Posted on 03/16/2023 11:01:40 AM PDT by jacknhoo
In recent days it has been reported in the Chosun Ilbo (one of South Korea’s most widely read daily newspapers) that if North Korea launches an ICBM into the “Pacific region,” the United States will “immediately” intercept it. This report was quickly responded to by Kim Jong-un’s sister, Kim Yo-jong, who warned of a “swift and overwhelming” military response to any action taken by the United States. It is unclear if the reporting in the Chosun Ilbo was a misquote or even a mistranslation. Such a comment has never been made in the past by a senior American official.
The reporting in the Chosun Ilbo was based on an unconfirmed comment allegedly made by the U.S. Indo-Pacific Commander to the Korean Consul-General in Honolulu and is based on unnamed military sources. The U.S. Department of Defense has not commented on this reporting.
Of course, the recent rhetoric leads one to ask, why would the North Koreans launch an ICBM into the “Pacific region?” The North Koreans have launched several ICBM platforms on an extremely high trajectory (almost straight up) since 2017. If these angles were to be laid out to the actual trajectory of a missile launched at the United States, the Hwasong-14 likely has the range to hit the west coast of the U.S., while the Hwasong-15 has the range to hit all of the continental U.S. Though the Hwasong-17 has reportedly been tested recently, its reliability remains in question.
So why break from this testing modus operandi that has been in effect since at least 2017? Because the debate within the United States and its allies in East Asia continues about whether or not a North Korean ICBM “can really hit” the United States simply based on the extreme trajectory the missiles have been tested on, and perhaps as importantly, “can it really” re-enter the earth’s atmosphere successfully with a live nuclear payload.
There is only one way to definitively prove this. To launch an ICBM carrying a nuclear payload into an empty spot somewhere in the Pacific Ocean. To date, the North Korean leadership has not felt the need to definitively prove this capability to the world. The ongoing debate, however, may have compelled Kim Jong-un to feel he now must show the world that he can launch a nuclear weapon at the United States if the need arises. In addition, if North Korea were to conduct such a test, it would be a “double-whammy,” detonating yet another nuclear weapon while also testing an ICBM at its “full-range” capability.
If the North Koreans were to conduct such a test and fire an ICBM with a nuclear payload into some empty spot in the Pacific Ocean, what would the risk be to American sovereign territory? Well, the answer is, no risk unless the ICBM was to be on a trajectory that would take it over Guam. Thus, though there have been no comments on the statement allegedly made by the Indo-Pacific Commander, if he did in fact make the remarks he may have been referring to a circumstance where the North Korean missile was actually overflying Guam in the Marianas Islands.
While North Korea’s missile launches can be considered provocative they have not been a threat to any nations in the Asia-Pacifric thus far. One wonders if the United States would even want to shoot at a missile that did not pose a threat, and that calls the reported remarks (if they were made) into question.
If the United States did in fact make the decision to shoot down an ICBM that was overflying U.S. sovereign territory, until very recent times, this was something that was seen as an unlikely reaction – because ballistic missile defense capabilities may not have been able to successfully achieve the mission.
There is a Terminal High Altitude Area Defense (THAAD) unit stationed on Guam and the system is well known for being able to bring down MRBM or IRBM systems – but has not been definitively or successfully tested on intercepting ICBM systems and thus would likely be ineffective against these systems if one or more of them was overflying America’s territory in the Marianas Islands.
Fortunately for the United States, on its Aegis-equipped ships, it has the SM-3 Block II-A system. This system successfully brought down (intercepted) an ICBM target on November 16, 2020, and thus could be deployed to wherever it needed to go if the United States made the decision to intercept a North Korean ICBM.
While it appears unlikely the United States would shoot down a North Korean ICBM headed toward an empty spot in the ocean – unless it looked to be on a trajectory that took it over American territory (and even then it is unclear what Washington’s reaction would be because there have been no official statements addressing this recently) – it is clear that the Americans (certainly in theory) have the capability to shoot down the ICBM if called into action while the North Koreans (certainly in theory) have the capability to put a nuclear warhead on a missile and launch it into an empty area in the Pacific Ocean.
Since the North Koreans have never fired an ICBM with a nuclear payload into the ocean, and the Americans have never intercepted a North Korean ballistic missile, we are looking at unprecedented events if either one of these things were to occur.
What are the events that are likely to occur if North Korea does in fact launch an ICBM with a nuclear payload? We can expect sanctions with real teeth will occur. There will also likely be other initiatives put in place to put pressure on and contain North Korea’s WMD programs.
If the United States were to decide to intercept a North Korean missile (and if the attempt was to be successful), tensions would of course increase, but Pyongyang would be forced to think twice before launching further “full-range” tests. If the attempts to bring down the North Korean missile were to prove unsuccessful, a call for further funding and development of BMD is likely to go out.
This would be legitimate because the threat from North Korea continues to grow in numbers and modernity.
Russia has 312 ICBMs with 1,032 warheads ready to launch and 112 SIBMs with 400 warheads ready to launch. And that was back in 2012.
