NationStates Jolt Archive

Let's say they test it, and it lands on either Japan or the US. It doesn't contain a nuke, but it does drop debris in a major city, causing damage and some deaths (a handful).

What would a valid response be?

http://english.chosun.com/w21data/html/news/200606/200606190006.html
Japanese Foreign Minister Taro Aso warned if the missile is dropped on Japan, “it will be regarded as an attack." Tokyo says it will refer the matter to the UN Security Council for sanction.

Washington said Friday it will not sit idle. “We, of course, will take necessary preparatory steps to track any potential activities and to protect ourselves,” State Department spokesman Sean McCormack said. Such “protective steps” are presumed to include intercepting the missile at an early stage with Aegis destroyers in the East Sea.

Note that the Aegis (modified version of Standard ER missile) system is operational in the area, and multiple successful tests have worked, in both mid-course and near-impact intercepts.

I think the nations of the world should establish a co-operation treaty for missiles and nukes and all that jazz. That way, everyone has the best weaponry they can get, and everyone is equal, and its all fair that way.

If a missile enters your airspace, you have full rights to shoot it down as far as I'm concerned.

also, your poll assumes that the North Korean are going to aim it at a city, or that the missile has good acuracy

We should respect their missile making culture :eek:

I think the nations of the world should establish a co-operation treaty for missiles and nukes and all that jazz. That way, everyone has the best weaponry they can get, and everyone is equal, and its all fair that way.

Umm... doesn't answer the question.

also, your poll assumes that the North Korean are going to aim it at a city, or that the missile has good acuracy
If it comes down in a highly populated place like Japan, it's not an unlikely possibility.

Do you like the prospect of spent boosters raining down in your neighborhood?

Um, I believe you'll find that AEGIS is a radar and communications system, not a missile.

Nevertheless, I would consider the destruction of a missile aproaching a military ship or a coastline to be a prudent course of action, regardless of the warhead.

And while it could be an attack, it is also true that accidents happen. It is also usually prudent to accept protestations of accident than get involved in a war one is unprepared for.

Umm... doesn't answer the question.
yeah it totally does, cuz then everyone knows what the enemy has, and can shoot it down with ease

Um, I believe you'll find that AEGIS is a radar and communications system, not a missile.

Nevertheless, I would consider the destruction of a missile aproaching a military ship or a coastline to be a prudent course of action, regardless of the warhead.

And while it could be an attack, it is also true that accidents happen. It is also usually prudent to accept protestations of accident than get involved in a war one is unprepared for.
AEGIS is part of a system that incorporates radar, communications, and a missile.
http://www.vectorsite.net/twabm_2.html

The missile is the Standard SM-3, and has hit multiple targets in mid-course and terminal approach under operational conditions at sea. Of the antimissile systems we possess, it is the most flexible and most effective (the PAC-3 is a close second).

Um, I believe you'll find that AEGIS is a radar and communications system, not a missile.

I guess the radar guides the missile

Use the NMD systems based in Alaska to blow the Sonofabitch out of the sky. Prove our own point, equally effectively.

I guess the radar guides the missile
The AEGIS radar system guides the Standard Missile-3 (SM-3) on an intercept with the inbound.

also, your poll assumes that the North Korean are going to aim it at a city, or that the missile has good acuracy
Which it won't. I'd be surprised if it had accuracy comparable to most Soviet-made ICBMs, a twenty mile radius. (If you shoot enough of the damn things, with enough power on each warhead, you'll eventually destroy the target.)

Um, I believe you'll find that AEGIS is a radar and communications system, not a missile.

When paired with the SM-3, though, the Pentagon refers to it as the Aegis Ballistic Missle Defense System, so Deep Kimchi, while not specific enough for nitpickers, is okay just calling it the Aegis.

Umm... doesn't answer the question.what is the question? Your poll sux

what is the question? Your poll sux
I guess you can't read.

well hows about that one

what is the question? Your poll sux
His poll dosent suck

(highlight it)

I'd prefer multiple options.
1. Shoot the thing down.
2. Litigate.
And 3. Declare war.

In sequence.

If the missile enters American or Japanese airspace, it should be interpreted as an act of war.

If the missile enters American or Japanese airspace, it should be interpreted as an act of war.
And then what?

And then what?

