norh korea

[shift-E]

Sure it does. Ballistic missile defence is a mission that the Navy does. One might be able to use news like this to base a scenario off of.

There already is a stock TBMD Quick-mission for the FFG (escorting BMD-capable Aegis CG).

Played it last night:hmm:

Kim Willy Wong is feeling neglected now all the attention has shifted to Iran (ha ha poor showing in the World Cup old chaps!). He's like a little kid throwing tantrums...countries like Iran, North Korea etc is the every day equivalent of the patients running the asylum. Should we still be surprised when they soil their underwear....or threaten to, anyway?

[LuftWolf]

The problem is not nations like Iran and North Korea.

The problem are the international entities and corrupt 1st world nations that don't have the spine to sustain their own cultures.

Iran and North Korea bark and the whole world flutters about like a bridge club.

What a farce.

Cheers,
David

[GhOsT55]

MORE INFO

SEOUL, South Korea - South Korea's defense minister said Thursday that Seoul believes North Korea's missile launch is not imminent despite concern in the region that the communist nation would test-fire a long-range missile.
"It is our judgment that a launch is not imminent," Defense Minister Yoon Kwang-ung told a parliamentary meeting in comments confirmed by his ministry.
Worries over a possible North Korean launch have grown in recent weeks after reports of activity at the country's launch site on its northeastern coast where U.S. officials say a Taepodong-2 missile _ believed capable of reaching parts of the United States _ is possibly being fueled.
Yoon said if the North fires a missile toward South Korean territory, combined U.S. and South Korean forces will be ready to intercept it.
Japan and the United States have issued strong statements of concern and have sent ships and planes to monitor the communist nation.
China on Thursday issued its strongest statement of concern over a possible launch, while Pyongyang warned of clashes in the skies as it accused U.S. spy planes of repeated illegal intrusions.
Beijing is the North's last major ally and key benefactor, and Washington has urged China to press the North to back down on its potential missile test.
"We are very concerned about the current situation," Jiang Yu, a Chinese Foreign Ministry official, said at a regular briefing in Beijing. "We hope all parties can do more in the interest of regional peace and stability."
Jiang said China would "continue to make constructive efforts."
President Bush praised China on Wednesday for "taking responsibility in dealing with North Korea."
The North's test of a long-range missile in 1998 shocked Japan and prompted it to accelerate work with Washington on a joint missile defense system.
The communist nation has been under a self-imposed moratorium on long-range missile tests since 1999, when its relations with the United States were relatively friendly. However, it has since test-fired short-range missiles many times, including two in March.
There are diverging expert opinions on whether fueling would mean a launch was imminent _ due to the highly corrosive nature of the fuel _ or whether the North could wait a month or more.
A North Korean diplomat said in reported comments Wednesday that the country wanted to engage in talks with Washington over its concerns of a possible missile test. The Bush administration rejected the overture, saying threats aren't the way to seek dialogue.
"You don't normally engage in conversations by threatening to launch intercontinental ballistic missiles," U.N. Ambassador John Bolton said.
The U.S. instead called on North Korea to return to six-nation talks on its nuclear program.
Bolton said he was continuing discussions with U.N. Security Council members on possible action, and had met with Russia's U.N. ambassador. Washington is weighing responses to a potential test that could include trying to shoot down the missile, U.S. officials have said.
China said all parties should focus on finding a peaceful solution and also urged the North to return to the nuclear talks.
The sides should "be determined to realize a nuclear-free Korean peninsula," Jiang said. "China stands ready to work with relevant parties in the international community to press ahead with the process."
The North agreed at the those talks in September to abandon its nuclear program in exchange for security guarantees and aid, but no progress has been made on implementing the accord.
North Korea has issued repeated complaints in recent weeks about alleged U.S. spy flights, including off the coast where the missile test facility is located.
"The U.S. imperialist warmongers have been intensifying military provocations" against the North, the country's official Korean Central News Agency said. "The ceaseless illegal intrusion of the planes has created a grave danger of military conflict in the air above the region."
The U.S. has sent ships off the Korean coast capable of detecting and tracking a missile launch, a Pentagon official said. South Korean aircraft have also been flying reconnaissance over the waters between the Korean Peninsula and Japan, said the military official, who spoke on condition of anonymity because he was not authorized to speak on the subject.
Japan said it, too, had sent naval ships and patrol planes to monitor the developments in North Korea, while playing down Pyongyang's capacity to load a nuclear warhead on its rockets.
The North has claimed to have a nuclear weapon, but isn't thought to have an advanced design that could be placed on a warhead. Japanese Senior Vice Foreign Minister Yasuhisa Shiozaki backed that belief at the parliamentary hearing.
"At this point, we have encountered no information that indicates North Korea has the technology," he said.
Japanese Foreign Minister Taro Aso vowed to continue efforts to persuade North Korea not to launch the missile.
"It's crucial to get North Korea to restrain itself from a missile launch," Aso said. "We should gather efforts before it happens, not afterward."
Japanese police were preparing for a "worst-case scenario," including the possibility that parts of a missile could fall on Japan, said Iwao Uruma, commissioner general of the National Police Agency.
About 1,000 people, including army veterans and activists, staged an anti-North Korea rally in Seoul, condemning the missile threat.
The two Koreas remain technically at war since the 1950-53 Korean War ended in a cease-fire, not a peace treaty.

