North Korea launch missiles

ninebeanrows

In a blatant call for attention North Korea launched 3 or possibly 4
missiles on today which is the 4th of July (Independence day).

2 scud missliles landed 300miles west of Japan while a long
range missile failed just after launch.

http://www.cnn.com/2006/WORLD/asiapcf/07/04/korea.missile/index.html

Hagar

joebhoy1916 wrote:

It's amazing the USA said they built these bombs to stop wars now there going to war's over these weapons.

No weapon was ever built to stop wars, all weapons are built to win wars.
They only stop wars as a by-product of beating the enemy.

The US simply doesn't want a nation it doesn't control to have the ability to fight them with nuclear weapons. Once a nation achieves nuclear launch capability the US has to negotiate with them rather than dictate to them.

Right,I think I'm going to have to have a private chat with whoever moved this from after hours to politics.
Most threads coming from there to here lately contain no politics discussion only gibberish tit for tat.

I've binned most of this thread(split and sent to recycle) and left the rest of it here.
Please continue and this time let it be a discussion.

The Saint

Another worrying development from an attention deprived crazy child. Having said that these countries are being compelled to seek a deterrant to avoid military attacks. They would be quite stupid not to seek a deterrant given the rhetoric and the threats from the West and primarily the US. Everyone knows you don't attack a country that can fight back.

bonkey

Articles today (news.google.com) suggest that up to 6 missiles may have been fired yesterday, with a 7th today. Only one was believed to be a Taepodong-2

What interesting/amusing to note is that the tests apparently commenced within minutes of the Discovery launch. One would imagine that the "reasoning" here is that the US didn't need anyone's permission for its launch and/or subsequent flyovers while NK are being told its unacceptable for them to launch anything and is certainly not allowed launch anything that flies over another nation.

I recall CNN speculating over the past weeks that teh Taepodong-2 could actually be a satellite-launch platform, rather than a long-range ballistic missile. This would make the tie-in with the Discovery launch even more interesting but, to be honest, even with cast-iron proof that this is what it was, I'm pretty sure we'd still be told there was no question that it was anythign other than an ICBM.

civdef

The performance of these missiles suggests NK need to go back to the drawing board with their world beating anti-imperialist weapons of defence.

Sleipnir

They could hit Japan?
They are nearly finished development of an intercontinental ballistic missile too, with a range in excess of 6000km.

Seeing as the U.S. has recently signed an agreement with Pakistan to share it's nuclear techinology, I think their reaction to proliferation in North Korea to be a little obtuse.

Did they rattle the sabre when India tested a nuclear weapon a couple of years ago? Did they hell.....

RedPlanet

From the article:

A statement from the White House said the United States "strongly condemns" the launches and North Korea's "unwillingness to heed calls for restraint from the international community."

Um, yeah.....
Those bad, bad Koreans huh?
It's almost like they commit unprovoked attacks on other countries, militarily occupy them and install puppet governments.

Now that Washington is onabout heeding calls from the international community.....ever heard of guantanamo bay?

Pot, Kettle.

daithimac

the UNSC has met to discuss the north korean situation. I would hope that air strikes would be sanctioned so as to take out as many developed missiles as possable.

Some of the things being said here are a little alarming to say the least. I honestly don't give a damn what India Pakistan france or any other nuclear power has done in the past. The fact is that a nuclear North Korea will be the biggest threat to global stability since 1930s Germany and is something which must be prevented at all costs.

A side note of this development could be the effect it will have on the mid-term elections in the US. The Clinton Administration was in talks with north Korea up till the end of its term of office. The Bush administration terminitated these talks and is now faced with this problem. this should surely help the democrats

zuma

daithimac wrote:

the UNSC has met to discuss the north korean situation. I would hope that air strikes would be sanctioned so as to take out as many developed missiles as possable.

Some of the things being said here are a little alarming to say the least. I honestly don't give a damn what India Pakistan france or any other nuclear power has done in the past. The fact is that a nuclear North Korea will be the biggest threat to global stability since 1930s Germany and is something which must be prevented at all costs.

