PDA

View Full Version : North Korea might launch missiles @ Hawaii jul. 4th


Darth Avlectus
06-19-2009, 11:42 PM
http://www.cnn.com/2009/US/06/18/korea.gates/index.html
http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,527020,00.html

Figuring we talked about the sabre rattling going on (or more like Radio Edit -PG-13 Forum -mimmartin :( ) in the thread about Iran, I figured this was off topic to Iran. So here we go.

Generally speaking, we know Kim Jong Il is about to keck. Going a bit war whacky, he's beting his chest. Unfortunately, they do supposedly have long range missile capability, if as-yet-untested. He proposes to make fireworks out of Hawaii on our (America's) independence day, Jul. 4th.

I'm kinda 50/50 on this. Bloodthirsty? Maybe. I just think China isn't quite friends wityh the US. But whatever. Point here: Given the explanations on probabilities of N. Korea actually following through by some of you, this may be just as likely an agitation. Not to say we should ignore it--quite the opposite. My contention, somewhat, that the one that'll get us is either
1) that which we do not see coming
2) the nutcase under pressure we just couldn't "talk" out of it.

It is a scary prospect. I say we'll see what goes down. Many think it is merely a blunder, but we all know the possibilities for disaster are there.

Thoughts?

Allronix
06-20-2009, 01:27 AM
http://www.cnn.com/2009/US/06/18/korea.gates/index.html
http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,527020,00.html

Figuring we talked about the sabre rattling going on (or more like EDIT ) in the thread about Iran, I figured this was off topic to Iran. So here we go.

Generally speaking, we know Kim Jong Il is about to keck. Going a bit war whacky, he's beting his chest. Unfortunately, they do supposedly have long range missile capability, if as-yet-untested. He proposes to make fireworks out of Hawaii on our (America's) independence day, Jul. 4th.

I'm kinda 50/50 on this. Bloodthirsty? Maybe. I just think China isn't quite friends wityh the US. But whatever. Point here: Given the explanations on probabilities of N. Korea actually following through by some of you, this may be just as likely an agitation. Not to say we should ignore it--quite the opposite. My contention, somewhat, that the one that'll get us is either
1) that which we do not see coming
2) the nutcase under pressure we just couldn't "talk" out of it.

It is a scary prospect. I say we'll see what goes down. Many think it is merely a blunder, but we all know the possibilities for disaster are there.

Thoughts?

The sad part is that the scenario could end up like this:

1. The nutter of N. Korea sends a bomb to Hawaii. Maybe we intercept, maybe a lot of innocent folks die.

2. We answer back in the form of the Pacific fleet and Trident subs.

3. A lot of innocents in N. Korea die while that SOB is sipping soju in his undisclosed location.

4. China gets ticked off that we kicked their poorly-trained mutt, and decides to cancel on all the loans.

5. US goes bankrupt from 20+ years of Reganomics.

CommanderQ
06-20-2009, 01:54 AM
This is indeed a scary prospect....something North Korea would definately do right now, at least because we are searching their ships. War may not be too far away...

But I'm thinking that if they launch, our missile defenses will just take the nuke out long before the thing gets close to Hawaii, our tech is that good:D

But anyways, if they did that, it would inevitably make everyone, and I mean everyone, possibly even the Chinese and the Russians, will jump on N. Korea for their actions. They're not exactly in a winning situation in my opinion.

But the future has yet to come. We'll see.

urluckyday
06-20-2009, 03:22 AM
While I do think that China would be peeved if we retaliated against N. Korea...they're not stupid people and would have to realize that it wasn't unprovoked. In those stories...both Russia and China urged them to return to talks...which is important to note b/c it proves that even Korea's "allies" don't want any major problems...

While we owe China a lot of money...our economies are very intertwined and if one fails...they both fail...it's a simple concept...we owe them money...they need us around to owe them money...

The eyes of the world are on N. Korea...but for all of the wrong reasons. I hope it does not come to retaliation...but it would be necessary for the US (and its allies) to do so if it came to it...I think it's time every country takes a good look and realizes that the US has always been there backing them up and never asking anything in return and considering the same...the UN needs to realize it can't be effective without the US's help and that they need to support them.

Something still troubles me...I was under the impression that N. Korea hasn't launched a successful missile yet...especially long-range ones...

Too bad they just don't learn...

Web Rider
06-20-2009, 03:21 PM
Something still troubles me...I was under the impression that N. Korea hasn't launched a successful missile yet...especially long-range ones...

This is what I was wondering as well. I seem to recall that most missile tests N Korea has done recently have been failures, with their missiles breaking up before their desired distance.

Det. Bart Lasiter
06-20-2009, 03:39 PM
also note that the desired distance you mentioned would fall short of hawaii anyway iirc

CommanderQ
06-20-2009, 03:47 PM
Never mind, I change what I say earlier. The North Koreans will launch a nuke at Hawaii.

And it won't make it halfway.

If we didn't shoot it out of the sky by then....I feel that North Korea is bluffing in their threat....but then again, we wouldn't want to assume that they are not dangerous. Even if they can't hit American soil, they can take the lives of South Koreans, Japanese, any of their enemies in the Asiatic area.

Web Rider
06-20-2009, 04:06 PM
Never mind, I change what I say earlier. The North Koreans will launch a nuke at Hawaii.

And it won't make it halfway. If we didn't shoot it out of the sky by then....I feel that North Korea is bluffing in their threat....but then again, we wouldn't want to assume that they are not dangerous. Even if they can't hit American soil, they can take the lives of South Koreans, Japanese, any of their enemies in the Asiatic area.

Assuming those missiles aren't intercepted or failures as well.

CommanderQ
06-20-2009, 04:18 PM
^True, there is that possibility. But still, America's missiles are known to be more technologically advanced, and probably more reliable then North Korea's pocket nukes. Let's just hope that there won't be a need to use Nuclear weapons. But sadly, it just seems that we're going down the war path, with North Korea shouting threats and tensions rising within the UN, if there is a war, I have a feeling it won't be a quick one. The world is just setting itself up for something really destructive...

urluckyday
06-20-2009, 04:28 PM
^That's a given fact. America was the first to master nuclear weapons and it still maintains that...while I'm not necessarily proud of that fact...it is something that N. Korea has to view...