1. Shoot it down.
2. Use MOAB's, bunker busters, whatever to take out all suspected nuclear sites in North Korea.
3. Begin bombardment of all military sites in North Korea.
4. Begin bombardment of all logistical/command/political sites in North Korea.

continue the above until the regime is toppled or unconditionally surrenders. If this is not enough, invade.


edit: yes, this seems extreme for a single missle, but that regime needs to be dealt with sooner or later, and if they give us an excuse to make it sooner, why wait? Also, letting that government get away with anything only encourages them to saber-rattle and push what they can get away with further. Read: Appeasement.

1. Shoot it down.
2. Use MOAB's, bunker busters, whatever to take out all suspected nuclear sites in North Korea.
3. Begin bombardment of all military sites in North Korea.
4. Begin bombardment of all logistical/command/political sites in North Korea.

continue the above until the regime is toppled or unconditionally surrenders. If this is not enough, invade.

Something tells me you won't be able to stop them from doing nasty things like destroying Seoul with the artillery they currently have massed within range. Or stop them from releasing chemical weapons all along the border.

Oh yes, it's possible to defeat North Korea. But there will be millions of dead, and the Korean Peninsula may be rendered uninhabitable for some time.

Let's say they test it, and it lands on either Japan or the US. It doesn't contain a nuke, but it does drop debris in a major city, causing damage and some deaths (a handful).

What would a valid response be?

http://english.chosun.com/w21data/html/news/200606/200606190006.html

Note that the Aegis (modified version of Standard ER missile) system is operational in the area, and multiple successful tests have worked, in both mid-course and near-impact intercepts.
Firing any weapon at another nation without provocation is an act of war, regardless of the number of deaths and/or the cost of any damage.

There is an excellent chance North Korea has WMD, it's pretty much certain. Why do you think we invaded Iraq instead? We won't go to war with a nuclear armed nation unless we absolutely have to, and there won't be any coalition like Iraq it'll be an actual multi-national effort, not a bunch of pissant countries trying to score points with us, it'll be nations with actual militaries.

There is an excellent chance North Korea has WMD, it's pretty much certain. Why do you think we invaded Iraq instead? We won't go to war with a nuclear armed nation unless we absolutely have to, and there won't be any coalition like Iraq it'll be an actual multi-national effort, not a bunch of pissant countries trying to score points with us, it'll be nations with actual militaries.
They already admit to having chemical weapons. So not a matter of "chance".

Right, because Kim Jong Il is real reliable.

Declare war.
They blow up anywhere in Japan, and the US will kill them.
And I'm going to support them all the way.
NO ONE ATTACKS JAPAN!!!!

Shoot it down as early as possible. Hopefully, it would be targetted and destroyed early enough to display our capabilities effectively. (Not only to them, but to all parties interested)

Start a dialogue with them, pretty much asking WTF ?

While talking politely, move sufficient carrier/sub groups into area to be prepared to neuter them with either small,well organized special forces strikes against Jong personally,as well as any ballistic missle sites or full cruise missle assault. Stealth bombers are another alternative-on their own or in conjunction with others.
So-let them say what they have to while making them fully aware they are going to be punished severely. Then punish as needed with no further discussion.

I think the nations of the world should establish a co-operation treaty for missiles and nukes and all that jazz. That way, everyone has the best weaponry they can get, and everyone is equal, and its all fair that way.

and then we can run around in the forest and return to nature and free love for everyone

If it enters the sovereign airspace of any nation, without that nations express permission, then it should be shot down and the issue brought before UN and possibly the Security Counsel. It should not, however, result in war. A single unarmed missile is not worth going to war over…

If the missile stays in international airspace, on the other hand, then it should simply be allowed to fly and eventually crash.
But I must admit that I’m not aware if there are any treaties forbidding the launch of a missile into international airspace… If so, then it should certainly be taken up in UN.

Declare war.
They blow up anywhere in Japan, and the US will kill them.
And I'm going to support them all the way.
NO ONE ATTACKS JAPAN!!!!
Ironic, no?

"We nuked Japan and we say - never again!"

And AllCoolNamesAreTaken -

What's your exit plan?

"We'll just tell the South Koreans to dig up their enormous minefields to let our soldiers and tanks back out afterwards, and we'll give them loads of weapons and such to fight off North Korea if they attack!"