[GhOsT55]

more stuff


The United States said Thursday that a U.S. missile-defense system under development has "limited operational capability" to protect against weapons such as the long-range missile North Korea is said to be near firing.
National Security Adviser Stephen Hadley underscored U.S. calls for North Korea to abandon any plans for testing the missile believed capable of reaching U.S. soil.
"We're watching it very carefully and preparations are very far along," Hadley said when asked about South Korea's assessment that a launch was not imminent.
"So you could, from a capability standpoint, have a launch," Hadley said. "Now what they intend to do _ which is what a lot of people are trying to read _ of course we don't know. What we hope they will do is give it up and not launch."
In Washington, a top Pentagon official said Thursday that a missile launch would be "a provocation and a dangerous action" that would lead the United States to impose "some cost" on North Korea.
Peter Rodman, assistant secretary of defense for international security policy, told a House Armed Services Committee hearing that he did not know if such a launch would happen. If it did, Rodman said the administration would take some action, but he did not specify what it would be.
"If such a launch takes place we would seek to impose some cost on North Korea," Rodman said. "That is the minimum response that you would expect of us."
"A launch of a missile would be a provocation and a dangerous action which would have to have some consequences," he said.
Col. Robert Carr, assistant director of intelligence for the Joint Chiefs of Staff, also told lawmakers that "preparations continue" for a possible launch. He declined to speak further on the subject in public, telling lawmakers he would brief them on the matter in a closed session.
Hadley, who briefed reporters while traveling with President Bush in Europe, also spurned a suggestion by former Defense Secretary William Perry that the United States launch a pre-emptive strike against the North Korean missile.
"We think diplomacy is the right answer and that is what we are pursuing," Hadley said when asked about Perry's recommendation in an opinion article published Thursday in The Washington Post.
"The way out of this is for North Korea to decide not to test this missile," Hadley said.
The United States has spent hundreds of millions of dollars on missile defense systems during the past few decades.
"We have a missile defense system ... what we call a long-range missile defense system that is basically a research, development, training, test kind of system," Hadley said. "It does ... have some limited operational capability. And the purpose, of course, of a missile defense system is to defend .... the territory of the United States from attack."
Hadley said it was hard to say what North Korea would do.
"In terms of North Korean intentions, you know this is a very opaque society, and very hard to read," he said.
"What we need to do is look at their capabilities and that's what we're trying to do," Hadley said.
He said a missile test would disrupt the stalled six-party talks about North Korea's nuclear program.
In the op-ed, Perry said the Bush administration should strike and destroy the missile before it can be launched. Perry noted the Bush administration's doctrine of pre-emption, which it used as the basis for sending U.S. troops into Iraq in 2003.
"Therefore, if North Korea persists in its launch preparations, the United States should immediately make clear its intention to strike and destroy the North Korean Taepodong missile before it can be launched," Perry said in the piece, co-written with Ashton B. Carter, Perry's assistant at the Pentagon.

