N. Korean threat activates shield U.S. cites a launch as 'provocative'

Drudgereport.com ^ | June 19,2006 | Drudge Report / Bill Gertz

[edpc]

The Pentagon activated its new U.S. ground-based interceptor missile defense system, Bill Gertz reports in Tuesday's WASHINGTON TIMES, just as officials announced that any long-range missile launch by North Korea would be considered a "provocative act."

Poor weather conditions above where the missile site was located by U.S. intelligence satellites indicates that an immediate launch is unlikely, said officials who spoke on the condition of anonymity.

However, intelligence officials said preparations have advanced to the point where a launch could take place within several days to a month.

Two Navy Aegis warships are patrolling near North Korea as part of the global missile defense and would be among the first sensors that would trigger the use of interceptors, the officials said yesterday.

Gertz reports: The U.S. missile defense system includes 11 long-range interceptor missiles, including nine deployed at Fort Greeley, Alaska, and two at Vandenberg Air Force Base, Calif. The system was switched from test to operational mode within the past two weeks, the officials said.

[Just Lori]

Colonel Hunt said on Fox today that if we shoot it down, it means war.

So what does it mean when THEY shoot it at US????

[Prophet in the wilderness]

How do we know that this is nothing but China using NK as a puppet to test the USA's resolve and capabilities ?
China could be using Kim Gone ILL to launch this missile and see how we react and or capabilities if the missile does come our way.

[singfreedom]

That is my fear. It is far more worrisome than just Kim Jong Mentally Il. That idiot truly is a potbellied, dog-eating, mongoloid frog--perfect descriptor!!

[garbageseeker]

My dissertation on a artillery attack on Seoul:

On average a artillery piece can fire five rounds, and maybe dozens more before being destroyed by an air strike or hiding shelters. They may have even tubes in protected areas. This means at least several thousand rounds can be detonated in the city before air strikes can destroy them. Seoul can be completely destroyed in a matter of a half an hour. If they use chemical weapons the death toll would be compounded. There will be little warning because an shell is traveling a half a kilometer a second.

Neutralizing these artillery pieces would be a top priority from U.S. aircraft in Guam and aircraft carriers.

[TexasPatriot8]

Oh I agree. And Iran wouldn't be too hard to topple either. And really, if Iran started anything before Iraq was stable and secured, I hope we'd go for a more defensive campaign against Iran, engaging them in the air and Persian Gulf with Air Force and Naval assets, not actually entering Iran with the Army or Marines, using them to continue to secure Iraq and improve the Iraqi military and police force. We could effectively destroy the bulk of the Iranian army and air force and their pitiful navy without entering Iran.

Our Air Force and Navy could eliminate most of that opposition, and when that's all over, we will have not jeopardized our position in Iraq, so the terrorists wouldn't be able to take advantage there, and we will have only used resources that were playing a minor role at most in Iraq, and in doing so we would have destroyed Iran's offensive military, most importantly, their air force and navy, and likely most of their tanks. If they had the audacity to roll into Iraq with them, they'd be dispatched quickly with the forces we have there, not to mention the eager pilots we have who love to rack up tank kills.

And in my way of thinking, once the majority of the Iranian peope, who are pro-western, aren't afraid of the military being turned against them after we've destroyed the balance of it, they may just over throw their oppressive radical regime government and we wouldn't have to do it for them. Maybe, maybe not, but still, the first part of my "scenario" is doable. :)

That document we found in that safe house was GOLD!

[Mad_Tom_Rackham]

One of the generals on Fox news said that if we knock it down, it would be an instant war...not sure I agree with him.

What are they going to do? Shoot another one at us? Sure, they could start bombarding Seoul. But we and the S.Koreans would open up a serious can of whupass on them.

[TexasPatriot8]

It's a big deal to me too obviously, don't know why you said it like that. The chances of that are pretty slim considering we have Anti missile systems set up there too. And he knows full well what would happen to him if that happened. Pyong Yang would be a memory within an hour if he did that, but I doubt any missile he launched would reach Seoul.

And I was speaking of conventional retaliation he would threaten. Conventionally, he couldn't do squat.

[Prophet in the wilderness]

Yup... China can say to the US, " Sure, go ahead, we don't care about NK anyway, half of them starving " and they will use it to glean any military information that they can from it if and when NK shoots off it's missile.
I think it's China's way of testing our resolve and capabilities.
NK is expendable to them anyway.

[usmcobra]

So what does it mean when THEY shoot it at US????

Easy, they screwed up.

[garbageseeker]

Big Time.

[LibertarianInExile]

I was speaking of conventional retaliation. It is well known that the DPRK has artillery ready to level Seoul proper. I should not have used "vaporize" as it implied Kim might nuke Seoul, when in fact he need do nothing of the nuclear variety to wreak havoc.

Unfortunately North Korea is far closer to a lot of Americans and American interests than you think, Tex--if our bases in Korea don't count to you, or the millions of Koreans and Japanese don't count, Guam is still American territory, with nearly 200,000 American citizens easily within medium range missile distance, or even range of a small boat carrying a nuke.

