North Korea about to launch ICBM test and/or space satellite

[signerror]

http://www.nytimes.com/2009/04/04/world/asia/04korea.html

Neighboring governments were on heightened alert on Friday, and had navy ships with missile-tracking radar deployed in waters near North Korea. For its part, the North reportedly moved jet fighters closer to the launching site and threatened counter-attack if any government tried to stop it.

“It’s too early to say for sure whether the object the North is launching is a satellite or a missile,” said Lee Jong-joo, a government spokeswoman in Seoul. “But our principled position is that whether this is a missile or something else, it threatens peace and stability on the Korean Peninsula.”

The countdown could begin as early as Saturday morning, and North Korea says its rocket will blast off sometime between then and Wednesday. It warned aircraft to stay clear of its easterly trajectory over northern Japan, toward the Pacific.

 

[rootX]

I was thinking what's preventing them to attack North Korea. Longer they wait, harder it gets to attack NK IMO.

 

[Woody101]

Since the only place in the U.S. that this missle could reach is Alaska I would guess that the current administration will do little to prevent the launch

Seriously though the thought of a nuclear tipped missle in the hands of that mad man are a very sobering although but I don't see how he can be stopped without some sort of attack and I am sure that would provoke an all out war with North Korea and I don't think that we or the rest of the world are prepared for that.

Who was it that said "The trouble with politicians is they always leave us with one more war to fight"

 

[mheslep]

Since the only place in the U.S. that this missle could reach is Alaska ...

That's the ~1000kg payload. The 100kg payload can reach anywhere.

 

[misgfool]

I was thinking what's preventing them to attack North Korea. Longer they wait, harder it gets to attack NK IMO.

Why should they attack? Just let NK boast and the trade embargo takes care of the rest. Sure NK may have a nuke, but they know that using it will be their demise.

 

[Phrak]

North Korea is within China's sphere. They get some use allowing Kim the Ill a long leash. He seems to be their test monkey.

 

[Wellesley]

Why should they attack? Just let NK boast and the trade embargo takes care of the rest. Sure NK may have a nuke, but they know that using it will be their demise.

There have been sanctions imposed against North Korea since the Korean War. Since 2007 (maybe a little later), the U.S. has placed severe embargoes on NK. Has this stopped them from creating these missiles?

 

[misgfool]

There have been sanctions imposed against North Korea since the Korean War. Since 2007 (maybe a little later), the U.S. has placed severe embargoes on NK. Has this stopped them from creating these missiles?

No, I guess not, but what difference does it make? If they want to make missiles and let their people starve, so be it. We have much more important issues to solve. I just don't see, what makes their actions newsworthy.

 

[Hurkyl]

I just don't see, what makes their actions newsworthy.

A few things, I assume.

The most obvious serious problem is that they are firing the vehicle for a weapon of mass destruction through Japanese airspace -- a nation with which they have a tense relationship -- and I believe without permission as well.

There's also a symbolic bit of firing towards the United States.

And also, there is the sticky issue that their leader is widely believed to be unstable -- so any capability (and demonstration) of the ability to use said weapons is worrysome.

Oh, and from the news article, this would seem to be a direct challenge to the international community that has banned NK From firing such missles.

 

[misgfool]

A few things, I assume.

The most obvious serious problem is that they are firing the vehicle for a weapon of mass destruction through Japanese airspace -- a nation with which they have a tense relationship -- and I believe without permission as well.

There's also a symbolic bit of firing towards the United States.

But the sea is also in the East, so it could also be a coincidence. And you can choose whether it is symbolical or not.

And also, there is the sticky issue that their leader is widely believed to be unstable -- so any capability (and demonstration) of the ability to use said weapons is worrysome.

Oh, and from the news article, this would seem to be a direct challenge to the international community that has banned NK From firing such missles.

Looks like China isn't a part of the consensus within the international community. Without China there is little that can be done to NK.

 

[Wellesley]

But the sea is also in the East, so it could also be a coincidence. And you can choose whether it is symbolical or not.

True, the sea is in the east, but why send it over Japan and cause commotion, when they could have sent it over China, or Russia and avoid world condemnation?

 

[OAQfirst]

Looks like China isn't a part of the consensus within the international community. Without China there is little that can be done to NK.