[GhOsT55]

more


The U.S. suggested Thursday it has limited ability to shoot a North Korean missile out of the sky and spurned suggestions of a pre-emptive strike on the ground. Still, it warned the Koreans would pay a cost for a missile launch.
The solution, said President Bush's national security adviser, is for the North to "give it up and not launch" the long-range missile that the U.S. believes is being fueled and prepared.
"We think diplomacy is the right answer and that is what we are pursuing," Steven Hadley told reporters.
The words came as tensions persisted over North Korea's apparent preparations to test-fire a Taepodong-2 missile _ and amid disagreements over U.S. military options for responding. The missile, with a believed range of up to 9,300 miles, is potentially capable of reaching the mainland United States.
A Pentagon official said Pyongyang risked unspecified retaliation in proceeding.
"If such a launch takes place, we would seek to impose some cost on North Korea," Peter Rodman, assistant secretary of defense for international security affairs, told the House Armed Services Committee.
Vice President Dick Cheney brushed aside a suggestion by former Defense Secretary William Perry that the Korean missile be obliterated at the launch site.
"I appreciate Bill's advice," Cheney said in an interview with CNN. "I think, obviously, if you're going to launch strikes at another nation, you'd better be prepared to not just fire one shot. And the fact of the matter is I think the issue is being addressed appropriately."
Cheney said that North Korea's "missile capabilities are fairly rudimentary" and that "their test flights in the past haven't been notably successful. But we are watching it with interest and following it very closely."
Missile defense experts disagreed on current U.S. ability to destroy such a missile once it is fired. But they seemed in agreement that shooting at it _ and missing _ would be a huge embarrassment.
"Either it won't work, in which case you've just undermined the rationale for the system. Or if it does work, you have created an even bigger international crisis," said Ivo Daalder, a White House national security aide in the Clinton administration.
"Even when you do intercept it, there's the real question of what have you done? These are international waters. Is this an act of war?" said Daalder, now a foreign policy and missile-defense specialist at the Brookings Institution.
Loren Thompson, a defense consultant at the Lexington Institute in Arlington, Va., said there are "two basic problems" with trying to shoot down a Korean missile.
"Our system is barely operational. And the impact on Korean perceptions if we miss could be counterproductive," Thompson said.
"Bombs work a lot better than missile defense systems," Thompson added, echoing Perry's suggestion for a pre-emptive air strike.
In an opinion article in Thursday's Washington Post, Perry and former assistant defense secretary Ashton B. Carter wrote that Bush should immediately declare that the U.S. would destroy the missile before it could be fired.
"Diplomacy has failed, and we cannot sit by and let this deadly threat mature," wrote Perry and Carter. Both served in the Clinton administration.
Hadley, the president's national security adviser, brushed aside such suggestions.
When asked if the U.S. would consider launching such a strike on the launch site on Korea's northeastern coast, Hadley responded: "We hope it (North Korea) would come back to the table, and we hope it would be a little sobered by the unanimous message that the international community has sent."
International talks to persuade North Korea to restrict its nuclear program have not been held since last November. The five other nations party to the talks _ the United States, China, Russia, Japan and South Korea _ have all strongly urged the North not to launch the missile.
Hadley, who briefed reporters in Budapest, Hungary, during a Bush visit, expressed some reservations about the ability of the United States to intercept and destroy such a missile, noting that the U.S. missile defense system was still in an early stage.
"It is a research development and testing capability that has some limited operational capability," Hadley said.
The missile defense system, which now includes advanced radar and interceptor missiles based in Alaska and California, has suffered repeated test failures since Bush ordered the program accelerated in early 2001.
Under the program, interceptor missiles are designed to strike and destroy incoming ballistic missiles.
The Pentagon has developed a rudimentary system that it says is capable of defending against a limited number of missiles in an emergency _ with a North Korean attack particularly in mind.
Some $91 billion has been spent over the past two decades on the program first proposed by President Reagan, according to congressional auditors.
"If the North Koreans fire the missile and the president chooses to launch an interceptor, the administration has an odd set of options," said Daryl Kimball, executive director of the private Arms Control Association.
"If it hits the missile, will the North Koreans consider that an act of war? And if the interceptor misses the North Korean test missile, it would simply illustrate the fact that we spent tens of billions of dollars for a system that's not effective _ even against one missile from one known launch point."

