack on Americans in Benghazi as an impromptu protest spurred by a little-known YouTube video rather than admit that a terrorist attack on an American embassy cost American lives on Obama's watch.

It's not the deed . . . It's the cover-up that gets you.

Why is this so hard to comprehend?

Israeli Attacks on Syria are a Message to Iran, "Obama Doctrine" Fades

Israel has attacked Syria twice in recent days.

Now what?

Israel is taking proactive steps to ensure its defense.  While there are two sides to every story, history shows that pre-emptive strikes by the Israelis have been defensive in nature.

The latest strikes against Syria don't appear to be related to the Assad regime's use of chemical weapons  against its own people, even as devastating as those reports are.  

These Israeli strikes appear to be a preemptive move directed directed at a shipment of advanced surface-to-surface missiles from Iran that Israel believed was intended for the Islamic, militant (and decidedly anti-Israel) Hezbollah.

According to the New York Times, the most recent strike was "aimed at disrupting the arms pipeline that runs from Syria to Hezbollah . . . highlighting the mounting stakes for Hezbollah and Israel as Syria becomes more chaotic."

The Times argues that Iran and Hezbollah have a keen interest in delivering advanced weapons to Hezbollah.  This is true, the Times argues, because Syria has been an effective channel for funneling weapons from Iran to Hezbollah, and if Assad loses power, that channel will be lost.

The problem lies in the reaction to Israel's actions by other countries.  Syria has already declared the Israeli attacks as a Declaration of War.  

But, with a civil war raging, it appears unlikely that Syria itself would be so bold as to respond with an attack directly on Israel.  Assad knows the Israeli response would be devastating and could launch the entire region into a major conflict, possibly drawing the United States in as well.

The recent Israeli strikes on Syria are a strategic warning to Syria, but more so to Iran.  

This is a proxy statement delivered to Iran through Syria saying, "Israel will take military action if we believe our security is threatened, and we won't wait until hundreds or thousands of our people are killed before we do so."

Iranian leaders like to rattle their sabres, but do they really want to get into a shooting war with Israel, and by proxy, the United States?

When is a Red Line REALLY a Red Line?

In the U.S., President Obama said that using chemical weapons in Syria would be "crossing a red line."  That presumably means that the US would act if it could be proved that Assad used chemical weapons against its people.  

Is this the "Obama Doctrine?" or was it simply an off-the-cuff remark?  Barry Pavel, a former defense policy adviser to President Obama has said "I'm not convinced [the President saying "red line"] was thought through."  Obama Doctrine or not, he's stuck with that position (unless he wishes to back-pedal, but that seems unlikely.

Obama has painted himself into a corner in regard to Syria, but Israel's preemptive strikes against Iranian missiles bound for Hezbollah may shift world focus away from the "Obama Doctrine" to the real actions of Israel, which may end up doing Obama's work for him.

Israel Targets Iranian Missiles in Syria, Rocking Damascus

Syria Calls Attack, "Declaration of War"

Reprinted from Lebanon's "THE DAILY STAR"

BEIRUT: Israel carried out its second air strike in days on Syria early on Sunday, a Western intelligence source said, in an attack that shook Damascus with a series of powerful blasts and drove columns of fire into the night sky.

Israel declined comment but Syria accused the Jewish state of striking a military facility just north of the capital - one which its jets had first targeted three months ago. Iran, a key ally of Syrian President Bashar al-Assad and an arch-enemy for Israel, urged states in the region to resist the Israeli attack.

People living near the Jamraya base spoke of explosions over several hours in various places near Damascus, including a town housing senior officials: "Night turned into day," one man said.

The Western intelligence source told Reuters the operation hit Iranian-supplied missiles headed for Lebanon's Hezbollah, a similar target to the two previous strikes this year, which have been defended as justifiable by Israel's ally the United States:

"In last night's attack, as in the previous one, what was attacked were stores of Fateh-110 missiles that were in transit from Iran to Hezbollah," the intelligence source said.

