North Korea Will Nuke American Cities if Provoked

Korea Web Weekly ^ | 5.3.03

[Enemy Of The State]

North Korea Will Nuke American Cities if Provoked

---

Korea WebWeekly (May 03, 2003) -- Dr. Kim Myong Chul, Japanese-borne expert on North Korea's military has stated in the past that North Korea has more than 100 nukes, including hydrogen bombs.  In a series of statements recently, Dr. Kim asserts that the nukes will strike American cities if the Bush administration imposes economic sanctions or other hostile moves against North Korea.

In sharp contrast with his past practices, Dr. Kim states that he is speaking for North Korea: he is relaying North Korea's official message to the Bush administration.  During the last meeting of North Korean and American officials in Beijing, the North Korea's chief delegate told his American counterpart that North Korea had at least one nuke.  The US CIA estimates that North 'may have one or two crude nuclear devices.'  

Dr. Kim states that the nukes were built in the 1980's before North Korea signed the Agreed Framework in 1994. It is likely that the US CIA knew about North Korea's nuclear capability but decided to cover it up with its persistent "North Korea may have 1-2 crude devices."  It should be recalled that the US CIA failed to predict the Korean War of 1950 and also the intervention of Chinese forces.  The failure was due to not any lack of intelligence but incorrect analysis of the mountain of intelligence.  

Dr. Kim stated that North Korea's technical capacity of delivering nuclear weapons on missiles was proven by Pakistan's nuclear tests and missile test-fires.  Pakistan claims that it has developed its nukes and missiles on its own.  The bottom-line is that neither North nor Pakistan has violated any international agreements.

US Secretary of Defense Rumsfeld believes North Korea does not have the capability to strike American cities and North Korea is bluffing.  Dr. Kim believes that North Korea will demonstrate its capacity to strike America: it may conduct a series of nuclear explosions and test-fire an ICBM over the US homeland.  The US CIA claims that North Korea's ICBM, Taepodong II, failed in its maiden test and that North Korea's ICBM test site was destroyed in a failed engine test. Recently, the warhead of North Korea's 'failed' ICBM was discovered in Alaska. 

The US hawks led by Rumsfeld believe that Kim Jong Il and Saddam Hussein are cut from the same cloth and that Kim will go the way of Saddam.  It should be noted that when the chips were down, Saddam's 'supporters' deserted his sinking ship and few Iraqis opted to die for him.  The fact of the matter is that the great majority of Saddam's supporters were opportunists and sycophants out to make a fast buck using Saddam's name.  Rumsfeld is convinced that few of Kim's supporters will die for him and that shake Kim's regime a little and he will be gone.

Dr. Kim asserts that Kim Jong Il is no Saddam and that North Korea's military and people will fight to the end and die for Kim; and that unlike Iraq, North Korea does have the military capability and the will to inflict fatal blows not only to the US bases in Japan, Okinawa, and Guam, but also the US homeland.   According to Dr. Kim, North Korea will demonstrate its military capability to hit the US homeland in the very near future.  

[GrandMoM]

California!? New Mexico?! Nevada!? Oregon!? Washington State!? No loss there. Those states might as well be know as the "Socialist State of..."....you know, you insult a lot of good Republicans here on Free Republic with remarks like that.

[Jim Noble]

Could they do blue zone cities?

[Calvinist_Dark_Lord]

US Secretary of Defense Rumsfeld believes North Korea does not have the capability to strike American cities and North Korea is bluffing. Dr. Kim believes that North Korea will demonstrate its capacity to strike America: it may conduct a series of nuclear explosions and test-fire an ICBM over the US homeland. The US CIA claims that North Korea's ICBM, Taepodong II, failed in its maiden test and that North Korea's ICBM test site was destroyed in a failed engine test. Recently, the warhead of North Korea's 'failed' ICBM was discovered in Alaska.

i have a little problem believing that the DPRK launched anything. NORAD would have spotted such a launch and massive retaliation would have been the result. If NORAD couldn't spot the launch of an ICBM, then we are in far worse trouble than we suspect.

i suspect that we have found one of our old test launches in Alaska.