I can't blame China for worrying about a refugee crisis if war comes a knockin on NK's door. Still, there's a lot that can be done without China's blessings, including forceful action.

 

[misgfool]

True, the sea is in the east, but why send it over Japan and cause commotion, when they could have sent it over China, or Russia and avoid world condemnation?

I guess one shouldn't bite the feeding hand.

 

[misgfool]

I can't blame China for worrying about a refugee crisis if war comes a knockin on NK's door. Still, there's a lot that can be done without China's blessings, including forceful action.

Such as?

 

[Ivan Seeking]

Japan has stated that they will shoot it down if it enters their airspace. NK has threatened to retaliate if that happens.

SEOUL, South Korea (AP, AFP) – North Korea's military has threatened immediate retaliation if "even the slightest effort'' is made to intercept a rocket that it plans to launch in the next few days...

http://mb.com.ph/articles/201205/north-korea-threatens-retaliate

There is also concern that it may not be carrying a satellite. Given the posture of NK, we have to assume that it could be anything. For one, we have to assume that they might try to nuke Japan. If it is true that it could reach the mainland US with a smaller payload, then that is certainly a huge concern. How do we know it doesn't have a smaller payload than claimed?

I almost think we should destroy it where it sits. But we may well destroy it after launch. We already have a good bit of the Navy sitting nearby and waiting.

 

[signerror]

Japan has stated that they will shoot it down if it enters their airspace.

Can they do that? This is an ICBM - as far as I know, there is no practical way to shoot one down after the boost stage.

There is also concern that it may not be carrying satellite. Given the posture of NK, we have to assume that it could be anything. For one, we have to assume that they might try to nuke Japan.
I almost think we should destroy it where it sits.

I think I agree.

 

[misgfool]

For one, we have to assume that they might try to nuke Japan.

C'mon. That is a rather bold assumption. Do you have any facts to support that?

 

[Hurkyl]

C'mon. That is a rather bold assumption. Do you have any facts to support that?

He never said it was the most likely possibility -- he simply said we have to assume it.

 

[misgfool]

He never said it was the most likely possibility -- he simply said we have to assume it.

Ok, but would you disagree, if we base our actions on the most likely possibility? In any case you have to have at least some evidence to back up all assumptions regardless of their likelihood.

 

[Ivan Seeking]

Ok, but would you disagree, if we base our actions on the most likely possibility? In any case you have to have at least some evidence to back up all assumptions regardless of their likelihood.

This is a military matter. We have to consider all possibilities and provide for a reaction in each case. I seriously doubt that anyone could put hard numbers on the "likelihood" of each possibility - esp given that we are dealing with a madman.

 

[Hurkyl]

In any case you have to have at least some evidence to back up all assumptions regardless of their likelihood.

North Korea plans to shoot an ICBM towards Japan, a country it is unfriendly towards.

 

[Ivan Seeking]

Can they do that? This is an ICBM - as far as I know, there is no practical way to shoot one down after the boost stage

It is easiest to hit before the boost stage. I don't know the publically stated limitations beyond that; nor do we have anyway to know if the claimed limitations are true. Our true abilities here are certainly most highly classified.

I would guess that the publically stated limitations are those of the National Missile Defense program.

 

[Ivan Seeking]

Then there is the little matter of a million people being ready to attack Seoul.

 

[misgfool]

This is a military matter. We have to consider all possibilities and provide for a reaction in each case. I seriously doubt that anyone could put hard numbers on the "likelihood" of each possibility - esp given that we are dealing with a madman.

It is possible to put cases to some order and obviously it is prudent to prepare for all possibilities. Now I know that the preemptive doctrine is appealing, but remember that the aggressor is the one making the first strike.

North Korea plans to shoot an ICBM towards Japan, a country it is unfriendly towards.

Well, that is a good start. Keep it coming. :)

 

[Ivan Seeking]

Whether or not preemptive action should be taken is the question of the day. The problem is that we don't have any reliable information.

The key to avoiding WWIII without an endless MAD arms race [Mutually Assured Destruction] has been "trust but verify".

The potential for preemptive action results from Korea's posture and unpredictability. The lesson all emerging powers must learn -the one that NK doesn't understand - is that with power comes grave responsibility. One small miscalculation could inadvertently escalate to a global nuclear conflict.