An Israeli official had confirmed a similar raid on Friday. In Lebanon, Hezbollah declined immediate comment.

Video footage uploaded onto the Internet by activists showed a series of explosions. One lit up the skyline of Damascus while another sent up a tower of flames and secondary blasts.

Syrian state media accused Israel of attacking in response to Assad's forces' recent successes against rebels who, with Western approval, have been trying to topple him for two years.

In 40 years since a war with a Syria then ruled by Assad's father, Israel has been locked in a cold standoff with Damascus, fought Hezbollah in Lebanon in 2006 and is threatening to attack Iran, accusing Tehran of trying to develop nuclear weapons.

But it is wary of instability in Syria, has long viewed Hezbollah as the more immediate threat and has shown little enthusiasm for U.S. and European calls for Assad's overthrow.

The raid follows intense debate in the United States over whether the use of chemical weapons by Syrian troops might push President Barack Obama to intervene more forcefully on the rebel side, but Western powers remain concerned at the presence of anti-Western Islamist fighters among Assad's opponents.

It was unclear whether Israel sought U.S. approval for the action; in the past, officials have indicated that Israel sees a need only to inform Washington once a mission was under way.

At a routine public appearance, Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu made no direct reference to the strikes but spoke pointedly of his responsibility to ensure Israel's future.

He maintained a plan to fly to China later in the day, suggesting a confidence that, as with the raid in January, Assad - and Hezbollah - would limit any reprisal. However, an Israeli military source said the army had deployed more anti-missile defence systems near the northern borders in recent days.

NIGHT OF EXPLOSIONS

"The sky was red all night. We didn't sleep a single second. The explosions started after midnight and continued through the night," one man told Reuters from Hameh, less than a mile from the Jamraya military research facility.

"There were explosions on all sides of my house," he added, saying people hid in basements during the events.

Another witness spoke of fire near Qura al-Assad, a town around 5 km (3 miles) west of Jamraya where many high-level government officials live. In the centre of Damascus, people said their first thought was that there was an earthquake.

Identified by Syrian media as the Jamraya military research centre, the target was also hit by Israel in another assault on Jan. 30. Jamraya, on the northern approaches to Damascus, is just 15 km (10 miles) from the Lebanese border.

The British-based Syrian Observatory for Human Rights said the blasts hit Jamraya as well as a nearby ammunition depot.

Other activists said a missile brigade and two Republican Guard battalions may also have been targeted in the heavily militarised area just north of Damascus.

Reports by activists and state media are difficult to verify in Syria because of restrictions on journalists operating there.

People living in southern Lebanon said they heard frequent sounds of jets overhead and believed they were Israeli.

The streets of central Damascus were almost empty of pedestrians and traffic on Sunday morning, the start of the working week. Only a few shops were open. Checkpoints that have protected the government-controlled zone from rebel attack appeared to have been reinforced with additional men.

Syria's state television said the strikes were a response to recent military gains by Assad's forces against rebels: "The new Israeli attack is an attempt to raise the morale of the terrorist groups which have been reeling from strikes by our noble army," it said.

Speaking shortly before Sunday's attack, President Obama said Israel had a right to act: "The Israelis justifiably have to guard against the transfer of advanced weaponry to terrorist organisations like Hezbollah," he said.

In Israel, a military spokeswoman said of the attack in Syria: "We don't respond to this kind of report."

Netanyahu appeared at the dedication of a highway junction in memory of his late father. He made no reference to raids but said his father "taught me that the greatest responsibility we have is to ensure Israel's security and guarantee its future."

MISSILE "BETTER THAN SCUD"

Israel has repeatedly made clear it is prepared to use force to prevent advanced weapons from Syria reaching Hezbollah, who fought a 34-day war with Israel seven years ago.