[Paul Ross]

We do have two cruisers that can do the job right now, and another 53 which can be retrofitted up to their level on the cheap. But we should probably deploy another twenty or so for coverage in depth and need to spend about $20 billion more or less right away to get going on this.

[Paul Ross]

Sounds like wishful thinking on your part!

Home
	USS Lake Erie CG-70 Steely-Eyed Missileers	Back

Navy Seabased Midcourse Defense (SMD) USS LAKE ERIE is pioneering Ballistic Missile Defense for the United States Navy Her mission is demonstrate the operational capability of Ballistic Missile Defense (BMD) from the sea. It is challenge of historic proportion and one upon which the defense of America and her Allies depend on for survival in an ever threatening security environment. With the proliferation of Ballistic Missiles on a global scale, this new mission area is extremely important. This is a synopsis of the capabilities that the LAKE ERIE will test in the upcoming months.

[harpseal]

Think of the fury with a million or more dead Americans and a city destroyed. The retribution would be horrendous to see,

[johnb838]

NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO! If we develop a missile defense it will provoke the enemy to attack us before its ready. We must sit down with them and TALK about it.

[stimpyone]

Awful quick to accept kim myung chul's word for it, aren't you?

Would you rather we wait for a demonstration of their nuclear capabilities? Heck, we went into Iraq on less evidence of WMD than we've got in N. Korea.

[Paul Ross]

Too late. We already have a good missile defense concept with the Aegis design, we just need to get it deployed in sufficient numbers and...in proximity to the obvious danger zones such as North Korea SOON ENOUGH to shut down this blackmail... Then Kim Il-Sung can talk til he is blue in the face to the Chinese....who don't have a missile defense. (Unless Clinton let them steal those designs too).

[CJ Wolf]

You forget who was in office then and what happened after that test.

[Calvinist_Dark_Lord]

Sounds like wishful thinking on your part!

No, wishful thinking is posting a bunch of graphics that take forever to load, about a system that has never been battle tested and has only worked in a Tom Clancy novel.

That's supereme wishful thinking

BTW, got any more pretty pictures to post?

[Constitutional Patriot]

This is such a bunch of nonsense. These communists can only terrorize their cousins in the south. This is just another example of corrupt and criminal nature of communist regimes. No wonder the international left coddle them so much. Look how they fuss over Castro. If he had any nukes he would be screaming the same nonsense (except he would be a pile of ashes shortly thereafter).

[cynicom]

Hitler was not willing to have Germany ruined from the opening bell. He lived in fear that the French and British would do something. Germany would not in any way have been ruined, not in those days.

This madman is mad before the opening bell, knowing that with todays weapons, that North Korea would be a nuclear wasteland.

The world may be "civilized", but that means nothing. Evil madmen are born every day.

[Paul Ross]

Sorry about the picture load, being used to DSL and Broadband tends to make one take these things for granted....

But as to whether a thing has been 'battle tested' I might remind that a LOT of systems were never battle tested before having to be used but came through with flying colors. The F-14, the F-15, the F-16, the A-10, the M1-A1 and the Bradley. The Hummer. JSTARS. AWACS. The Prowler, the TOW, etc. The list goes on.

And we have TOTALLY DEPENDED for national strategic deterrence on systems such as the Minuteman III, The Peacekeeper, and the Trident D-4/D-5 missles WHICH HAVE NEVER been 'battle tested'. And thank God they haven't been.

But deterrence has shown weaknesses depending on the enemies assessment of our national strength of will to actually do anything in response to their aggressions. Hence 3-4 decades of proxy war, transforming into terrorism of the last decade currently. And with the most artless practitioners basically calling our 'bluff' that we either can or will stop them from blackmailing us and our allies (after having Clinton spending 8 years telling them they could get away with said blackmail). We need to make it clear that we are indeed possessed of the resolve to do whatever it takes. The deployment of the Aegis sea based missile defense is both a real defense...and a message. WE WILL PREVAIL. WHATEVER IT TAKES. SO DON'T MESS WITH US.

