North Korea Nuclear Standoff

[kevin]

Its not the end of the world. The US will not respond with war. Costs are too high, not in our national interests.

The North Korean government would be foolish to possess a weapon and not know its reliability. The western nations would be foolish to let them acquire this ability without protest. That's all that's going on.

[Brent]

This is a real stupid question. Could Korea move a missle out of Korea and shoot it from somewhere else? Maybe we are watching the wrong areas.

Very Doubtful IMO. It's always possible I guess, but that country's government would have to know about it too. The U.S. has seen them preparing the missile from the satellites.

[x-y-no]

Hey Jan,I think that the U.S can know ahead of time if an invasion towards South Korea is in the making as sattelite data would supplie information about what is going on inside North Korea.What do you think of that?

We would certainly know they were preparing for an attack. But that doesn't mean we could prevent it, unfortunately.

[cycloneye]

Hey Jan,I think that the U.S can know ahead of time if an invasion towards South Korea is in the making as sattelite data would supplie information about what is going on inside North Korea.What do you think of that?

We would certainly know they were preparing for an attack. But that doesn't mean we could prevent it, unfortunately.

Agree that preventing at attack or invasion will be imposible to know.However I think that the information from sattelites can put at maximun alert the 37,000 U.S forces and the South Korean Military.Also they can evuacuate the city of Seul but that is a giant task to do as more than 6 millon live there.

[Derek Ortt]

remember, our B2s can take off from US soil and strike N Korean troops that are about to invade. IN Kosovo and Iraq, the B2's took off from US soil for their bombing missions

[spinfan4eva]

I think they mean that as long as the missile dont go near any airports or actually strike any populated areas, we will allow them to test but be prepared to intercept if there is going to be too many casualties/deaths. It would be an act of aggression on the US's part to intercept a missile intended to be only a test and I couldnt see the US doing this.

[Brent]

I think they mean that as long as the missile dont go near any airports or actually strike any populated areas, we will allow them to test but be prepared to intercept if there is going to be too many casualties/deaths. It would be an act of aggression on the US's part to intercept a missile intended to be only a test and I couldnt see the US doing this.

What if North Korea's missile is not a test though?

[spinfan4eva]

What if North Korea's missile is not a test though?

I'm guessing thats why we are ready to intercept, incase NK is lying about it being a test or if it is a test and the test malfunctions and is about to hit a major city. The interceptors will come in and destroy the missile. Maybe the US and North Korea are playing some type of war games and NK is testing a missile and the US is testing its interceptors.

[Regit]

Don't they realize that if they would ever target anyplace with population, they would be wiped off the face of the earth immediately? They can't be that dumb. If they strike anyone, it will be the last time.

They would be erased from the map if they fire this missile especially if they go ahead and load it with nuclear stuff.

By "this missle" I assume you mean the one they're planning on testing. They won't be wiped off the map. I highly doubt the US will even be able to shoot it down. There will be no physical retaliation. Also, it will NOT be loaded with a nuclear device. This is a TEST missle and could blow up on the launch pad. They're not idiots.

[mf_dolphin]

Actually emplaced and hardened artilley or only good for 20 miles or so. Not much good if you're invading. What we should all realize from the first Gulf war is that no army can be sustained on the modern battlefield without air cover. In other words while N Korea may have an impressive army on paper (read Saddam) his air force can't provide continued coverage. Once they were swept from the sky the army would be squashed like bugs.

As too the "too bad our armed forces are otherwise occupied" post just take a gander at the US Armed forces not occupied. I guarantee you there's a lot more not occupied than occupied. Keep in mind that to blunt a ground invasion of S Korea would reply primarily on an air campaign.

A missile of the type being disussed here would require large support systems so the short answer is no.

[Cookiely]

I think they mean that as long as the missile dont go near any airports or actually strike any populated areas, we will allow them to test but be prepared to intercept if there is going to be too many casualties/deaths. It would be an act of aggression on the US's part to intercept a missile intended to be only a test and I couldnt see the US doing this.

How can you trust a country who agreed not to test ICBM's and then is fueling one up to test it. He's either saber rattling or just psychotic as some people think he is. Any way you cut it, its a dangerous game.

[x-y-no]

Actually emplaced and hardened artilley or only good for 20 miles or so. Not much good if you're invading.

I think that range is a little low. The Koksan, for instance, (170mm on a T-54 chassis) has an official range over 50km. That easily puts Seoul within range even of fixed emplacements on the border. The range of some of their newer platforms isn't publicly available as far as I know. I'll agree they are unlikely to be longer than the Koksan.

While these artillery pieces are in underground emplacements, there's no assurance they would all stay there either. The bulk of them are self-propelled, so in an invasion presumably a significant part of them would advance across the border.

Also, they've got between 500 and 600 Scud missiles (which can easily reach any part of South Korea) and over 100 No-dongs with a range to hit Japan.