N. Korea is a new contender on the grounds of nuclear warfare...

CommanderQ
06-20-2009, 04:46 PM
Indeed, N. Korea is very new to the 'Nuclear Club,' so to say. It would be wise for them to break their isolation and try to make allies, so as to prevent a Nuclear War, but Kim Jong Il is undoubtedly a madman, as we see it right now. It has been said many times already that to have nuclear weapons in the hands of a dictator who's mental state hasn't even been confirmed to us yet, is a pretty big crisis, should it come to war.

America has been the only country to use Nukes in war. We only used them twice, the Japanese death toll was catastrophic. The Second World War ended because of that.

Let's hope that we should never have to do that again.

purple_tentacle_
06-20-2009, 04:47 PM
Scary...Real Scary. Another thing is that there is a possibility that we go to war with Korea and start another world war maby even resulting in a large world wide nuclear war.

mur'phon
06-20-2009, 04:57 PM
Since NK lacks a lot of the neccesary tech to carry out that threat (lack of a delivery system being just one), I'm not terribly worried. As for Kim being a madman...
Tell me, what exactly has he lost by acting the way he does, and then tell me what he has gained. He might be one of the biggest disasters to befal NK, but he certainly isn't insane.

@CommanderQ, nukes don't really need to be "advanced" at all, as long as they can strike close to where you point them. And the only kit needed to awoid missile defence is the ability of nukes to drop decoys (which are very low tech). Missile defence, as far as I know has only been tested on missiles without decoys where they knew exactly where they where going, and even then they often missed.

jawathehutt
06-20-2009, 05:04 PM
What are they going to do, javelin it at us? And its not going to be a suprise attack so its not like there will be a shortage of missile defenses sitting around the area ready to atomize any decoy or real nuke

CommanderQ
06-20-2009, 05:08 PM
@Mur'phon, True. With Nukes, it's hard to miss the target....if it can reach the target, that is the key-point here, N. Korea has yet to bring their nuclear weapons up-to-date, there's no garuntee that if they launch, that it won't jsut plop into the middle of the Pacific Ocean long before it's even within range to cause any sort of damage. {Also, concerning the decoys, they are rather low in tech, very correct, missile defenses can still hit their target. Let's just hope they do should worse come to worse:D}

Perhaps you're right though, this could just be more sabre-rattling, but we shouldn't underestimate how far they are willing to go. Any threat of a nuclear strike should be treated with the utmost care. Even if they lack the necessary tech, we shouldn't assume what will happen. We must be on our gaurd.

JediAthos
06-20-2009, 06:11 PM
Personally, for all his talk, I don't thing Kim Jong Il has the intestinal fortitude to directly attack the United States. That would an overt act of war and no one, not even China, would be able to say a word to America when we blew North Korea back to the stone age.

Arcesious
06-20-2009, 06:28 PM
I'm not saying that the US is invulnerable, but if North Korea plans to launch an ICMB, it would get shot down pretty easily. That is, unless Kim Jong IL gets his hands on Russian missile tech or something equivilant... For example: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/RS-24

mur'phon
06-20-2009, 06:59 PM
but we shouldn't underestimate how far they are willing to go.

Willing to go to achieve what? So far Kim has been willing to go very far indeed to to pry things from the rest of the world, but he has yet to do anything AFAIK that is against the rulers's interests.


Missile defence: Nuclear missile goes into space, launches dozens of decoys (simple baloons for instance) as well as a warhead, since this is space, they will move about equally fast, look just about alike, and this is only a single missile. This is just an example of the simplest decoy, and even it is hard to guard against.
Furthermore, would you mind showing any sources that the missile defence actually work? Because all the test I have seen have shown that it's unreliable even against a single missile without decoys, and theese are missile launched by the U.S itself, and as such it didn't exactly come as a surprise.

@Arc: No worries, Russia is even less in favor of spreading nuclear weapons than the US.

@China: China is nice to NK only because it shares a border, should NK collapse, China will get refugee hell, and since nuclear hell is worse, China might well join the bombing if NK launch a nuke.

I think it's time every country takes a good look and realizes that the US has always been there backing them up and never asking anything in return and considering the same...

Huh? Last I checked the US was like every other country, doing what it thinks is in its own (or its government's) interest. Would be interesting if you could back that up.

the UN needs to realize it can't be effective without the US's help and that they need to support them.

The UN is a collection of countries acting in their own self interest (yes, this includes the US), if the US wants the countries on its side, it'll have to make it in said countries interest to do so. To expect anything else is naive.

CommanderQ
06-20-2009, 08:24 PM
Willing to go to achieve what? So far Kim has been willing to go very far indeed to to pry things from the rest of the world, but he has yet to do anything AFAIK that is against the rulers's interests.


Missile defence: Nuclear missile goes into space, launches dozens of decoys (simple baloons for instance) as well as a warhead, since this is space, they will move about equally fast, look just about alike, and this is only a single missile. This is just an example of the simplest decoy, and even it is hard to guard against.
Furthermore, would you mind showing any sources that the missile defence actually work? Because all the test I have seen have shown that it's unreliable even against a single missile without decoys, and theese are missile launched by the U.S itself, and as such it didn't exactly come as a surprise.



What are they trying to achieve you ask? We can't possibly know. Kim Jong Il successfully isolated his country, he achieved that. But on his other reasons, I'm not sure anyone has a girm hold on that. Does he just want to make sure the media doesn't forget him? Could he be trying to maintain his hold as Supreme Leader, thus threatening the US and South Korea with nuclear war? Or perhaps reach his friends in the Middle East? Does he just want to wipe out his dreaded enemies? We don't know. His recent Nuclear tests got America's attention, and when the US moved to check all out-going ships and he threatened Nuclear War, he got the UN's attention.