A side note of this development could be the effect it will have on the mid-term elections in the US. The Clinton Administration was in talks with north Korea up till the end of its term of office. The Bush administration terminitated these talks and is now faced with this problem. this should surely help the democrats

Well as N.Korea already has 3-6 nuclear weapons (US estimates) these missiles are being tested for their transport once the warheads have been minaturised some more.

The big talk on the news today was a possible arms race heating up in the near future mainly between China and Japan...which would be pretty damn scary to say the least!

Also, what proof have we that the test ICBM, really did crash after 40seconds and didnt actually fly over Japan, but was kept secret so as not to scare the populous?

Remember aswell that although Japan currently has no nuclear weapons Im pretty damn positive that they could develope and mount them on the own rockets (satellite launchers are ICBM remember) in a couple of months!

Hobbes

civdef wrote:

The performance of these missiles suggests NK need to go back to the drawing board with their world beating anti-imperialist weapons of defence.

The new missiles they are testing have the ability to hit a large portion of the world.

http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/6947403

Moriarty

Hobbes wrote:

The new missiles they are testing have the ability to hit a large portion of the world.

http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/6947403

Theoretically have the ability.. and it appears more theoretical than ever after those launch tests on Tuesday.

bk

Hobbes wrote:

The new missiles they are testing have the ability to hit a large portion of the world.

But there are some important questions to ask:

1) Do they actually work?

At the moment no.

2) How many do they have?

Doesn't matter if you have 5 or 6, if the US has over 10,000.

3) How accurate are they?

There is absolutely no evidence that NK have the ability to accurately target these nukes, sure they can blast them at Alaska, but there are unlikely to hit anything major.

Bards

bk wrote:

Doesn't matter if you have 5 or 6, if the US has over 10,000.
QUOTE]

you can only nuke things once. As the IRA said to Tatcher. "we only have to be lucky once. You have to be lucky everytime"

Hobbes

Moriarty wrote:

Theoretically have the ability.. and it appears more theoretical than ever after those launch tests on Tuesday.

Depends a lot on what you define the test as. As the picture shows to fully test its range would involve flying into someones airspace/area that is liable to get it shot down or provoke a pre-emptive response by another country.

Take a look where they landed. Far away from Japan but flew more then far enough to point out they could drop them into Japan if they wanted to.

You also wouldn't need to fly a missile to its full limit. Just far enough to determine its trajectory and how steady it was flying in relation to where you wanted it to go. After that just blow up in mid-air.

And if you look at the other missiles they have, they do have proper tracking/etc and one of which can be launched from a Sub (which they also have).

The problem isn't the missles themselves, but the nutjob behind the button. I've watched a NK documentry (by NK) and it is quite astounding. A large majority of NK believe that in a confrontation against the US that NK would win.

Red Alert

israel is a bigger threat to world security rather than Kim Jong Il.

RedPlanet

Weathercheck wrote:

In a blatant call for attention North Korea launched 3 or possibly 4
missiles on today which is the 4th of July (Independence day).

2 scud missliles landed 300miles west of Japan while a long
range missile failed just after launch.

http://www.cnn.com/2006/WORLD/asiapcf/07/04/korea.missile/index.html

A blatant call for attention huh?
You'd think it'd take a month or so to prepare for such a launch.
http://english.ohmynews.com/ArticleView/article_view.asp?no=300030&rel_no=1
Sure it's not like Washington wasn't playing "war games" off their coast to intimidate them or anything.

So NK finally launch their missiles and suddenly it's front page news like nobody expected it.

Moriarty

Hobbes wrote:

Depends a lot on what you define the test as. As the picture shows to fully test its range would involve flying into someones airspace/area that is liable to get it shot down or provoke a pre-emptive response by another country.

They could have shot it out over the pacific. Wouldn't have infringed in anyone elses airspace anymore than they have already.

Hobbes wrote:

Take a look where they landed. Far away from Japan but flew more then far enough to point out they could drop them into Japan if they wanted to.

You also wouldn't need to fly a missile to its full limit. Just far enough to determine its trajectory and how steady it was flying in relation to where you wanted it to go. After that just blow up in mid-air.

And if you look at the other missiles they have, they do have proper tracking/etc and one of which can be launched from a Sub (which they also have).