What we should all realize from the first Gulf war is that no army can be sustained on the modern battlefield without air cover. In other words while N Korea may have an impressive army on paper (read Saddam) his air force can't provide continued coverage. Once they were swept from the sky the army would be squashed like bugs.

Well, I did say I'm confident we could beat them in the long run. And by our standards, the NKs don't have much of an air force (one wing of Mig-29s, IIRC, a couple of wings of 23s and a couple of hundred ancient 21s and 19s) so no doubt we'd take air superiority pretty fast. But the terrain in central Korea is very different than that of southern Iraq - air superiority is certainly important but not nearly as much so as in the Gulf War example.

As too the "too bad our armed forces are otherwise occupied" post just take a gander at the US Armed forces not occupied. I guarantee you there's a lot more not occupied than occupied. Keep in mind that to blunt a ground invasion of S Korea would reply primarily on an air campaign.

The initial blunting of an invasion would certainly be primarily an air campaign. But actually repelling that invasion would take a large ground campaign to follow up. And the fact is, our ground combat capacity is stretched thin. I think we could do it, but I'll stick with my statement that it would make Iraq look like a Sunday picnic.

[mf_dolphin]

Actually the standard munition for the Koksan is 40km or 24 miles. You aslo have the difference between maximum range and effective range to consider. Their multiple launch rocket systems have a far greater range and would definitely pose a far greater destructive potential IMO. That is all really a moot point however since to be an effective offensive threat they would have to move from their "protected" positions. This would make them extremely vulnerable to air assests.

There's no doubt that a war on the Korean penninsula would be bloody but it's a war that N Korea has no hopes of winning. While they have a vast army for a country oftheir size they are woefully outdated. As an example their tanks are primarily knock-offs of the Russian T34/54/62 series. These are designs that range from 20-30 years old and with the T-34 even older.

Here's a link to good general information about their equipment and capabilities.

http://www.globalsecurity.org/military/ ... k/army.htm

[x-y-no]

Actually the standard munition for the Koksan is 40km or 24 miles.

OK, I stand corrected. I've got a lot of trivia in my head, but I can't swear all of it is 100% accurate.

You aslo have the difference between maximum range and effective range to consider. Their multiple launch rocket systems have a far greater range and would definitely pose a far greater destructive potential IMO. That is all really a moot point however since to be an effective offensive threat they would have to move from their "protected" positions. This would make them extremely vulnerable to air assests.

There's no doubt that a war on the Korean penninsula would be bloody but it's a war that N Korea has no hopes of winning. While they have a vast army for a country oftheir size they are woefully outdated. As an example their tanks are primarily knock-offs of the Russian T34/54/62 series. These are designs that range from 20-30 years old and with the T-34 even older.

Here's a link to good general information about their equipment and capabilities.

http://www.globalsecurity.org/military/ ... k/army.htm

I don't think we have any disagreement on what the ultimate outcome would be. And I imagine even Kim Jong-il understands this perfectly well, or we would have had a real conflict by now.

[mf_dolphin]

You're partially right as well. The Koksan is capable of firing rocket-assisted munitions with ranges up to 60km by estimates. The effectiveness at those ranges is an issue though. Having watched N Korea for decades now (read I'm an old fart) most of this is posturing on his part and is nothing really new. I've watched it go in cycles over and over again. He's a dangerous kook who would be institutionalized in almost every civilized country. For that reason alone he has to be watched....

[cycloneye]

U.S dismisses talks with North Korea



Above is the news of the rejection from the U.S for talks with North Korea about the missile test.

[cycloneye]

TOKYO (AP) -- Japan has dispatched ships and planes to monitor North Korea amid regional jitters about a possible long-range missile launch, but it played down the communist nation's capacity to load a nuclear warhead atop its rockets.

Fukushiro Nukaga, the head of Japan's Defense Agency, told a parliamentary committee that Japan had deployed naval ships and patrol planes to monitor developments in North Korea as the country apparently prepares to test a long-range missile believed capable of reaching the United States.


Japan is watching the movements that North Korea might make.

[Janice]

Well, I hope some of these countries are capable of stopping these missles if they are released. We need all the help we can get. Every country does.

[Tampa_God]

I forgot who said it, I think his last name is Leavy, said that if the US intercpts this missle, a war would break out.

I still think we should intercept, because if they even do start a war with us, they won't get nowhere. We have way better defense and their missiles just sucks. Also, we have many allies. Their onlt allies is Iran and probably Venezuela.

[GalvestonDuck]

By "this missle" I assume you mean the one they're planning on testing. They won't be wiped off the map. I highly doubt the US will even be able to shoot it down. There will be no physical retaliation. Also, it will NOT be loaded with a nuclear device. This is a TEST missle and could blow up on the launch pad. They're not idiots.

They're aiming our way. For that alone, I'd say they're idiots.