Because that's what'd have to happen and what happened in Vietnam after the South Vietnamese were armed up?

They lost it all and fell to the communists.

And after millions of dead if you attacked North Korea, that would be a rather bitter experience for the US, no?

nuke them,i'm a fuckin'punk
Yet,a bit minister.

Let's say they test it, and it lands on either Japan or the US. It doesn't contain a nuke, but it does drop debris in a major city, causing damage and some deaths (a handful).

What would a valid response be?

In your scenario was the missile deliberately aimed at the city, or did it accidentaly fall on it?

If the former is the case, a few bombing runs over North Korea's missile facilities should work, because you'll want to disable them from shooting any more missiles.

Shooting it down before it hits would obviously be the ideal response.

In your scenario was the missile deliberately aimed at the city, or did it accidentaly fall on it?

Your scientists say they can't tell if it was deliberate or accidental.

If it comes anywhere near the coast, I shoot it down.

Then, I bomb all missile launching facilities, so they can't do it again.

Naughty DPRKians.

Your scientists say they can't tell if it was deliberate or accidental.
In that case, presuming the shoot-it-down plan didn't work, just tell theNK government (which is presumably apologising for the 'accident') that another such incident will be met with retaliation. In the event of another attack, bomb their weapons facilities. No need to declare war on them, or bother to invade, just disable them.

And AllCoolNamesAreTaken -

What's your exit plan?

Well, first, your Vietnam comparison doesn't make any sense, since North Korea doesn't have the USSR backing them.

As for an exit plan, I am for a reunified Korea. The NK regime just needs to be eliminated, which is entirely possible even without resorting to nuclear weapons. It would just require enough bombing. Of missile silos, SAMS, artillery sites, logistics and command sites...

Well, first, your Vietnam comparison doesn't make any sense, since North Korea doesn't have the USSR backing them.

As for an exit plan, I am for a reunified Korea. The NK regime just needs to be eliminated, which is entirely possible even without resorting to nuclear weapons. It would just require enough bombing. Of missile silos, SAMS, artillery sites, logistics and command sites...
In other words, it would require an enormous war that would cause hundreds of thousands of (if not more) deaths and completely and utterly destroy the country. Again.

In other words, it would require an enormous war that would cause hundreds of thousands of (if not more) deaths and completely and utterly destroy the country. Again.
The vast majority of DPRKians would not fight to keep their peoples apart.

The vast majority of DPRKians would not fight to keep their peoples apart.
...you hope. And even if 80% surrendered immediately (while I STONGLY doubt they would) it would STILL require an enormous war that would cause hundreds of thousands of (if not more) deaths and completely and utterly destroy the country. Again.

The vast majority of DPRKians would not fight to keep their peoples apart.

Exactly. Take out the regime, and that "million man army" will dissolve.

...you hope. And even if 80% surrendered immediately (while I STONGLY doubt they would) it would STILL require an enormous war that would cause hundreds of thousands of (if not more) deaths and completely and utterly destroy the country. Again.

That's not really true at all. The US would not be the ones liberating the DPRK. The South Koreans would. People on both sides want to be reunited. the Kim government has prevented that. The people of the DPRK will not let a chance for reunification go by.

That's not really true at all. The US would not be the ones liberating the DPRK. The South Koreans would. People on both sides want to be reunited. the Kim government has prevented that. The people of the DPRK will not let a chance for reunification go by.
...You, still, hope. It's possible, yeah. But you can't know that. You can just hope. And "try it out". If you're proven to be wrong, ... : /

...You, still, hope. It's possible, yeah. But you can't know that. You can just hope. And "try it out". If you're proven to be wrong, ... : /

No no, once the secret police and such'n are removed, the people of the DPRK will join their people in the south. Koreans hate having 2 seperate nations. Sons are seperated from fathers and mothers. Kids that are 20 years old have not seen their grandparents. The people want to be one. The Kim government has prevented that.

Send it back to North Korea, with a "this parcel could not be delivered" sticker, from the USPS? :rolleyes:

In other words, it would require an enormous war that would cause hundreds of thousands of (if not more) deaths and completely and utterly destroy the country. Again.
There's not much stuff in the country worth destroying. Nearly the entire industrial base is military, with minimal benefit to the people. The agricultural industries of the DPRK are in terrible condition.