He obviously wants something, other then seeing his face in the news. One doesn't step up nuclear research and not have a good reason for it. We'll all figure out what his true objective is eventually, perhaps very soon. That is a disturbing thought.

http://www.defenselink.mil/news/newsarticle.aspx?id=15967

That is one link I found concerning missile defense. There were a few others, but I chose this one. Now I understand that you may not completely believe anything the US says concerning these type of tests, but you asked for a link, and I believe this one may help. 7 out of..I believe 8 tests were successful. This may differ in a real combat situation, but NK's pocket nukes would probably be at about the same difficulty without decoys.

Now, I thought about what you said about decoys, and did a little research on the lower-tech light decoys{which NK would use if they launched a missile}. You were correct that even these light decoys could throw off even the most advanced of missiles. This doesn't render the missile defense unreliable, as I did read on one test that used a single decoy{a very small test} and the dummy missile was destroyed, evading the decoy.

Still, this may be just a matter of luck. It's all up in the air I suppose...{forgive the pun:D}

urluckyday
06-20-2009, 10:06 PM
^He's insane and he's actually thinks that nuclear weapons are the best way to bargain...

Arcesious
06-20-2009, 11:00 PM
If the nuke idea doesn't work, he can also make threats with chemical weapons.

Rake
06-20-2009, 11:24 PM
I agree with murph, Kim most likely isn't insane. I mean the man has successfully stayed in power a long time.

And it's not that hard to figure out why any nation would want nuclear weapons: as a shield. As soon as a nation gets nukes, it essentially becomes immune to land invasions. Especially for a small country like North Korea that has many enemies, and could easily be defeated in a ground war, it's smart for them to develop nukes ASAP.

TriggerGod
06-20-2009, 11:30 PM
If the nuke idea doesn't work, he can also make threats with chemical weapons.

yeah, thats an acceptable substitute. Instead of having the bodies of our Hawaiians decimated, we can have them fall ill to an artificial illness that they made specifically to kill their enemies.

Kim just wants his country to be recognized world wide as a world power, one that can make the US army and the British navy quake in their boots at the mention of their name. I doubt he'll actually be stupid enough to fire it off.

But we'll have to look for places where Kim can get a good seat of the fireworks if he actually does fire them off. He'll want to savor the moment.

CommanderQ
06-21-2009, 12:28 AM
I agree with murph, Kim most likely isn't insane. I mean the man has successfully stayed in power a long time.



Well, I imagine he uses the famous Communist tactic of killing off or sending any opposition to the Labor Camps. Can't really have much competition if everyone against you is either dead or broken. I mean, that's the way Stalin handled his problems, he was in power for awhile. Then there would be the way Kim Jong Il practically brainwashes his people. Constant rallies, indoctrination, reeducation, oh, and everyone wakes up to the Glorious sound of marching music. That could help his rule a bit...

urluckyday
06-21-2009, 01:27 AM
I agree with murph, Kim most likely isn't insane. I mean the man has successfully stayed in power a long time.

While I don't mean to be contradictory...but don't you think that Hitler was insane? And while Kim Jong Il isn't following some crazy plan to destroy a race (that we know of), he has followed many of the same patterns that we've seen in Hitler, Saddam, Idi Amin, etc. by failing to understand - after several years of sanctions and international shunning - how the world really works...
You'd have to be crazy or just so caught up on your own pride to continue what he has done...

Darth Avlectus
06-21-2009, 03:25 AM
Interjection: Kim Jong Il's mental state...I can't say since I am no psych expert. But to my experience, instability is what to watch for sane or not.

If he's backed into a corner he may lash out like a ferocious animal. However, that is not the case.

Also there is a difference between crazy and insane. One still has conscious awareness, the other does not and cannot (rationally anyway) connect consequence to its actions.
"If I know I'm going crazy........I MUST NOT BE INSANE"
--Dave Mustaine, Megadeth song Mary Jane

As to craziness, there is smart and stupid. I think it involves taking risks and weight of outcomes plus certain measures of delicacy either way.

Still, I cannot speak as to KJI's stability or rationality.

Supposing NK actually got the delivery capabilities, where would they have gotten it? From whom? While I'm not sure that is the case...mmm, best be safe than sorry I suppose.

@ mimartin: ehh, for lack of better term let's endeavor to say fluff'dup like a turkey--deal?

Jae Onasi
06-21-2009, 12:24 PM
Also there is a difference between crazy and insane. One still has conscious awareness, the other does not and cannot (rationally anyway) connect consequence to its actions.
"If I know I'm going crazy........I MUST NOT BE INSANE"
--Dave Mustaine, Megadeth song Mary Jane
Neither 'crazy' nor 'insane' are the appropriate medical terms. If one is psychotic, they don't process reality the same, whether they're conscious of it or not. We don't give psychotics knives, guns, or assorted other tools that can be used on themselves or others, because they're not going to use those things in a rational manner, and they represent an extreme danger to themselves and anyone in contact with them. We should be likewise very concerned about any WMDs in the hands of someone who is psychotic.

As to craziness, there is smart and stupid. I think it involves taking risks and weight of outcomes plus certain measures of delicacy either way.I'm not sure what your driving at with your point here. I'm not a mental health expert, so I can't definitively diagnose Jong Il, but his behavior is certainly indicative of someone whose sanity is in question. A lot of psychotics are extremely smart, but they still do dumb things because the disease doesn't allow them to process information correctly.

@ mimartin: ehh, for lack of better term let's endeavor to say fluff'dup like a turkey--deal?As long as you keep the language clean, I don't care what euphemism you choose to use. ;)

Totenkopf
06-21-2009, 07:45 PM
..... I can't definitively diagnose Jong Il, but his behavior is certainly indicative of someone whose sanity is in question. A lot of psychotics are extremely smart, but they still do dumb things because the disease doesn't allow them to process information correctly.