But they already fired a missile over the northern japanese islands and crashed it into the pacific in 199(8)?. Doing it again would be pointless. Also, different things happen to ICBM missiles at different points during their flight. I doubt they'd blow one up 40 seconds after it took off so as not to offend japanese sensibilitys (which they have no problem doing at other points, including 8 years ago).

It's far more likely that the missile simply malfunctioned and self destructed due to a flaw in the design or manufacture of it, rather than NK intentionally destroying it and losing masses of valuable data for some non-obvious reason.

Hobbes wrote:

The problem isn't the missles themselves, but the nutjob behind the button. I've watched a NK documentry (by NK) and it is quite astounding. A large majority of NK believe that in a confrontation against the US that NK would win.

The weapons are rarely the problem in and of themselves. But then, nasty thoughts alone wont cause a japanese/south korean/US western seaboard city to go up in a flash of light and destruction. So you do what you can - ie. remove their ability for long range missile launches one way or another.

RedPlanet

Moriarty wrote:

So you do what you can - ie. remove their ability for long range missile launches one way or another.

Right, and no doubt you'd like a particular foreign power to be judge and jury.
But that's not gonna happen as the UN Security Council has already poured cold water on USA's tantrum.

Moriarty

Like it or not, that's how the world works in case you haven't noticed by now.

RedPlanet

Moriarty wrote:

Like it or not, that's how the world works in case you haven't noticed by now.

I don't like it.
But i do like it when folks like NK, Iran, Pakistan etc develope nukes to level the playing field.

Moriarty

Really? I never would have guessed.

Honest.

magick

But i do like it when folks like NK, Iran, Pakistan etc develope nukes to level the playing field

are u kidding?! u like it when Iran has nukes!?!

level the playing field! id rather the west have the biggest advantage in weapons technology

Bards

I'd prefer to see the World get rid of WMD to level the playing field

mike65

But i do like it when folks like NK, Iran, Pakistan etc develope nukes to level the playing field

I knew there was a reason I stopped browsing Politics....

Mike.

joebhoy1916

In 1993 North Korea withdrew from the nuclear non-proliferation treaty they suspended the decision and entered talks with the United States!

In 1994 they agreed to abandon there nuclear weapons program in return for aid from the USA, Japan and South Korea.

Why was it USA stopped sending Aid?

Seemed a fare deal to me.

Now that they are not in the NPT would it be there right to make the weapons?

North Korea claim USA have 1,000 nuclear bombs in South Korea even though these bombs were sapposed to be taking out from there in 1991! If I was the leader id be building them too if a mad country which has always said they would be willing to use nuclear bombs against them!

America say they would use nuclear bombs and who says anything to them?

bonkey

joebhoy1916 wrote:

Now that they are not in the NPT would it be there right to make the weapons?

Arguably yes, but it also means there is no international protection for them doing so.

One purpose of the NPT was to clear the way as to what nuclear research nations could undertake without fear of reprisal. This is what Iran are currently arguing on.

Once you're out of the NPT, you no longer agree on what research is to be allowed without reprecussion just as much as you no longer agree to not develop weapons.

So yes...Kim can build his nukes and the US can take him to task for it. They can take him to task for any nuclear research they like if NK isn't in the NPT.

North Korea claim USA have 1,000 nuclear bombs in South Korea even though these bombs were sapposed to be taking out from there in 1991!

If Kim says it, it must be true. He'd never lie or fabricate to suit his own agenda, right? And he's certainly not known to be paranoid in any way.

If I was the leader id be building them too if a mad country which has always said they would be willing to use nuclear bombs against them!

America say they would use nuclear bombs and who says anything to them?

With the exception of Iran at present, the US' position has always been one embracing a "no first strike" doctrine. That means that the only way the US could use nukes against NK is if the NK developed its own WMDs.

One can argue that the threats against Iran have changed the political landscape, but the simple truth is that until those threats were made, the only nuclear threat from the US to NK was if the NK fired first.

The Saint

With the exception of Iran at present, the US' position has always been one embracing a "no first strike" doctrine. That means that the only way the US could use nukes against NK is if the NK developed its own WMDs.