Uzi Rubin, an Israeli missile expert and former defence official said the Fateh-110 missile "is better than the Scud, it has a half-ton warhead". Iran has said it adapted the missile for anti-ship use by installing a guidance system, he added.

With Assad battling the revolt, Israelis also worry that Islamist rebels among the majority Sunni Muslim population could loot his arsenals and eventually hit the Jewish state, ending four decades of relative cross-border calm.

There was no immediate indication of how Syria would respond to Sunday's attack. After Israel's January raid, Damascus protested to the United Nations and the Syrian ambassador to Lebanon promised a "surprise decision", but no direct military retaliation followed.

Iranian Defence Minister Ahmad Vahidi was quoted by the ISNA news agency as saying on Sunday: 

"The Zionist regime's attack on Syria, which occurred with the U.S.'s green light, revealed the relationship between mercenary terrorists and their supporters and the regime occupying Jerusalem ... 

The evil actions of the Zionist regime can threaten the security of the entire region."

The uprising against Assad began with street protests that were met with force and grew into a bloody civil war in which the United Nations says at least 70,000 people have been killed.

Assad has lost control of large areas of north and eastern Syria, and is battling rebels on the fringes of Damascus.

But his forces have launched counter-offensives in recent weeks against the rebels around the capital and near the city of Homs, which links Damascus with the Mediterranean heartland of Assad's minority Alawites, who have religious ties to the Shi'ite form of Islam practised in Iran.

Opposition activists said hundreds of Sunni families fled the coastal town of Banias on Saturday after fighters loyal to Assad killed at least 62 people and left bloodied and burned corpses piled in the streets. It was the second such alleged massacre in the area in the recent days.

Israel has conducted airstrike into Syria

REPRINTED FROM CNN.com

(CNN) -- Israel has conducted an airstrike into Syria, two U.S. officials first told CNN, now confirmed by the Israeli government via Reuters. 

The attack was authorized in a secret Israeli security cabinet meeting.

Report, prior to confirmation:

U.S. and Western intelligence agencies are reviewing classified data showing Israel most likely conducted a strike in the Thursday-Friday time frame, according to both officials. This is the same time frame that the U.S. collected additional data showing Israel was flying a high number of warplanes over Lebanon.

Both officials said there is no reason to believe Israel struck at a chemical weapons storage facilities. The Israelis have long said they would strike at any targets that prove to be the transfer of any kinds of weapons to Hezbollah or other terrorist groups, as well as at any effort to smuggle Syrian weapons into Lebanon that could threaten Israel.

The Lebanese army website listed 16 flights by Israeli warplanes penetrating Lebanon's airspace from Thursday evening through Friday afternoon local time.

The Israeli military had no comment. But a source in the Israeli defense establishment told CNN's Sara Sidner, "We will do whatever is necessary to stop the transfer of weapons from Syria to terrorist organizations. We have done it in the past and we will do it if necessary the future."

Muslims have a problem. Uncle Ruslan may have the answer.

By Asra Nomani, Published: April 23

The following piece is excerpted (heavily) from the Washington Post

The uncle to Dzhokhar Tsarnaev, 19, and Tamerlan Tsarnaev, 26, the alleged Boston Marathon bombers, accomplished something that 11 years of post-9/11 press releases, news conferences and soundbites by too many American Muslim leaders has failed to do on the issue of radicalization and terrorism: with raw, unfettered emotion, he owned up to the problem within.

As an American Muslim who has watched the radicalization of Muslims from Louisville, Ky., to Chatanooga, Tenn., to Chechnya, the ancestral ethnicity of the alleged bombers, over the last three decades, I had one question on my mind.

I asked softly: “Is your family Muslim?”

The uncle didn’t hear me well: “Huh?”

I repeated my question: “Is your family Muslim?”

The question was one other journalists later admitted to me that they wondered but didn’t dare ask, the proverbial elephant in the room, only at that moment, on a cul-de-sac with manicured lawns, playground sets and helicopters and Canadian geese overhead. 