[SeaQueen]

Originally Posted by shift-E

There already is a stock TBMD Quick-mission for the FFG (escorting BMD-capable Aegis CG).

Played it last night:hmm:

Yeah... but I don't like that one.

[Fish]

The country with the most firepower the world ever saw is rejecting a small country to light a new years rocket.

http://www.af.mil/shared/media/photo...-8492C-212.jpg

Originally Posted by Fish

The country with the most firepower the world ever saw is rejecting a small country to light a new years rocket.

http://www.af.mil/shared/media/photo...-8492C-212.jpg

That "new years rocket" can hold multiple nuclear weapons and probably destroy the Netherlands quite easily.

[moose1am]

If WWIII breaks out the Neatherlands may not be a direct target but the radiation created by all the nukes from USA, Russia, China and a few other small countries will make your dikes glow orange and yellow for years.

You can put your ice skates away and bend over and kiss your back side goodby if N Korea sends a missle at the USA.

I lived through the Cuban Missile Crisis and believe me that was a very close call. But the Leaders back then were more rational than what we have today in N. Korea.

The world gets more dangerous each and ever time a new country arms themselves with nuclear weapons. Someday all hell will break out and we will all be very very sorry that we ever designed nukes.

One thing we can depends on is that mankind will screw things up eventually.

Originally Posted by Kurushio

That "new years rocket" can hold multiple nuclear weapons and probably destroy the Netherlands quite easily.

[Captain Norman]

Now, if North Korea were to invade South Korea, it would fail in their part.
The North Korean military has the power to cause immediate serious damage, but cant fight a full scale war. We are talking a country with no food, no money, and no oil. How do you fight a war without it? If a war between NK and SK and the US broke out, we could expect serious casualties on all fronts, but North Korea cannot recreate the Korean War in the modern age of the 21st century.

[Wilko]

Just idle speculation here but while I agree NK is very poor they seem willing to sacrifice the peasents for what ever goal they deem worthy, so would not they have a decent stock pile od stuff if they were planning on going to war. Surely they would just strip everything bare for they military use and if a few odd million die from starvation or freeze to death then so be it... and what sort of help would they be getting from what ever so called allies they might have...

[goldorak]

Originally Posted by Captain Norman

Now, if North Korea were to invade South Korea, it would fail in their part.
The North Korean military has the power to cause immediate serious damage, but cant fight a full scale war. We are talking a country with no food, no money, and no oil. How do you fight a war without it? If a war between NK and SK and the US broke out, we could expect serious casualties on all fronts, but North Korea cannot recreate the Korean War in the modern age of the 21st century.

Are you so sure about it ?
Currently the US military is waging war in iraq, and they aren't winning neither on military nor political ground.
Can the US really wage 2 wars on 2 vastly different fronts if NC were to invade SC ?
I honestly don't think so.
So the situation wouldn't be so clear cut.
What happens if Cina supports NC ?
If NC ever stood a chance of invading SC and winning at riunification it is right now.

[LuftWolf]

Originally Posted by Fish

The country with the most firepower the world ever saw is rejecting a small country to light a new years rocket.

http://www.af.mil/shared/media/photo...-8492C-212.jpg

As long as we are feeding their people, the rights of North Korea are not a priority.

NK has done nothing to earn its place in the global community, other than being granted powers the reality of its existence never justified.

[goldorak]

Originally Posted by LuftWolf

[
As long as we are feeding their people, the rights of North Korea are not a priority.

NK has done nothing to earn its place in the global community, other than being granted powers the reality of its existence never justified.

Just who came up with the division of the corean peninsula after world war 2 ?