But is he? He's learned as far back as the 90s that he can manipulate the US and gloabal "community" to gain concessions. His father held an American naval crew for ~13 months...an arguable act of war...back in the 60s. The one thing many of these tyrants learn is how far they can push the envelope before anyone responds. I think "crazy like a fox" is probably the term of choice here. He knows that the PRC is a kind of trump card, so as long as they don't come down on him, he has a pretty free hand to cause trouble.

CommanderQ
06-21-2009, 09:35 PM
This reminds me of a term from the movie "Speed."

"Remember, he's crazy, not stupid..."

urluckyday
06-21-2009, 11:09 PM
^I think that sums up what I'm saying...

Edit: Forgot to say it - excellent post Commander.

Sabretooth
06-22-2009, 01:02 AM
"Remember, he's crazy, not stupid..."

I couldn't have predicted at any time in the past that one day I'll agree 100% with a line from that movie, but there you have it.

Darth Avlectus
06-22-2009, 01:28 AM
Neither 'crazy' nor 'insane' are the appropriate medical terms. If one is psychotic, they don't process reality the same, whether they're conscious of it or not. We don't give psychotics knives, guns, or assorted other tools that can be used on themselves or others, because they're not going to use those things in a rational manner, and they represent an extreme danger to themselves and anyone in contact with them. We should be likewise very concerned about any WMDs in the hands of someone who is psychotic.
No argument there.

I'm not sure what your driving at with your point here.
Generally smart crazy vs stupid crazy: neither are rational (granted), but smarter ones takes survey of things if rather intensely, stupid ones are simply noisemakers.

Recognizing risk taking and recognizing outcomes/consequences ultimately stemming from actions taken. Relative mental disquiet within the individual. He has shown penchant for behaving the way he has in past to get what he wants. Perhaps it's a power trip. He's crazy, but a smart crazy. Still smart enough to recognize he'll end up badly if he "goes there". It is a question of how willing he is to just do it. Not as likely if there is insurmountable evidence he'd be crushed like a bug under a heel. Which there is.

So while he is war-whacky, I guess I'm on about this because it would seem like another manipulation. Maybe not the most stellar or effective, but manipulaiton nonetheless. He still seems to recognize outcome. I see more manipulation than likelihood. If I'm wrong, I'll admit it. Until then: "We'll see".

However, if it makes you feel any better, I'd say this is hardly reason to take it easy. You're a martial artist, so you know obliviousness and letting down your guard is the most foolish thing you can do even when you believe they won't act.

I'm not a mental health expert, so I can't definitively diagnose Jong Il, but his behavior is certainly indicative of someone whose sanity is in question. A lot of psychotics are extremely smart, but they still do dumb things because the disease doesn't allow them to process information correctly.

I'm basically in agreement with you on this. Where I beg to differ is the degree to which it is the case here with KJI. To me it appears he's rattling his cage to get what he wants. He still processes that much. He's trying to make you afraid of him that way to get what he wants.

As long as you keep the language clean, I don't care what euphemism you choose to use. ;) I'll PM you--you'll get a laugh, sorta. :smirk2:

But is he? He's learned as far back as the 90s that he can manipulate the US and gloabal "community" to gain concessions. His father held an American naval crew for ~13 months...an arguable act of war...back in the 60s. The one thing many of these tyrants learn is how far they can push the envelope before anyone responds.

That's the criminal mindset. Once they learn,
1) you are afraid, they will keep picking at you and pushing the envelope.
2) that you are not afraid of them, they rethink it. Probably will try again, but if they feel every time they do that they will come off the worse for it if they follow through...well, they don't act.

I think "crazy like a fox" is probably the term of choice here. He knows that the PRC is a kind of trump card, so as long as they don't come down on him, he has a pretty free hand to cause trouble.

Exactly.

mur'phon
06-24-2009, 06:09 PM
@Kyp::thmbup1:

@CQ: Kims motives: 1: getting a nuke makes him immunity: invasions. 2:grabing resources, cash or whatever carrot is offered. 3:setting the stage for Kim V 3.0. 4: the positive effect on his popularity by showing the world the middle finger.
That's 4 just from the top of my head.

That is one link I found concerning missile defense. There were a few others, but I chose this one. Now I understand that you may not completely believe anything the US says concerning these type of tests, but you asked for a link, and I believe this one may help. 7 out of..I believe 8 tests were successful. This may differ in a real combat situation, but NK's pocket nukes would probably be at about the same difficulty without decoys.

Since I doubt anyone else have much info from th tests... I'll take what I can get. One difference from NK's nukes is that if one of those is launched, it'll be out of the blue, not in a test where everyone is prepared and know where it'll land. Also, I still dislike that they insist on destroying on impact, sure, it looks better but it's like tying one hand behind your back. And of course it's the issue of the tests (afaik) being against single missiles without decoys.

This doesn't render the missile defense unreliable, as I did read on one test that used a single decoy{a very small test} and the dummy missile was destroyed, evading the decoy.

Problem is, baloons don't exactly take up much space, or weight much, so it'll be much more than one decoy pr missile.
Not that this matter much, NK don't have ICBM's

Originally psted by ULD
^He's insane and he's actually thinks that nuclear weapons are the best way to bargain...

Insane: doing the same thing over and over and expecting different results. With NK so far having bargained successfully using nukes, I'd say he expects the same result.

While I don't mean to be contradictory...but don't you think that Hitler was insane?

Without a definition of "insane" I find it hard to answer this.

And while Kim Jong Il isn't following some crazy plan to destroy a race (that we know of), he has followed many of the same patterns that we've seen in Hitler, Saddam, Idi Amin, etc. by failing to understand - after several years of sanctions and international shunning - how the world really works...

If he doesen't know how the world "really works", then why have he been constantly benefitting from his "tantrums"? I'd say if he don't know how the world works, then we better fire just about every guy who have dealt with him.

Q
06-26-2009, 10:08 PM
I'm with mur'phon on the notion that shooting down a ballistic missile, or, more importantly, the warhead(s), is no mean feat. It would be far more preferable (and make a lot more sense) to shoot it down during the ascent and coast stages of its flight when it's all in one piece, than to try to shoot down it's warheads (and decoys) after they've deployed.