In Washington, D.C., leaders of national American Muslim organizations filled a room at the National Press Club and issued their flat, blanket rebuttals: Islam doesn’t sanction violence, and it doesn’t allow terrorism. 

When the New York Post made the mistake of writing that a Saudi witness was actually a suspect, bloggers and others took advantage of the opportunity to chortle over the mistake as just one more horrible example of stereotyping.

While it is critical that we don’t jump to conclusions by associating religious affiliation with militancy, there is no doubt that embracing an ideology of Islam that promotes extremism and violence has been a motivator for terrorism, from assassinated al-Qaeda leader Osama bin Laden to Army Major Nidal Hasan.

Did such an ideology influence the Tsarnaev brothers? Who or what compelled them to violence? What role does Muslim culture play in this type of radicalization?

Rather than worrying about being politically correct, we have to be comfortable asking these difficult questions. 

And the collectivist-minded Muslim community needs to learn an important lesson from Tsarni: 

It’s time to acknowledge the dishonor of terrorism within our communities, not to deny it because of shame. 

As we negotiate critical issues of ethnicity, religious ideology and identity as potential motivators for conflict, we have to establish basic facts.

So when I asked about his faith, Tsarni heard me. And he did something remarkable. He didn’t flinch.

“We are Muslims,” he answered clearly and steely-eyed. “We are Chechnyans. We are ethnic Chechnyans.”

“Do you think that they got radicalized in the mosques in that area?” I asked.

What I heard I couldn’t believe, I’ve become so used to the tactics of deflection. He looked me straight in the eye, and he said, 

“…most likely somebody radicalized them. But it’s not my brother, who just moved back to Russia, who spent his life bringing bread to their table, fixing cars, fixing cars.”

What happened when this Muslim American looked us in the eye and admitted the problem?

Tsarni became “Uncle Ruslan” to millions of Americans watching him on TV and later online, winning their respect, first, with apologies and then, with his hands clenched, fierce indignation, outrage and anger over the suspected role of his nephews as the Boston Marathon bombers. 

The uncle stunned seasoned reporters, some of them veterans of the trials in Guantanamo Bay and the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan, with his straight talk. 

First, he expressed his condolences to the victims of the Boston Marathon bombings and, then, declared loud and clear that his nephews brought “shame” on his family and the people of Chechnya, the family’s ethnicity: 

“Yes, of course, we’re ashamed. We’re ashamed. They’re children of my brother, who had little influence of them!” Later on Dzhokhar: 

“He put a shame on the entire Chechnyan ethnicity!” According to public records, Uncle Ruslan shared the same last name as his nephews but shortened it .

With close-cropped hair, a strong jawline and fit physique, the attorney became an accidental spokesman, instilling confidence as a truth-teller.

His effectiveness reveals that the best crisis management doesn’trequire intellectual gymnastic but just plain, honest talk: We have a problem. We know it. And we want to do right. 

“Uncle Ruslan” proved that folks can handle nuance. “It was wild, dramatic, angry, over-the-top,” wrote Washington Post blogger Alexandra Petri. She added: “People like Uncle Ruslan remind us that it’s the apples, not the barrel.”

She concluded: “Thank you. This was a moment we all needed.”

Back in America, Uncle Ruslan was winning in the court of public opinion.

And it was stunning to see how he acknowledged the shame openly but didn’t allow it to silence his criticism.

The bombing suspects, "put a shame on the entire Chechnyan ethnicity,” he said.

What Tsarni is admitting is something true but politically incorrect to talk about: the increasing use of these phrases of religiosity are code inside the community for someone who is becoming hardcore. 

It doesn’t mean that they’re becoming violent or criminal, but it’s a red flag. 

Instead of playing that game, Uncle Ruslan did something remarkable. He put his hands together as if in prayer, and he showed humility, not defensive arrogance, saying he’d prostrate himself before the victims of the Boston bombings.