That’s not “tiny tactical nukes.” And, they’re of course well maintained, just like ours are.
Sniffer will shoot his toe off.
The NORKS can always get the required info from the Biden cartel plus a 10% service charge for the big guy.
To which I replied "I respectfully disagree", which I meant by the way of disagreeing but with an attitude that I'm on a forum with a fellow FReeper who usually sees things like I do.
I then pointed out that the basis of your statement was a study that was limited to only ground-based interceptors. An unrealistic limitation when trying to answer the question of if we can knock out an ICBM from NK (again, the context of the article). What next, they say, "Yeah, but can we do it with only a slingshot? If not then it's all crap."
I then pointed to recent tests of knocking out an ICBM from a sea based platform, including hitting the ICBM near apogee (impressive if you keep up with missile defense R&D like tech geeks born and raised a couple of hours from Huntsville, AL where much of this is designed). There was a time when I thought hitting it at apogee was impossible (typed in my best MIT dean voice from the 1980's when it seemed like every egg head at MIT went around saying not to do SDI, because "you can't hit a bullet with a bullet" LOL). This successful test basically is against ICBM's more advanced than what NK has (again, context of the article is about NK).
So could we intercept a test launch from NK? Yes if we have an interceptor capable boat in the area, and possible yes if we have an interceptor launched from an area their missile flew over (i.e. if flying over Japan).
Can we stop the split warheads the Russians made lately? Nope, not all of them. Nor can we stop the supersonic ones China has that can fly barely over sea level (basically our ships are defenseless against those right now). Nor could we stop all of the conventional ones Russia has if they launched all of them at us at once. For Russia and China our primary missile defense is still MAD.
But we can stop what NK has. And we can stop most incoming tactical nukes (small scale) even from Russia if directed at a military position that has interceptors. I don't know if they're equally as capable at stopping ours.
IMHO what we have is not only impressive work done by the Huntsville geeks, but also effective defenses against all but the full assaults from Russia and China. IMHO, that means our missile defense program isn't wasted money, it brings us real valuable defense that shouldn't be so casually discarded.
Will Joe Biden Shoot It Down?
NO Biden thinks ICBM means In Coming Big Money.
Shoot it down? With what? The Dems and faux-Republicans over the last several decades have prevented us from having any kind of ABM system that could actually protect us...and have also made any kind of national shelter system impossible with their arrogance and condescending ridicule of the concept. They’ve left us completely unprepared to face a purposeful EMP attack or a solar storm like the Carrington Event that would destroy our civilization and kill hundreds of millions.
Imagine if the Norks put a nuclear warhead on the missile and detonated in in some very remote part of the south Pacific. Even if we had the shoot down capacity, old Joe wouldn’t be awake from his nap to make the decision.
No US missile defense system is proven capable against ‘realistic’ ICBM threats.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
Nothing to worry about because no capable missile defense system is needed against ICBM threats, realistic or otherwise!
Of course if there was an actual missile ATTACK, then it would be a different matter!
Look how long it took to make a decision on a slow-moving balloon. With this administration, nothing is getting shot down before they gauge the sentiment on social media and their focus groups.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
IMHO there can be no better reason than that to get every damn Democrat and RINO out of D.C., and re-elect President Trump for the third consecutive time!
“N. Korea has yet to prove a guidance system or a re-entry system.”
You are a hard man to convince. I didn’t try to prove they are using the targeting capacity, just that they had it. Did you read past this in the article I quoted:
“After failed satellite launches in 1992, 1995, and 1996, China has reported 28 consecutive, successful commercial and government/military space launches.”
This was right after Loral, Hughes, Boeing, and Clinton handed the re-entry system to China where it bounced past them to N. Korea.
Korea has not fired a single missile with intent to attack a country...yet. But with the proven success of the test firings, and the missiles they are using, the largest, the Hwasong series 12, 14, 15, and 17, it is admitted by the US, to include Japan, that the 17 has the range to hit New York. The 12, Guam.
I also spent a good bit of time in the business between active military (DP) retirement, NAF, and DOD with my last few years in a job being a 35L researcher in terrorist weapons and tactics. (Over 38 years) North Korea has all the tools now with knockoff Russian missiles they have built and successfully tested, and the MRV. But to say they can’t because they haven’t had an excuse to or are willing to take the gamble at this point, is denying it is possible for the wrong reason.
The Germans invented the plans for the atom bomb. But we used it. Does that mean they didn’t have it? Same theory.
wy69
“Given to them by the 1990s version of Julius Rosenberg.”
Funny thing is, to show people just how far we’ve advanced, the fine handed to Clinton for his part in the passing, he and Hilly got themselves a begging like site on the internet to cover his fine which was equivalent to Loral and Hughes. He’s a scab isn’t he.
wy69
Biden probably has his shotgun ready ... no doubt he will use 00 buckshot.
What a shame. I'm sad.
I say he would have it shot at after it overshot the whole country.
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.