I think that all of this confidence in the present missile defense system is completely unfounded.

mimartin
06-26-2009, 10:13 PM
I think that all of this confidence in the present missile defense system is completely unfounded.
I could not agree more with anything written on this forum.

urluckyday
06-26-2009, 11:11 PM
While I agree that there's no definite way you can stop a missile...I do believe that the US has the best ability out of any country in the world to fend off an attack...just my honest opinion.

JediAthos
06-26-2009, 11:48 PM
The Patriot missile has proven effective in combat at intercepting missiles and I imagine that is what would most likely be employed by the US in Hawaii.

Some US Navy ships also carry the Rolling Airframe Missile and the Sea Sparrow missile both of which are anti-missile defense as well as the CIWS(close in weapon system) which is a high velocity mini-gun used for close in missile defense.

urluckyday
06-27-2009, 12:06 AM
^Yeah. While the Patriot missile has been criticized in the recent decade, I still believe that it is the most advanced missile defense system on the planet...

CommanderQ
06-27-2009, 12:41 AM
^^I agree. The Patriot Missile must be one of the best out there. But still, we can't entirely rely on it to solve our problems in a nuclear crisis, almost anything can happen at this point. Our country needs to be prepared in more then just defence, speak softly and carry a big stick. Perhaps we can reach an agreement, but I doubt that, as Kim Jong Il doesn't look like the negotiating type...

Q
06-27-2009, 02:44 AM
Patriot was designed more than 25 years ago to intercept aircraft and SRBMs traveling at little more than mach 3 at the most. It was not, repeat, not designed to intercept MIRVs reentering the atmosphere at mach 8.

Big, big difference, folks.

True_Avery
06-27-2009, 05:10 AM
Patriot was designed more than 25 years ago to intercept aircraft and SRBMs traveling at little more than mach 3 at the most. It was not, repeat, not designed to intercept MIRVs reentering the atmosphere at mach 8.

Big, big difference, folks.
Quoted for emphases.

http://i40.tinypic.com/bk8wn.png

It would be a statistical miracle to stop any of those incoming warheads. Our "missile defense" is designed to stop the missile from ever getting that high to deploy, as once they are let go they will be traveling too fast and in too much of a random fall to stop.

The Patriot would be used, if given the time, to shoot down the missile before leaving the atmosphere. There is not a chance in hell of it hitting a warhead as it falls, as Qliv said, at speeds upward of mach 8.

Considering these can be shot up and easily make it to another continent, the chances of intercepting an unexpected launch are laughable at best. A missile net at Hawaii means nothing if this type of missile is fired, as it can only truly be stopped on its way up, which would be far, far from Hawaii.

Technologically superiority means nothing if your target is smaller than a car and traveling at 5280 mph, over 7 times the speed of sound. You'd be lucky to see them re-entering at the speed they would hit.

It is the existence of these in multiple countries, however, that guarantees your survival. Not a missile net around Hawaii. If anything (and this is under the asumption that Kim isn't completely insane) be glad he has one as this is, in a strange twist of irony, one more country aiding world peace.

JediAthos
06-27-2009, 05:07 PM
I found this breakdown of NK's missile capabilities or at least known missile capabilities: http://www.atomicarchive.com/Reports/Northkorea/Missiles.shtml

Pretty interesting stuff actually.

Nedak
06-27-2009, 06:07 PM
Patriot was designed more than 25 years ago to intercept aircraft and SRBMs traveling at little more than mach 3 at the most. It was not, repeat, not designed to intercept MIRVs reentering the atmosphere at mach 8.

Big, big difference, folks.

I'm fairly certain our technology has been updated since 25 years ago.

There is so much we don't know about as far as our military is concerned.

JediAthos
06-27-2009, 06:11 PM
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Patriot_missile

The article talks about the evolution of the missile system and planned upgrades as well as the basics.

True_Avery
06-27-2009, 09:53 PM
I'm fairly certain our technology has been updated since 25 years ago.

There is so much we don't know about as far as our military is concerned.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Anti-ballistic_missile

We do have anti-ballistic missiles. Most have been shelves, the current being the updated Patriot Missile, the SM-3, and the Arrow.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/MIM-104_Patriot
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/RIM-161_Standard_missile_SM-3
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Arrow_missile

These are all fairly untested and underfunded, however:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/THAAD

THAAD is currently being worked on to destroy incoming ballistics. Problem is, these missiles, programs, and so on are designed to take out single ballistics. Their main weakness is that there is only a limited amount that can be fired, and they are some of the most expensive missiles ever built.

The MIRVs launch multiple war-heads, so the problem still stands of multiple ballistics coming down at Mach 8. Not only would you have to know what was coming, but you'd have to have ships/missile defence ready in a minute or so it would take for them to hit the ground.

This is, in my opinion, unrealistic. Anti-ballistic missiles and so on are great when you know what is coming, but a surprise MIRV would be almost guaranteed a hit.

Its just countries blowing more hot air at each other. Realistically, it wouldn't be that hard to nuke a country into dust. Just don't expect to be standing when the dust clears, however.

JediAthos
06-28-2009, 08:47 AM
I think you're probably right Avery, North Korea is simply trying to do what it has done in the past which is threaten the rest of the world to get what they want. I don't think they would intentionally start a war with the U.S. and I would like to think, as I said before, that President Obama is smart enough not to initiate a war.

JediAthos
06-29-2009, 11:20 AM
VANDENBERG AIR FORCE BASE, Calif. The Air Force says it has successfully launched an unarmed Minuteman 3 intercontinental ballistic missile from a California base, firing it to targets in the Pacific Ocean.

Lt. Raymond Geoffroy (JEFF-rey) said the ICBM was launched from Vandenberg Air Force Base at 3:01 a.m. Monday.

He said it carried three unarmed re-entry vehicles that hit their targets near the Kwajalein Atoll in the Marshall Islands, some 4,200 miles away.