Ameen, as “amen” is said in Arabic and Muslim culture, to Uncle Ruslan. 

I believe it’s time for us American Muslims to take collective responsibility, rather than issue collective denial. 

That’s the attitude that cultivates confidence and fosters safety—for all.

Rather than waiting for an invitation to RSVP to a superfluous “interfaith” dinner, Uncle Ruslan did something simple but crucial: He extended an invitation, was a good neighbor and took responsibility for the trouble that emerged in his front yard. In short, he owned up.

Surely, the Tsaernev family story is complicated, and there is nobody without flaw.

But Uncle Ruslan showed us where to be“Uncle Ruslan” proved that folks can handle nuance. “It was wild, dramatic, angry, over-the-top,” wrote Washington Post blogger Alexandra Petri. She added: “People like Uncle Ruslan remind us that it’s the apples, not the barrel.”

She concluded: “Thank you. This was a moment we all needed.”in.

With reporters still camped out , he emerged from his neighbor’s porch, his arm around the older music teacher who lived there, leading her warmly into his house. Hundreds of miles away, Boston Police drew close to bringing his nephew into custody, leaving Uncle Ruslan, the rest of Tsaernev family and our Muslim communities to do some real soul-searching about how we lost these boys to the ideology of terrorism.

To me, the answer lies inside a culture shift where we honestly acknowledge the radicalization problems within our communities—so that no Uncle Ruslan has to step outside his home, confessing to something gone very, very wrong.

Asra Q. Nomani, a former Wall Street Journal reporter, is a mother and the author of “Standing Alone: A Muslim Woman’s Struggle for the Soul of Islam.”

Why the Chinese Earthquake is More Significant than the Boston Bombings

Not seen here on American Trusim, but seen broadly in response comments on websites such as CNN.com and Huffington Post, I think a lot of folks missed my point entirely my blog post contrasting the obsession with everything Boston Marathon Bombing related and the complete indifference to the deaths and injuries in China.

I UNDERSTAND that people are more interested and more obsessed with the Boston Bombing for two main reasons:

• Boston is in the United States - That act of terror happened here, in our backyard, on American soil.
  
• Terrorism is a Deliberate Act, Earthquakes are Acts of Nature - Terrorism is much more grave.

I GET that, OK?  That was never in question.  You'll get no argument from me that there would naturally be more interest in a bombing inside the United States vs. an earthquake in China.  WE'RE ON THE SAME PAGE.

What I DON'T get is that there was next to NO coverage of the devastation and death caused by the Chinese earthquake.

What's worse, in the small amount of coverage we're now seeing, it appears that impacted Chinese citizens are not getting the help nor the attention they deserve, either. 

100,000 Homeless in China  

"We are in the open air here. No place to sleep, nothing to eat. No one is paying any attention to us," said Peng Qiong, 45, a farmer in Chaoyang village on the outskirts of Lushan, near the epicenter.

Thousands of displaced survivors are living in Red Cross tents following an earthquake in China's Sichuan province, though many are left with no form of shelter. Saturday's 6.6 magnitude earthquake killed more than 200 people and has left an estimated 100,000 homeless.

Caring about the 200 who died, the 11,000 who were injured and the 100,000 left homeless does not take away from how we feel about the tragedy in Boston, but we MUST treat these situations very differently and ask the world to begin paying attention to the needs of the Chinese people affected by this natural disaster.

Three Die in Boston, 186 in China - Which Gets More Media Attention?

The two Boston Marathon bombing culprits have been killed in one case and captured in the other.  They turned out to be brothers who had lived in the Boston area for quite a while, but felt tied to Chechnya, and possibly conducted this act of terrorism as a Chechnya protest.  Maybe?

That one of the terrorists is dead, and the other captured is a good thing.

Along with rest of the United States, I sat, transfixed Friday night, as police forces (local, state and federal) converged on a covered boat parked in a Watertown, MA driveway, bringing an incredible manhunt to a close, with the second terrorist, a 19-year-old, being shot and eventually surrendering to authorities.