He can do damage, you bet. That doesn't factor into the equation, however. We should plan our defense not based upon what he could do if he hit us but upon preventing that from ever happening. And if Clinton had a pair, besides Halfbright and Hitlery, he'd have done that a long time ago and we wouldn't be in this mess.

[garbageseeker]

Excellent. I agree.

[garbageseeker]

Those "interests' are within Scud missile range. Those targets can be hit a boat.

[garbageseeker]

The Scud-D has a range of 700 kilometes

[WoofDog123]

actually a number of other countries would presumably be monitoring the test and would notice a failed interception. it would be major press and a notable embarrassment.

[garbageseeker]

The longest range missile currently deployed by North Korea is the No Dong missile, with an estimated range of 1,300 kilometers for a payload of about 700 kg. Such a range would allow North Korea to target all of Japan. North Korea is believed to have flight tested the No Dong only once-in May 1993. While Pakistan may have provided North Korea with information from the tests of its Ghauri missile, which is believed to consist largely or entirely of North Korean technology, and North Korea is believed to have used a modified No Dong as the first stage of the Taepo Dong 1 (TD-1) launched in 1998, North Korea nonetheless has limited information about the reliability and accuracy of the missile. The No Dong uses a larger, more powerful engine than the Scud missile. This engine, which is believed to have been developed with foreign assistance, is believed to be used in the longer range missiles North Korea is developing.

[TexasPatriot8]

Ummm, I do know how many Americans are in Seoul, and how important it's interests are, my best friend was stationed there in the AF for a couple years when he was a Captain years ago. And all those people are important but ALL people are important.

Obviously the South Koreans and Japanese count, and if North Korea executed a first strike obviously there would be casualties, that's just how war is. But the outcome is certain, and Kim Jong-Il is like most dictators, most concerned with his continued rule. Executing a first strike against us would guarantee the end of his rule of North Korea, if not the end of his life. And firing on South Korea or Japan would be no different than if he fired on Hawaii or California. It would be the end of him.

I'm quite well aware of the situation in the region, father served there, friends served there, and have studied the region, wrote a hypothetical scenario about war in Korea in the late 20th century years ago and did a lot of research for that. So thanks, but I do know a thing or two about the region, it's people, economic and industrial importance, and the numbers of American military personnel and civilians there, as well as it's proximity to Japan and American territories. But even if he unloaded a heavy conventional first strike, it would not result in tens of thousands of casualties, and most of that artillery would not be around long enough for a second massive wave of attacks.

And unlike the Muslim islamo-fascists, the North Koreans have no such illusions about virgins or some great afterlife like the Muslims do. And on top of that, the South Koreans are mean MFers and would retaliate on their own against the North Koreans with extreme prejudice. The VC and NVA would go miles out of their way to avoid South Korean troops in Vietnam when they were there. After the South Koreans captured some VC and stripped the skin off of them, and tortured them horribly over the course of hours, releasing a couple to tell their friends, the VC and NVA went out of their way to avoid engaging the South Koreans from about '68 on. The ruthlessness of the South Koreans is almost unprecedented. That certainly can't be overlooked. We should hire them as mercs and send them to Iraq. They could end the terrorist presence there much quicker than we can because they don't give a fuzzy rip about the Geneva Convention, which the VC and the islamo fascists don't obey either anyway.

In any case, please try to not talk to me like I'm stupid and ignorant of the Korean Peninsula, okay? It's kinda patronizing. :) Thanks.

[TexasPatriot8]

Oh, and above, I said that if we hadn't wasted six years with these ridiculous multi-lateral "talks" and negotiations, this wouldn't be happening. This all proves that Bush is right and the only way to stop rogue terrorist nations like this from getting nukes and holding the world hostage with them is to strike first, destroying their nuclear weapons programs before they are producing completed weapons, like in Iraq. I don't care what anyone says. Iraq had chem and bio and nuke weapons programs before we went in in 2003, and it's illogical to suggest otherwise. If we'd of given North Korea an ultimatum about it's nuclear weapons program three years ago, this "test" wouldn't be happening.

You don't negotiate with the neighborhood bully, you knock the snot out of him and make him so scared of you that he NEVER wants to cross you again. That's one of the things that's wrong with America today. Many in America are more interrested in being liked than being feared. I'd rather be feared. To quote one of my heros. "Better to be feared than to be respected".

[garbageseeker]

But even if he unloaded a heavy conventional first strike, it would not result in tens of thousands of casualties, and most of that artillery would not be around long enough for a second massive wave of attacks

We know that there are 10,000 artillery pieces in the DMZ region and about 500 pointed at Seoul, would it be very difficult to get them all especially when they are camouflaged? What about those which are armed whith chemical and bological shells?

[garbageseeker]

But even if he unloaded a heavy conventional first strike, it would not result in tens of thousands of casualties, and most of that artillery would not be around long enough for a second massive wave of attacks

We know that there are 10,000 artillery pieces in the DMZ region and about 500 pointed at Seoul, would it be very difficult to get them all especially when they are camouflaged? What about those which are armed whith chemical and bological shells?