On clear mornings, missile launchings from Vandenberg can be seen as far away as Los Angeles, 140 miles to the southeast, but fog along the coast made Monday's launch difficult to see even in the immediate area, Geoffroy said.

The Air Force said the launch was an operational test to check the weapon system's reliability and accuracy.

Test data will be used by United States Strategic Command planners and Department of Energy laboratories.

-From the AP via Yahoo! News


Anyone else think this might not be just a test? Perhaps a message to our buddy Kim in North Korea? "Hey guess what, we can do it too" Maybe?

CommanderQ
06-29-2009, 11:32 AM
^^Hmm, that is indeed interesting, but I think we're just practicing, though a demonstration of our power would definately be a product of this. This is probably just-in-case the worse should happen practice run, so rest assured, if we are attacked, then North Korea has 'awakened a sleeping giant." Hopefully, Kim Jong Il is paying attention...

JediAthos
06-29-2009, 11:46 AM
Yeah...I was thinking we'd be more likely to use our submarine launched missiles in response to any attack. We could get them closer, and wouldn't be shocked if they aren't already in the area.

CommanderQ
06-29-2009, 12:11 PM
Well, I should hope they are, it would enable us to strike faster, and not wait for the NK to land the first blow. But if they were in use, we wouldn't know about them until a form of war started.

JediAthos
06-29-2009, 12:16 PM
That is very true...the movements of SSBN's are a closely guarded secret...and few know where they at any given time since they don't surface hardly at all once they're deployed.

Lord of Hunger
06-29-2009, 01:41 PM
One thing I'm wondering...would we retaliate with nukes ourselves? I'm thinking that since Obama is incharge, no. We can already wipe N. Korea off the face of the Earth without nukes, and not using nukes against Kim Jong Mentally Ill when he has would actually gain the US far more sympathy than 9/11 did. Plus, it'd be the least amount of casualties: just target military facilities with precision smart bombs only.

Either way, N. Korea is toast and they know it. The question is this: who is really in charge and what is the mental health of Kim Jong Ill? If it's Kim and he's truly crazy, this scenario may occur if they have the tech. If it's the military having a Myanmar style junta secretly, they're just going to keep screeching at us to give them aid or be destroyed by weapons that might not work.

CommanderQ
06-29-2009, 01:55 PM
^^Kim Jong Mentally Ill? Clever:D

Well, we've been asking the question of his anity many...many times so far. But the thing is, NK is so isolated and allows so little information out to the public, we may not know what Kim Jong Il's mental health until...either when it's too late, or when he's dead. I know of no sources that speak of his sanity, yet.

Also, concerning the idea of using smart bombs. We could do that, we already have an Airbase there, and 28,000 troops. This may be a good alternative to nukes, because it would prevent the utter destruction of thousands, possibly millions, of innocent{though maybe brainwashed} civilians.

Arcesious
06-29-2009, 01:56 PM
Plus, it'd be the least amount of casualties: just target military facilities with precision smart bombs only.


Don't be so sure. Military personnel aren't the only ones who go inside military bases. There are bound to be numerous civilian scientists and engineers too.

JediAthos
06-29-2009, 03:59 PM
Still Military targets would cause the least amount of civillian casualties, and using precision strikes from Tomahawk cruise missiles launched from either ships or submarines would be an even better alternative to smart bombs as those require using bombers or attack aircraft. I would imagine the smart bombs would come after cruise missile strikes or strikes from Predator drones or some other type of UAV as has been done before in Iraq and Afghanistan.

Totenkopf
06-29-2009, 04:01 PM
That's why he said "least" and not "none" or "no civilian". A precision strike on military targets would naturally have casualties, both military and possible civilian. But preferable to area bombing near civilian population centers..

urluckyday
06-29-2009, 05:31 PM
Anyone else think this might not be just a test? Perhaps a message to our buddy Kim in North Korea? "Hey guess what, we can do it too" Maybe?

I really don't think that the US has anything to prove to anyone or anybody...I think the entire world knows what we're capable of...

Web Rider
06-29-2009, 05:49 PM
I really don't think that the US has anything to prove to anyone or anybody...I think the entire world knows what we're capable of...

Honestly, I think a lot of people don't. They see our half-hearted efforts to "play nice" with civilians and wage a war at the same time as us being evil and abusing our power. I think if we really flexed our muscle, with the kinds of weaponry people are talking about here, it would put everything we've done over the last decade in a whole new light ala: "Wow, they were barely trying."

JediAthos
06-29-2009, 06:06 PM
Honestly, I think a lot of people don't. They see our half-hearted efforts to "play nice" with civilians and wage a war at the same time as us being evil and abusing our power. I think if we really flexed our muscle, with the kinds of weaponry people are talking about here, it would put everything we've done over the last decade in a whole new light ala: "Wow, they were barely trying."

I couldn't agree more Web...considering a single carrier battle group has enough fire power to reduce a small country to dust.

Web Rider
07-04-2009, 01:58 AM
Well, it's July 4th almost, and we're all still alive, so, things are looking up!

Arcesious
07-04-2009, 10:19 AM
Everything seems okay to me.

This happened though:

http://www.cnn.com/2009/WORLD/asiapcf/07/04/nkorea.missiles/index.html

http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,530004,00.html

urluckyday
07-04-2009, 11:58 AM
^They were displaying the peak of their military might by launching all of their missiles at once! ;)

CommanderQ
07-04-2009, 12:24 PM
^^Yeah, it'd be funny if those missiles were all they had....heehee...doubtful, but I'm sure it would've shown their 'might.'

Well, it doesn't look like any nukes are flying towards Hawaii. We still have a lot of the day to go, and I'm not entirely sure it's July 4th yet for NK, but it looks to me that Kim Jong Il was bluffing.

Darth Avlectus
07-04-2009, 08:34 PM
I also believe we didn't search the boats suspected to contain nuclear components.

TriggerGod
07-05-2009, 12:12 PM
well, last time I checked, Hawaii hasn't become a nuclear wasteland, so they were just beating their chest.

For now...