Their deadly act killed three people in Boston, and injured hundreds more.

Then, half a world away, a major earthquake struck the Chinese province of Sichuan at 8 a.m. local time, killing 186 and injuring more than 11,000.


How much television coverage have you seen of the earthquake in China or the 186 deaths there?

All I've seen is a text crawl at the bottom of the screen while wall-to-wall, repetitious coverage of the Boston Marathon Bombings continues on all the 24-hour news networks (CNN, Fox, MSNBC, etc.) non stop.

Three people died in Boston.  186 in China.  11,000+ were injured in China.

Where are the five-minute profiles of children who died in the China earthquake?  Instead, we're treated to "deep background" pieces on the Boston Terrorists, the Tsarnaev brothers and speculation by talking heads about what might have radicalized these men.

What about the dead and injured in China?

I'm not saying the events which unfolded in Boston aren't newsworthy.  They clearly are, and I was among the "consumers" of news all week long, and especially into the weekend.

But, do they justify the amount of international news coverage they're receiving, especially on the same weekend that a 7.0 magnitude earthquake killed nearly 200 people (sure to be more) and injured 11,000?

We need to get our priorities straight, here in the United States and elsewhere.

Tragedy in Boston

Media reported an arrest had been made, then stepped back from the assertion. 

(From CNN)  Investigators scrambling to solve the fatal bombings at the Boston Marathon want to question a man seen on video as a possible suspect in the attack, two official sources with knowledge of the investigation said Wednesday.

The sources identified the person as a man wearing a white baseball cap. News of a possible suspect comes on a day when authorities have made "significant progress" in the case but no arrests, a federal law enforcement source told CNN's John King.

Sources previously told CNN that a suspect was in custody, but both Boston police and the FBI denied that any arrests had been made.

-----------------------------------------------------------------------

In writing about the recent deaths and injuries from the bombing attacks at the Boston Marathon, the only title that seemed fitting was "Tragedy in Boston."

The human toll that has been seen on television the last few days is deeply saddening to anyone with a conscience.  There can be no excuse, political, ideological or otherwise for the slaying of innocent civilians, including women and children.

A SLATE article (I refuse to link to it) employs the headline, "Let's hope the Boston Marathon Bomber is White Male."

WHAT?

It would be understandable to say, "Let's hope the Boston Marathon Bomber ISN'T (fill-in-the-blank)," but to "wish" for the guilty party to come from a certain group, race or demographic is deplorable, and an example of "Yellow Journalism" at its worst, simply seeking headlines.

In fact, a current SLATE piece from David Weigel IS headlined, "Understandable for Muslims to 'Hope Beyond Hope' That This Doesn't Turn out to Be What It Might Be."

Weigel quotes CNN correspondent Christiane Amanpour who said, "There are no conclusions.  Is it international? Is it domestic?  I am part Iranian. And I do understand the burden of association. And I know when we know who did this, we will all unite in strong condemnation."

That is reasonable.  Hoping that a white male, black female, Latino male, Irish female, etc. is culpable, is far beyond the pale.

I'd call it racism, but then again, the Left is incapable of racism, right?

North Korea gives nuclear-war warning (Al Jazeera Report)

AL JAZEERA:  North Korea gives nuclear-war warning

"Moment of explosion approaching fast" after Pentagon move to deploy missile defence system to Pacific island.

First, consider the country (North Korea) and secondly, consider the source of this story, Al Jazeera.  Still, read on . . . 

The North Korean army has warned the US that its military has been cleared to wage an attack using "smaller, lighter and diversified nuclear" weapons.

"The moment of explosion is approaching fast," the military said, warning that war could break out "today or tomorrow".

The statement, carried by the Korean Central News Agency early on Thursday, said troops had been authorised to counter US aggression with "powerful practical military counteractions".