 

[Ivan Seeking]

Well, that is a good start. Keep it coming. :)

No one needs to justify our national defense when faced with such an unknown. Maybe you require justification, but you will see just how little that matters. What's more, Japan is claiming a violation of airspace.

 

[OAQfirst]

Such as?

Forceful action, up to and including war. We did it in Iraq and Afghanistan, if I recall correctly. Not very promising options, but China had little weight in the matter. Now we have a cruel man who tosses around violent rhetoric and isn't fooling anyone with his "space program."

 

[misgfool]

The problem is that we don't have any reliable information.

Exactly. Let's not forget this.

The potential for preemptive action results from Korea's posture and unpredictability. The lesson all emerging powers must learn -the one that NK doesn't understand - is that with power comes grave responsibility. One small miscalculation could inadvertently escalate to a global nuclear conflict.

Have you considered the possibility that the preemptive strike may trigger a conflict as well?

 

[Hurkyl]

Not that it matters, but I think we're past the point where the adjective "preemptive" applies.

 

[Count Iblis]

All this talk about shooting down the missile has only made things far worse. Of course, Japan will not shoot down the rocket. They will only shoot down some debris if they threaten to fall on Japan.

What would happen if the launch fails and Kim thinks that's because Japan shot it down?

 

[misgfool]

No one needs to justify our national defense when faced with such an unknown.

That is a very dangerous policy for all. Including you.

Maybe you require justification, but you will see just how little that matters.

I know, I guess I'm still hoping that the US comes to it's senses. As you said "with power comes responsibility".

Forceful action, up to and including war. We did it in Iraq and Afghanistan, if I recall correctly. Not very promising options, but China had little weight in the matter. Now we have a cruel man who tosses around violent rhetoric and isn't fooling anyone with his "space program."

Yes, I believe I have heard of these excursions. But unlike weak Iraq or Afghanistan, NK may actually have nuclear devices, chemical or biological weapons etc. And it has its artillery aimed at Seoul with a population of 10 million. Attacking NK may mean the destruction of Seoul. Are you sure you wish to take that risk?

 

[misgfool]

Not that it matters, but I think we're past the point where the adjective "preemptive" applies.

What do you mean?

 

[Count Iblis]

A long range missile that takes several days to be fueled is not a practical weapon. The North Koreans need to develop long range solid fuel missiles that can carry a nuclear warhead. Also, they need to develop thermonuclear devices.

While a few Hiroshima sized bombs would do huge damage, they won't win a war for North Korea.

 

[OAQfirst]

Yes, I believe I have heard of these excursions. But unlike weak Iraq or Afghanistan, NK may actually have nuclear devices, chemical or biological weapons etc. And it has its artillery aimed at Seoul with a population of 10 million. Attacking NK may mean the destruction of Seoul. Are you sure you wish to take that risk?

It's not my risk or decision to make. Now you're going on a tangent that is far from my original reply: "there's a lot that can be done without China's blessings, including forceful action."

 

[misgfool]

It's not my risk or decision to make. Now you're going on a tangent that is far from my original reply: "there's a lot that can be done without China's blessings, including forceful action."

I was referring to the US as a nation with "you". Now could you personally integrate me back to your reply, since I not entirely following you logic. I would still, however, like to hear what are the forceful actions available while considering the risks.

 

[signerror]

Yes, I believe I have heard of these excursions. But unlike weak Iraq or Afghanistan, NK may actually have nuclear devices, chemical or biological weapons etc. And it has its artillery aimed at Seoul with a population of 10 million. Attacking NK may mean the destruction of Seoul. Are you sure you wish to take that risk?

Iraq did have chemical weapons, although not during either of the Gulf Wars (IIRC). They also did attack Israel with Scuds (analogous to DPRK threatening Seoul), but these were neutralized quickly.

How much damage, realistically, could DPRK inflict before its artillery units were neutralized by air strikes?

More seriously, they do have nuclear weapons, which they may be able to launch on tactical ballistic missiles. I'm not sure how easily these can be intercepted.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/North_Korea_and_weapons_of_mass_destruction#Delivery_systems

 

[rootX]

Why should they attack? Just let NK boast and the trade embargo takes care of the rest. Sure NK may have a nuke, but they know that using it will be their demise.