JediAthos
07-05-2009, 05:03 PM
I also believe we didn't search the boats suspected to contain nuclear components.

Under the UN Resolution we didn't have authority to use military force to search the ship. The most we could do would be ask for permission to search it and if permission was refused then the ship would have to be searched by the country where it pulled into port, and it would not be able to refuel etc...

Not only did we not ask for permission, but the ship turned around and went back the way it came without ever pulling in to another port.

urluckyday
07-05-2009, 06:32 PM
^The ship made the right choice...

True_Avery
07-05-2009, 08:10 PM
I also believe we didn't search the boats suspected to contain nuclear components.
And risk a declaration of war?

Totenkopf
07-05-2009, 10:05 PM
Or maybe just to call their bluff. I seriously doubt KJI would break the 50+ yr old ceasefire unless he figures the rest of the NKs have no right to exist when he's dead.

Web Rider
07-05-2009, 11:10 PM
Or maybe just to call their bluff. I seriously doubt KJI would break the 50+ yr old ceasefire unless he figures the rest of the NKs have no right to exist when he's dead.

Yeah but the last thing the US needs is to get blamed for starting another war. It's one thing to let NK fire the first shot, but I really don't think it'd good for anyone if the US does.

Darth Avlectus
07-06-2009, 04:26 AM
And risk a declaration of war?
That's one way of looking at it, I suppose.
Under the UN Resolution we didn't have authority to use military force to search the ship. The most we could do would be ask for permission to search it and if permission was refused then the ship would have to be searched by the country where it pulled into port, and it would not be able to refuel etc...

Not only did we not ask for permission, but the ship turned around and went back the way it came without ever pulling in to another port.
An about-face before the mission even really got underway.
^The ship made the right choice...
QFT

Totenkopf
07-06-2009, 05:15 PM
Yeah but the last thing the US needs is to get blamed for starting another war. It's one thing to let NK fire the first shot, but I really don't think it'd good for anyone if the US does.


There's always more than one way to do a great many things. Black ops is one obvious option. "Piracy" is another. As long as there is culpable deniability.......

Darth_Yuthura
07-06-2009, 05:51 PM
We do have anti-ballistic missiles. Most have been shelves, the current being the updated Patriot Missile, the SM-3, and the Arrow.

This is, in my opinion, unrealistic. Anti-ballistic missiles and so on are great when you know what is coming, but a surprise MIRV would be almost guaranteed a hit.

Its just countries blowing more hot air at each other. Realistically, it wouldn't be that hard to nuke a country into dust. Just don't expect to be standing when the dust clears, however.

Anti-ballistic missile systems serve a different purpose than what they were really designed for. The US has been outputting weapons of mass destruction even when there were more than enough to cause global winter. Why bother at that point? It was that they were built with the hope that they would never be used. If the US could claim that it has an effective anti-ballistic missile system, even if it doesn't, it could serve to ease the minds of US citizens that we are not at risk from Korea nukes.

urluckyday
07-06-2009, 06:47 PM
There's always more than one way to do a great many things. Black ops is one obvious option. "Piracy" is another. As long as there is culpable deniability.......

I feel a Tom Clancy book/video game coming on.

Web Rider
07-06-2009, 09:14 PM
There's always more than one way to do a great many things. Black ops is one obvious option. "Piracy" is another. As long as there is culpable deniability.......

Uh huh, because people never find out we toppled said country that way.

urluckyday
07-06-2009, 09:32 PM
^You don't have to really topple a country that way...you just take out the leader and then put a new pro-american leader in power...

Totenkopf
07-06-2009, 09:50 PM
Uh huh, because people never find out we toppled said country that way.

Never said take over NK, so you're jumping the gun. I'm merely talking about intercepting ships indirectly. Hence black ops/piracy, where no ID is on any of the operators undertaking the mission.

urluckyday
07-06-2009, 11:14 PM
^But where's the fun in that? I say take out Kim Jong Il in some covert op thing...man I really wish splinter cell was real.

Web Rider
07-07-2009, 01:58 AM
Never said take over NK, so you're jumping the gun. I'm merely talking about intercepting ships indirectly. Hence black ops/piracy, where no ID is on any of the operators undertaking the mission.

I think our proximity would be a little too suspicious. News says: "US ship lets NK ship pass." Everyone would go "uh, why?" then the NKoreans complain about their ship being searched by guys in ski-masks and everyone will turn to America and go "I see what you did there."

Totenkopf
07-07-2009, 02:46 AM
Location, location. Depends on where the ship is intercepted. Also, if ship were to mysteriously disappear enroute from NK to destination, people can suspect what they want. Proving it is something else altogether. The other side is inevitably going to cry foul no matter what. Take Iran as an example. Khamenie has already accused the west of interfering in Iran's internal affairs (which is pretty cheeky given what they are doing in Lebanon and elsewhere).

Sabretooth
07-07-2009, 08:37 AM
^But where's the fun in that? I say take out Kim Jong Il in some covert op thing...man I really wish splinter cell was real.
Exactly what hit my mind. I commend you for your similarity to my genius, sir. :thmbup1:

JediAthos
07-07-2009, 08:46 AM
I dunno...the last few times the United States has tried to kill less than desirable world leaders things have gone badly...see Castro...and Saddam Hussein (at least he got his in the end.)

ForeverNight
07-07-2009, 09:59 AM
Well, it doesn't help that since the Ford Administration -I'm pretty sure it was- according to Executive Order no member of the US Government may take part in the assassination of any political leader around the world.

Kinda sucks, doesn't it?

Especially because I'm pretty sure that would include anybody the US (Or, rather, CIA/NSA/ONI/et cetera) would hire for the job.

As for Castro, I'm pretty sure that that assassination was called off by JFK before it could be launched... I may be wrong, but I'm pretty sure that it was canceled.

I don't know about Saddam though... I'll have to look into that.

JediAthos
07-07-2009, 11:20 AM
I found this from CNN.com on Castro, but couldn't find anything concrete on Saddam other than an article from USA today (http://www.usatoday.com/news/world/iraq/2003-03-18-us-forces-usat_x.htm) from 2003 saying the U.S. Special Forces were hunting Saddam.