The warning, the latest in a series of escalating threats against the US and South Korea, came after the Pentagon said it would deploy a missile defence system to the US Pacific territory of Guam to strengthen the region's protections against a possible attack.

Meanwhile, a  South Korean news agency reported that the North had moved a mid-range missile to its eastern coast..

Ban Ki-moon, the UN secretary-general, said that he was "deeply concerned" over rising tensions on Thursday.

'Clear danger'

In an address to the National Defence University in Washington on Wednesday, Chuck Hagel, US defence secretary, labelled North Korea's recent rhetoric as a threat to the US and its Asia-Pacific allies.

"Some of the actions they've taken over the last few weeks present a real and clear danger," he said.

Hagel added that the US was doing all it could to defuse the situation.

Deployment of the Terminal High Altitude Area Defence System is the latest step the US has taken to bolster forces in the region in a far-reaching show of force aimed at countering the North Korean threat.

The Pentagon already has sent dispatched bombers, stealth fighters and ships.

The land-based missile defence system includes a truck-mounted launcher, tracking radar, interceptor missiles and an integrated fire control system.

The Pentagon said the system would boost defences for US citizens in Guam, a US territory, and US forces stationed there.

North Korea has railed for weeks against joint US and South Korean military exercises taking place in South Korea and has expressed anger over tightened sanctions for a February nuclear test.

Following through on one threat on Wednesday, North Korean border authorities refused to allow entry to South Koreans who manage jointly run factories in the North Korean city of Kaesong.

Meanwhile, North Korea barred entry to a joint industrial complex it shares with the South for a second day, the South Korean Unification Ministry has said.

The ministry also said on Thursday that it would allow 222 South Korean workers to leave the zone through the day.

Shut down threat

North Korea also repeated its threat to shut down Kaesong industrial zone, where 123 South Korean firms operate factories, if the South's government continued to insult it and worsen the situation by mentioning a possible military action against it.

"If the South's puppet conservative group and its media continue bad-mouthing ... we will be taking the stern measure of pulling out all of our workers from the Kaesong industrial zone," KCNA news agency quoted the North's Committee for the Peaceful Reunification of the Fatherland as saying.

Kaesong brings in $90m annually in wages to 53,000 North Korean workers and is one of the impoverished North's few sources of ready cash.

South Korean workers were banned from entering the site, located 10km inside the North, on Wednesday amid a tense standoff with North Korea pitted against South Korea and the US.

Al Jazeera's Harry Fawcett, reporting from the Paju border crossing, said that the longer Kaesong remains inaccessible to Seoul, "the bigger and more serious the situation becomes".

The real test will come over the weekend when the factories in the complex begin to run low on supplies, he said.

'Contingency plan'

The gates between North and South Korea will open 10 times on Thursday to allow workers to leave.

After the 222 South Korean workers leave between 10am and 5pm (01:00-08:00 GMT), another 606 workers from the South will remain in the Kaesong complex.

The operating stability of the complex is seen as a bellwether of inter-Korean relations, and its closure would mark a clear escalation of tensions beyond all the military rhetoric.

South Korea's defence ministry said it had contingency plans, including possible military action, to ensure the safety of its citizens working in the joint industrial zone. 

"We have prepared a contingency plan, including possible military action, in case of a serious situation," Defence Minister Kim Kwan-jin told ruling party MPs in a meeting on Wednesday. 

Border crossings for Kaesong had until Wednesday been functioning normally despite soaring tensions in recent weeks between the North and the South.

Pyongyang has been ramping up its threats since it was hit by international sanctions following its third nuclear test earlier this year. 

How Will the US Respond to a North Korean Attack on South Korea?

What will the United States do if there is a live-fire exchange between North and South Korea?

There has been a lot of "pooh poohing" of the rants / threats coming out of South Korea in recent days, with the White House even saying there is "no evidence that the country’s leader, Kim Jong-un was mobilizing troops or other military forces for any imminent attack.