Will diplomacy work here? If it can work here then that's great!
Else, I think war is inevitable. Would it be better to start it now or in the future?

Or, can we just keep on going like current forever?

 

[OAQfirst]

I was referring to the US as a nation with "you". Now could you personally integrate me back to your reply, since I not entirely following you logic. I would still, however, like to hear what are the forceful actions available while considering the risks.

That makes even less sense. If you're asking me if I'm willing to take that risk, how am I supposed to respond? I don't represent the U.S.

And I just told you what the forceful action could be: up to and including war. Air strikes and what. So, as I said, these are options that we don't **need** China to agree or go along with.

 

[turbo]

As Count Iblis pointed out, a ballistic missile that takes days to prep and fuel on a gantry that is outside on public display makes a pretty bad "secret" weapon. We have lots and lots of imagery of the launch site (WAY more than has been made public, certainly) and we could take out the facility with a cruise missile quite easily. North Korea would face certain self-destruction if they used such a missile to attack SK or Japan, and I doubt that the Chinese would step into help them. China needs regional stability in order to continue to build its economy. If China jumped in on North Korea's side in a conflict with US allies, they would risk having their US assets and investments frozen, and that wouldn't be pretty. Financial and economic entanglements mean that both the US and China each have a "tiger by the tail" and can't afford to let go.

 

[misgfool]

How much damage, realistically, could DPRK inflict before its artillery units were neutralized by air strikes?

Apparently enough to prevent any incursion at least so far.

Will diplomacy work here? If it can work here then that's great!
Else, I think war is inevitable. Would it be better to start it now or in the future?

Or, can we just keep on going like current forever?

No diplomacy. Just leave NK to itself. They can rattle their saber as much as they want, but as long as they don't strike, the only thing that needs to be done is to make sure that they understand the consequences.

 

[LowlyPion]

North Korea would face certain self-destruction if they used such a missile to attack SK or Japan, and I doubt that the Chinese would step into help them. China needs regional stability in order to continue to build its economy. If China jumped in on North Korea's side in a conflict with US allies, they would risk having their US assets and investments frozen, and that wouldn't be pretty. Financial and economic entanglements mean that both the US and China each have a "tiger by the tail" and can't afford to let go.

Not sure about North Korea being destroyed or what there is there to destroy. It's not exactly the most advanced country. But that said war there is in no one's interest. Not the US or China or even NK or SK. Those populations are pretty large and pretty close. Japan sticking their nose in isn't exactly useful either, though I suppose that they are far enough removed from WWII now to want to think about flexing their muscles. Ultimately though I don't see how there could be any winners.

I think this is Kim Jong-il being a narcissist and getting maximum leverage for minimum expense.

As to talk of shooting it down, I doubt anyone will, because I doubt that anyone wants to demonstrate that their anti-missile defenses don't work.

 

[mheslep]

A long range missile that takes several days to be fueled is not a practical weapon. The North Koreans need to develop long range solid fuel missiles that can carry a nuclear warhead. Also, they need to develop thermonuclear devices.

While a few Hiroshima sized bombs would do huge damage, they won't win a war for North Korea.

Winning a war against the modern world, nuclear weapon or no, has never been possible for NK. A WMD allows them to essentially hold people and other nations hostage, and that can grant them a great deal: money, a greater internal hold on power, an ego boost for the Great Leader, and so on.

 

[Count Iblis]

Winning a war against the modern world, nuclear weapon or no, has never been possible for NK. A WMD allows them to essentially hold people and other nations hostage, and that can grant them a great deal: money, a greater internal hold on power, an ego boost for the Great Leader, and so on.

I think they have been in that position for a very long time: They can shell Seoul using artillery installations that are built within a mountain. The time it would take for North Korea to completely destroy Seoul would be about an hour or so.

The time it would take for us to silence the North Korean guns, assuming that the North Koreans start a surprise attack, would be longer. Obama would have to be notified and then he would have to consult with his generals and decide on emergency measures, such as the deployment of nuclear weapons to destroy the mountain.

 

[OAQfirst]

I think they have been in that position for a very long time: They can shell Seoul using artillery installations that are built within a mountain. The time it would take for North Korea to completely destroy Seoul would be about an hour or so.