(CNN) -- Before disappearing from public life in 2006 and officially stepping down as Cuba's president Tuesday, Fidel Castro ruled the country with an iron fist, despite numerous attempts by his enemies to do away with him.

The CIA-directed April 1961 invasion of Cuba at the Bay of Pigs was just the tip of the iceberg when it came to U.S. government efforts to rid Cuba of Castro.

They began with his rise to power in 1959 and continued through the mid-1960s.

In many cases, those efforts were accompanied by assassination plots, ranging from the ridiculous to the sublime. Some were serious, others were not.

Obviously, none succeeded.

Most Americans did not learn of these efforts until 1975, when Sen. Frank Church of Idaho conducted hearings on Alleged Assassination Plots Involving Foreign Leaders.

Greater detail became available in 1993 with the declassification of the Report on Plots to Assassinate Fidel Castro, a report ordered by President Johnson. It was prepared in 1967 by the CIA's inspector general and made available to the Church Committee but not declassified until 36 years later.

The Church Committee concluded there were "at least eight plots involving the CIA to assassinate Castro from 1960 to 1965." Some, however, never got beyond the talking stage, as indicated by the CIA inspector general's report.

They included, before August 1960, plots aimed only at discrediting Castro.

Aerosol attack on radio station Discussion was held on a scheme to contaminate the air of the radio station in Havana where Castro broadcast his speeches with a chemical that produces reactions similar to LSD. Nothing came of the idea.

Contaminated cigars A vague scheme involving a box of cigars treated with a chemical intended to produce temporary personality disorientation or, perhaps, cause his beard to fall out. The source was the late Jake Esterline, the CIA's project director for what became the Bay of Pigs. While vague on his recollections about the intended effect of the cigars, Esterline said he was positive they were not lethal.

Depilatory A scheme involving thallium salt, a chemical used by women as a depilatory, placed in his shoes. The idea was to cause Castro's beard to fall out, thus damaging his image.

Gambling syndicate -- Phase I (August 1960 - May 1961) A complicated assassination plot initiated by Richard Bissell, involving Mafia figures Sam Giancani, Santos Trafficante and Johnny Rosselli, who had contacts remaining in Havana from pre-Castro days. It was timed to coincide with the Bay of Pigs invasion, although Bissell, head of CIA covert operations at the time, never bothered to tell either Esterline, the Bay of Pigs project director, nor Marine Col. Jack Hawkins, the project's paramilitary officer. Poison pills were to be delivered to Havana and delivered to a contact inside a restaurant frequented by Castro. No one knows if the pills ever got to Havana. It was called off after the Bay of Pigs.

Gambling syndicate -- Phase II (Late 1961 - June 1963) The same plot involving Mafia figures and poison pills was reactivated in early 1962 as part of the period of Operation Mongoose, the post-Bay of Pigs program to unseat Castro. The pills were given to Tony Varona, a prominent Cuban exile, through Johnny Rosselli, another Mafia figure. Varona then asked for arms and ammunition as well, which were passed to him by the Miami CIA station. The inspector general's report indicates uncertainty as to whether the pills ever made it to Cuba.

Schemes in early 1963

Skin-diving suit This plot was hatched at the time New York Attorney James Donovan was negotiating with Castro for the release of the Bay of Pigs prisoners. It called for Donovan to present Castro with a skin-diving suit dusted inside with a fungus that would produce a disabling and chronic skin disease and contaminating the breathing apparatus with the bacterium that causes tuberculosis. The skin-diving suit already had been bought but was abandoned when it was learned Donovan already had given Castro a skin-diving suit on his own initiative.
advertisement

Booby-trapped seashell The idea was to take an unusually spectacular seashell that would catch Castro's attention, load it with an explosive triggered to blow when the seashell was lifted, and submerge it in an area Castro was known to frequent for skin-diving. The plan progressed so far that Desmond Fitzgerald, then head of the CIA's Cuban operations, bought two books on Caribbean mollusks. It was later decided the scheme was impracticable for a variety of reasons, among them that a midget submarine to have been used in placing the seashell had too short an operating range.

Project Amlash-Rolando Cubela Cubela, whose code name was Amlash, was a member of Castro's inner circle from the beginning. He had become disenchanted and made contact with the CIA as early as 1961. Nestor Sanchez, his CIA case officer, was meeting with Cubela in Paris when President Kennedy was killed in Dallas, Texas, November 22, 1963. Sanchez provided Cubela that day -- at Cubela's request -- a poison pen-syringe to be used either on Castro or on himself, in case of a failed attempt. Nothing happened. As CIA covert operations against Castro began winding down, the Agency put Cubela in touch with Manuel Artime, the exiled chief of a 300-member, CIA-funded exile guerrilla army operating for Central America. The joint Artime-Cubela plan was for Cubela to assassinate Castro when he gave his annual July 26, 1965, speech at Varadero, a beach resort on Cuba's north coast. The assassination would coincide with a seaborne invasion by Artime's forces with the presumed support of several Cuban army officers in the area. The operation was canceled in late June 1965 after it became compromised

urluckyday
07-07-2009, 05:25 PM
I dunno...the last few times the United States has tried to kill less than desirable world leaders things have gone badly...see Castro...and Saddam Hussein (at least he got his in the end.)

Saddam ended the way the US wanted...as for castro...the US merely "equipped" (I use that word very lightly) several revolutionaries to take out Castro...it'd be very different if US troops/agents had actually attempted to take him out.

Totenkopf
07-07-2009, 06:16 PM
Well, if the Bay of Pigs fiasco had instead been a direct US military intervention before the Russians had a chance to get into Cuba, I agree. Especailly since we didn't yet have the adversarial press corp we have today. Besides, we could have told the USSR that Cuba was w/in our sphere of influence---like eastern europe was in theirs--and that they needed to stay the hell out or risk WW3. We were still much more powerful than them in the 1950s/60s.