WHEN IT COMES TO NORTH KOREA AND WHY WE ATTACK, “WHAT DIFFERENCE DOES IT MAKE ANYWAY?” ENTER THE FALSE FLAG.


If North Korea (NOKO) has a hydrogen bomb, the stakes of the game just went up. Now the threat is 10 times larger and the death toll it could exact is a million-plus. Drop a NOKO thermonuclear bomb in Seoul or Tokyo and the death count would be inestimable… but it would be no less than many millions.

Maybe there is more bark to Kim Jung Un than bite. But how long can the world look the other way when the next missile is fired or the next nuclear weapon (or thermonuclear weapon) is tested?

It is my opinion that the U.S. will not conduct a preemptive strike — although it should — without North Korea starting the conflict. The tide of public opinion would be totally against the U.S. And President Donald Trump cannot survive starting a war that likely leads to the killing of tens of thousands of Koreans on both sides of the 38th Parallel. The only way for the U.S. to legitimately take out Kim and his NOKO cult is for an attack by NOKO against the U.S., Japan, or South Korea to happen first. But will Kim go that far? Probably not. Not at this time. Not for quite awhile. Enter the false flag.

As most students of true history know, wars are seldom fought based upon what the combatants tell the public. Indeed, most wars are started by a FALSE FLAG. In the Spanish American War… the sinking of the battleship Maine was the call to action. World War I was really fought to allow the British and French to take the oil of Romania and the Middle East. They wanted to keep the black gold away from Germany. America’s entry into World War II was catalyzed by the Japanese attack on Pearl Harbor that FDR and his administration helped along by the blockade against Japan. FDR knew it was going to happen — but it was the only way to galvanize U.S. popular support to help Britain attempt to save its empire. Vietnam began with the false flag known as the Gulf of Tonkin affair. The War on Terror began with 911 — and 911 increasingly screams “inside job” to get Americans behind the crusade against Arab States and Iran. It too was about who controls the fossil fuels that power the world economy.

The reality is that the only way the U.S. would take the giant step of a preemptive strike is for it to create an acceptable false flag.

The argument for a false flag is simple: We can choose the level of destruction and death we are willing to tolerate. We don’t want Kim to make that decision. And although he continues to increase the bluster, Kim does not have a death wish. He knows he’s safe. He knows how NOKO for over half a century has demonstrated that the West will let NOKO get away with almost anything — anything but a direct attack on South Korea or Japan.

The U.S., however, is now in a position where the calculus suggests it has to act. The U.S. has a window of opportunity which will close in a year or two. Why? The lessons learned sternly teach us that “buying time” only increases the likelihood of greater death and destruction for us and our allies. Would we prefer to attempt the elimination of the Kim regime after it has more missiles for its military than loaves of bread for its people? Or would we choose to attack them now when there is no doubt what the outcome will be and the death count in South Korea can be held to several thousand (or several tens of thousands) rather than one million plus?

Consequently, that is why I make the suggestion that the U.S. must (and will) effect a false flag to justify its military preemptive strike against Pyongyang. Perhaps it will be a mid-range missile that hits a wayward Japanese island that will be identified as launched from NOKO. Or maybe it’s a U.S. naval ship where a thousand U.S. sailors are killed while the evidence “proves” it was a NOKO submarine conducting a torpedo assault to test our resolve. Afterall, Kim has to wonder how serious the U.S., Japan, and South Korea are about going to war. Decades of appeasement suggest we aren’t serious. Furthermore, isn’t it likely that Kim will continue to push his luck? It would certainly seem to be so. That is why a false flag can be effective. Given his behavior so far, it won’t be a hard sell to tell the American people that Kim simply miscalculated and went one big step beyond what we were willing to tolerate. He forced our hand. Or so it would seem.

The false flag will be like a vaccination. With vaccinations, we cheerfully accept an injection of a controlled version of the disease in order to immunize us from the uncontrollable symptoms of “the real disease.” With a false flag, we control “what hits us and how hard” and we dramatically reduce the death toll only to what is necessary to get the American public behind the plan to attack NOKO. We don’t want a massive artillery barrage blasting Seoul or a nuclear missile detonated over Tokyo to be the reason we go to war with Pyongyang. Instead, our leadership selects an unlucky group of persons that “takes one for the team” to minimize (relatively speaking) the damage and death overall. 3,000 lost at Pearl Harbor. 3,000 lost in the Twin Towers. How many will be sacrificed in the China Sea or the Korean Peninsula? Can’t our leaders feel justified this is an ethical action given the circumstances?

That’s the way all our wars get started. Why would we expect this one to be otherwise? And to quote Hillary, “What difference does it make anyway?”


If you want to read more, below is an article that adds more nuance to the argument.

Welcome to the Thermonuclear Club, North Korea!  FOREIGNPOLICY.COM


Be sure to sign up for my posts at www.doomsdaydoug.com.

And support me by buying a book. My author page at Amazon can be found by clicking here:  CLICK!