A picture of the USS Lake Erie berthed at Vancouver

[Post Toasties]

I have doubts that a mouthpiece for NK could be trusted to tell the whole truth, particularly wrt the part about NK supposedly developing nukes in the '80's. That said, I see nothing wrong with the US preemptively destroying NK's ballistic missile & nuclear capabilities, as long as it's comprehensive and quick.

[Paul Ross]

If all things were as simple as that, we likely would. And I am all in favor of that. But what if, say, there was a secret Russian defense pact with North Korea that obligates them to retaliate in kind with THEIR arsenal of strategic weapons? We need to talk to the NK allies and sound out their responses in private so as todetermine just what those would likely be in case we move to pre-empt.

[duk]

Expoloding a nuke via ICBM is difficult, but loading a missle with spent fuel rods or other highly radioactive material and high explosives is easy. Think of it as a long range permanant mine field. You don't need to be accurate with the missle, just on land, the weather will do the rest.

It doesn't matter if KIM has a warhead or even 100. He does have the means to deliver a warhead (nuke, HE, dirty nuke) and those missles work! He needs to be dealt with, so the real question is how do we bring about a confrontation with NK so it will be in our tactical and strategic advantage?

Will we squeeze NK like a vice or will we deal quickly like a hammer blow? I think the next 60 days of diplomacy will tell how action against NK will go. By the way diplomacy is going and the fact the UN is not dealing with NK's treaty breaking, I think we will take a hammer to NK.

[Calvinist_Dark_Lord]

But as to whether a thing has been 'battle tested' I might remind that a LOT of systems were never battle tested before having to be used but came through with flying colors. The F-14, the F-15, the F-16, the A-10, the M1-A1 and the Bradley. The Hummer. JSTARS. AWACS. The Prowler, the TOW, etc. The list goes on.

i might remind you in turn that all of these systems had severe problems which were corrected in subsequent production runs. In particular, the 105mm cannon on the Abrams was far too small for it's use. The Abrams was also supposed to be designed with a turbine engine that proved to be far too difficult to maintain. The Abrams gets 12gal/mile, and needs a part replaced every 50 miles on average. It's real advantage is in it's fire control system, and the fact that there is no portable anti tank weapon effecive against it's armor.

The first flight Bradley was called (rightly so) a flaming coffin by such men as Lt.Gen Henry "Gunfighter" Emerson (it cost Emerson his career, but he was vindicated when the Bradley was redesigned due to the difficulties he mentioned).

It is also inaccurate to say that many of these these systems were not battle tested. The Israelies were responsible for a great many of those battle tests. In many cases they came up with modifications that we adapted, particularly with the F-16.

Getting back to my area of concern though, did NORAD spot the launch? If not, why not? Why didn't the US respond? After all, we would have had no way to know if it was a test or a strike. When was this supposed launch? Why did it take so long to find the "warhead".

The whole Alaskan missle find story smells funny. Why did the story come from CIA and not DoD? Has there been any comment from DoD? In light of recent CIA blunders concerning WMD in Iraq in any substantial amount (some traces of chemical weapons have been found but no weapons), how reliable is this information?

While i do believe that Kim Jong Ill has nukes, i question how many, and whether he has adequate means of delivery. It would probably be in the nation's best interest to load some nuke warheads on some Tomahawk cruise missles aboard a couple of Ohio Class subs just in case we need to take out some command and control facilities.

[mathurine]

Would you prefer North Korea well, medium or rare. We would be remiss if we didn't mention that it is hard to do it medium or rare, and if we overcook, there is no other meat available.

[spookycc]

And thank you Ronald Reagan and George W. Bush who allowed North Korea to build plutonium extraction capabilities, and produce nuclear weapons, as well as long range missile technology, while ignoring IAEA demands for open inspections of nuclear facilities.

IIRC, didn't the Clinton administration *pay* NK in economic aid, etc., in, oh, say 1994, on the condition that they NOT proliferate their weapons? They want more money.

I have this feeling they're not gonna get more money.