The time it would take for us to silence the North Korean guns, assuming that the North Koreans start a surprise attack, would be longer. Obama would have to be notified and then he would have to consult with his generals and decide on emergency measures, such as the deployment of nuclear weapons to destroy the mountain.

Would he have already been briefed on that?

 

[mheslep]

...North Korea would face certain self-destruction if they used such a missile to attack SK or Japan, and I doubt that the Chinese would step into help them.

It is by no means certain that NK would face self-destruction in the event of an NK attack on another country, say Japan. One thing that makes it uncertain is indeed the Chinese. They don't want to step into help NK, but they may very well want to stop action by anyone else. They certainly will object strongly to any action that threatens to destabilize their border, same goes for Seoul. Then there is the question of who is going to do the 'certain' destroying. Even a one shot nuclear attack from NK is unlikely to draw a nuclear response from the US, IMO. It would kill thousands who are essentially under the lash of chattel slavery, and second the fall out is bound to be felt in Seoul and/or China. And the US will be extremely averse to another hundred years of post Hiroshima like 'was it really necessary' questioning. Then, with a nuclear response off the table and with China sitting out, who has the conventional muscle to destroy the NK million man military? Again, only the US. At the moment the US is poised with sufficient force only to deter NK, to hurt it through air strikes, etc in the event of an attack on SK. The US has by no means sufficient force in theater to decisively force capitulation of the NK military, and the rest of the force that could do the job is, as we know, busy elsewhere.

 

[mheslep]

I think they have been in that position for a very long time: They can shell Seoul using artillery installations that are built within a mountain. The time it would take for North Korea to completely destroy Seoul would be about an hour or so.

'Completely destroy' is way off the mark. NK could kill many people, do damage, temporarily stop the daily life of Seoul, cause panic and a huge migration of people. Artillery needs a quite a bit of time, un-harassed, to 'destroy' even a small city, and NK arty would enjoy neither condition. Another consequence - NK will lose all the immovable heavy arty.

 

[drankin]

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/world/asia-pacific/7982874.stm

Looks like they launched it already. Noone shot it down.

 

[mheslep]

NK launched their rocket 11:30AM Korean time (Sunday), 10:30PM EST. It cleared Japan and continued over the Pacific, no word yet on how far.
http://online.wsj.com/article/SB123889854918290025.html?mod=article-outset-box

EDIT: No rocket! Japan retracts its initial report as bogus, according to Reuters.
http://uk.reuters.com/article/usTopNews/idUKTRE53314H20090404?pageNumber=1&virtualBrandChannel=0
Yeah, bogus report.
http://www.voanews.com/english/2009-04-04-voa24.cfm

 

[drankin]

NK launched their rocket 11:30AM Korean time (Sunday), 10:30PM EST. It cleared Japan and continued over the Pacific, no word yet on how far.
http://online.wsj.com/article/SB123889854918290025.html?mod=article-outset-box

EDIT: No rocket! Japan retracts its initial report as bogus, according to Reuters.
http://uk.reuters.com/article/usTopNews/idUKTRE53314H20090404?pageNumber=1&virtualBrandChannel=0
Yeah, bogus report.
http://www.voanews.com/english/2009-04-04-voa24.cfm

LOL, that's a bit of a blunder. I was worried we were going to get a hunk of metal landing on the West Coast at any minute.

The rest of the news agencies, at the moment, are showing that a missile HAS been launched.

 

[WhoWee]

Not sure about North Korea being destroyed or what there is there to destroy. It's not exactly the most advanced country. But that said war there is in no one's interest. Not the US or China or even NK or SK. Those populations are pretty large and pretty close. Japan sticking their nose in isn't exactly useful either, though I suppose that they are far enough removed from WWII now to want to think about flexing their muscles. Ultimately though I don't see how there could be any winners.

I think this is Kin Il Sung being a narcissist and getting maximum leverage for minimum expense.

As to talk of shooting it down, I doubt anyone will, because I doubt that anyone wants to demonstrate that their anti-missile defenses don't work.

I don't think it's possible for ANY Nation to "win" a nuclear exchange. A terrorist network without a domestic population is another story.

NK knows we can't do anything except get mad...and they'll keep playing games and continue to torment the big dogs until they cross a line that is unacceptable...hopefully China will advise them otherwise prior to a point of no return.