One can argue that the threats against Iran have changed the political landscape, but the simple truth is that until those threats were made, the only nuclear threat from the US to NK was if the NK fired first.

Not true. The US has a nuclear first strike policy with regard to North Korea and Iran and alse reserve the right to use nuclear weapons against non-nuclear states.

RedPlanet

bonkey wrote:

With the exception of Iran at present, the US' position has always been one embracing a "no first strike" doctrine. That means that the only way the US could use nukes against NK is if the NK developed its own WMDs.

The only countries to state a policy of no first strike was the former USSR and China.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/First_strike

Unless you have other information bonkey.

Essey

The US, UK, France, Isreal, Pakistan & N. Korea have not signed the "no first strike pact" - its somewhat believed the China has signed beacuse their arsenal is not beleived to be strong and a first strike would be suicidal deal. The US, Russia, UK & France reserve the right to respond w/nuclear power against a non-nuclear country if necessary.

Liber8or

With regards somebody saying the re-building of arms between Japan and China on the previous page, i just wanted to clarify that this is not a worrying situation. This is because under the "Peacy Treaty of 1951" between Japan and America, Japan were only given a strict plan on their military. Meaning they were only allowed to build a defense force to protect themselves from foreign invaders, which at the time, was recognised as Communism.

By the terms of the treaty Japan renounced all claims to Korea, Taiwan, the Kurils, Sakhalin, and former mandated islands and relinquished any special rights and interests in China and Korea; the right of Japan to defend itself and enter into collective security arrangements was recognized.

I think NK simply wants to play ball with the big players, UK, Russia, France, America, etc. They are a threat to SK, simply because of NK's history and sense of Honour in controlling Seoul again, but as to the rest of the World, i dont think so. Their weapon systems are very bad, as seen from reports and even though China and Russia are calling on calmer measures to be taken at the moment, they would not support NK in its invasion of SK. Which if NK were looking for a fight, SK would be their first target.

Thats just my thoughts on the matter..

Chakar

The main doctrine seems to be MAD [Mutually Assured Destruction] which is why India, Pakistan and other countries developed nuclear weapons.

zuma

Liber8or wrote:

With regards somebody saying the re-building of arms between Japan and China on the previous page, i just wanted to clarify that this is not a worrying situation. This is because under the "Peacy Treaty of 1951" between Japan and America, Japan were only given a strict plan on their military. Meaning they were only allowed to build a defense force to protect themselves from foreign invaders, which at the time, was recognised as Communism.

Please read here:
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2005/11/22/AR2005112200672.html

Manic Moran

The US never went to a 'no first strike' option for two reasons.

1) It would have been difficult/impossible to defend Western Europe against the Warsaw Pact without nukes. The Soviets in 1982 when they made their declaration were in a very good position to make it, as they (and most everyone else) knew that they didn't need nukes to overrun NATO. That situation didn't really change until the last generation of NATO's Cold War equipment really came on line in strength.

2) As the US retains no operational chemical weapon stocks, it has a policy of a reply with nuclear weapons to a chemical attack, regardless of if the country in question is nuclear-armed or not.

NTM

Manic Moran

Please read here:
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn...112200672.html

Wrong focus.

The problem isn't Japan: It's had an extremely capable military for several decades at this point, and in pure dollar value has, I believe, the 2nd largest annual defense budget in the world. What the country itself is allowing itself to do is little to do with the country's capabilities, which are limited offensively, but more than capable of carrying out defensive operations within Japan's sphere of influence (As opposed to the territory of Japan).

China, on the other hand, is undergoing a massive military resurgence. Give them another ten or fifteen years, and they're going to have a very capable offensive force. Right now, they suffer the problem of limited overseas offensive capability: All the troops and tanks they have are of no use if they can't get to the Spratleys or Taiwan or wherever due to a lack of transport vessels, blue-water combat ships or whatnot. China is also looking to be recognised as a world superpower, and a decent power projection capability is liable to be an integral part of that. The NorthWestern Pacific is liable to become a very interesting place come 2020.

NTM

Liber8or

zuma wrote:

Please read here:
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2005/11/22/AR2005112200672.html

Ahh i see the Peace Treaty of 1951 is effectively gone now. Thanks for updating this.