Yet, at the same time, the US has moved a Navy destroyer off the coast of North Korea and has made mock bombing runs over South Korea with its B-2 stealth bombers, a highly unusual move for the US.

While the US has made these moves (along with its 28,500 troops stationed in South Korea), the military of North Korea says it is at its highest level of alertness, and continues to insist that a state of war exists between the two Koreas.

Equally disturbing is the fact that South Korean President Park Geun-hye has ordered her military to "deliver a strong and immediate response to any North Korean provocation."  In fact, she has said (rightly so), "If the North attempts any provocation against our people and country, you must respond strongly at the first contact with them without any political consideration."

This contrasts with the stance historically taken by South Korean.  Park is taking a much harder stance than her predecessor, Lee Myung-bak, who did not respond after a 2010 North Korean artillery attack killed four South Koreans.

So, we currently have:

• An unpredictable N. Korean making military threats against S. Korea and the US
• The US moving warships and planes into the region and conducting maneuvers there
• S. Korea pledging to respond to any attack militarily
• Reports of the Chinese military mobilizing near the border with N. Korea
• N. Korea reportedly re-starting a shuttered nuclear reactor

If the two countries trade missiles, bombs or gunfire, how will the United States respond given the currently explosive situation on the Korean peninsula?  A military exchange could take place by accident or on purpose.  No matter what the provocation, with 28,500 American troops in South Korea, would the US be forced to attack North Korea?

If US troops were targeted, or accidentally harmed, what would be the United States' response?  

Further, if the North attacks the South, it appears that military leaders in the south have been given the "green light" by their civilian leadership to respond, unilaterally.

This has all the makings of a catastrophe just waiting to happen, if one or more of the players makes a misstep.

Tensions Mount on Korean Peninsula:

US Moves Destroyer Off of North Korea,

Chinese Troops Mobilize Near Border

(Summarized from NBC News)

The U.S. Navy is shifting a guided-missile destroyer in the Pacific to waters off the Korean peninsula in the wake of ongoing rhetoric from North Korea, U.S. defense officials said.

The USS McCain is capable of intercepting and destroying a missile, should North Korea decide to fire one off, the officials said.

Still, U.S. defense officials insist that there is nothing to indicate that North Korea is on the verge of another launch. 

As North Korean state TV shows constant images of the army bombarding South Korea, North Korea's leader Kim Jong Un is saying his missiles are at the ready and has cut off emergency communications.

The McCain in December 2012 was moved to be in position to defend against a impending North Korean rocket launch.

On Sunday, The United States sent F-22 stealth fighter jets to South Korea as part of military exercises in a move aimed at further deterring threats from North Korea against its neighbor.

S. Korean President Gives Military "Green Light" to Strike Back

Also Monday, South Korean President Park Geun-hye appeared to give her country's military permission to strike back at any attack from the North without further word from Seoul.

"As commander-in-chief of the armed forces, I will trust the military's judgment on abrupt and surprise provocations by North Korea," she said, according to Yonhap.

The deployments and Park's remarks came as tensions approached an all-time high between Pyongyang and Washington.  

Kim Jong Un has ratcheted up the rhetoric against both South Korea and the United States in recent months, and in February violated U.N. sanctions by ordering a nuclear weapons test.

On Saturday, North Korea said it had entered a "state of war" against South Korea, according to a statement reported by the North's official news agency, KCNA. 

The greatest danger right now appears to be the possibility of a miscalculation. 

- US Defense Secretary Leon Panetta

"The reality is we don’t have as much insight as we should," Panetta said of Kim's motives.

Kim has also recently threatened to "settle accounts" with the U.S. and posed near a chart that appeared to detail bombings of American cities.

In North Korea, meanwhile, KCNA reported on an Easter service at which it said "the participants renewed the firm resolution to put the warmongers [the US and South Korea] into the red hot iron-pot of hell as early as possible."

# # # # #