That's not really true at all. The US would not be the ones liberating the DPRK. The South Koreans would. People on both sides want to be reunited. the Kim government has prevented that. The people of the DPRK will not let a chance for reunification go by.

What you dont realise, is that the people of the DPRK (poor bastards) have been brain washed into thinking kim jong loony is the greatest living person on the planet and can do no wrong, and his father is revered as the greatest dead person of all time(currently stuffed and mounted in his own tomb, rather like Lenin):eek:

Just have a look at todays dprk news web page
http://www.kcna.co.jp/index-e.htm

full of the usual anti-US vitriol, and singing the praises of socialism and the leadership of kim jong loony*

However , in a war situation, the only hope for the north is a lightning strike south while the US/South Korea blast the dprk airforce and air defences , then cling onto whatever captured terroritory in the vain hope of establishing a new ceasefire line further south.

Will they go that far? will they be stupid enough to fire a missile into/over Japan while 4 US trident subs lurk off the coast..... who knows.... only kim jong loony and he aint saying:confused:

El-Presidente Boris






* While the majority of the population starve on reduced rations since the dprk threw out the UN world food aid program

It is an actof WAR ans should be responded to as such.


Let's say they test it, and it lands on either Japan or the US. It doesn't contain a nuke, but it does drop debris in a major city, causing damage and some deaths (a handful).

What would a valid response be?

http://english.chosun.com/w21data/html/news/200606/200606190006.html




Note that the Aegis (modified version of Standard ER missile) system is operational in the area, and multiple successful tests have worked, in both mid-course and near-impact intercepts.

What you dont realise, is that the people of the DPRK (poor bastards) have been brain washed into thinking kim jong loony is the greatest living person on the planet and can do no wrong, and his father is revered as the greatest dead person of all time(currently stuffed and mounted in his own tomb, rather like Lenin):eek:

Just have a look at todays dprk news web page
http://www.kcna.co.jp/index-e.htm

full of the usual anti-US vitriol, and singing the praises of socialism and the leadership of kim jong loony*

However , in a war situation, the only hope for the north is a lightning strike south while the US/South Korea blast the dprk airforce and air defences , then cling onto whatever captured terroritory in the vain hope of establishing a new ceasefire line further south.

Will they go that far? will they be stupid enough to fire a missile into/over Japan while 4 US trident subs lurk off the coast..... who knows.... only kim jong loony and he aint saying:confused:

El-Presidente Boris






* While the majority of the population starve on reduced rations since the dprk threw out the UN world food aid program

Give the people of the DPRK some credit. They know the score just like their cousins in the south. The commoner is not brainwashed. They put out that show because they know they will be killed if they don't. The only people that are brainwashed are those in the upper echelons of the military and the party. Those are who you need to get rid of.

Take it as an act of war and eliminate their Launch sites, their nuclear facilities, and their missile batteries. Take out leadership targets, try to get Kim Jong Il, and take out the missiles pointed at South Korea first.

If we're honest with our selves we know that if we or the UN don't do it, the Japanese will do it with the nuclear weaponry that they "don't have".

Its easy really. You shoot the fucker down and you tell N.Korea never again if you want to remain a country with you know, people living in it. For people who say do nothing, why would you allow that exactly?

Shoot the missle down, then shoot a nuke at them. Give them a taste of American/Japanese/South Korean ICBMage

Let's say they test it, and it lands on either Japan or the US. It doesn't contain a nuke, but it does drop debris in a major city, causing damage and some deaths (a handful).

What would a valid response be?

http://english.chosun.com/w21data/html/news/200606/200606190006.html




Note that the Aegis (modified version of Standard ER missile) system is operational in the area, and multiple successful tests have worked, in both mid-course and near-impact intercepts.

I'm going to say this before going back and reading the previous 3-4 pages of responses.

If the America decided to launch a test missile on a sovereign state, with which they do not have a particularly good standing (as with Japan and America vs. North Korea), like Cuba, it would be treated as a declaration of war. A foreign missile, deliberately launched into sovereign territory, and causing any damage whatsoever is a serious breach of international security and in the worldview is considered just cause for a declaration of war. And if not war, then definitely there would be considerable international strain on already precarious relationships. However, if the missile were to be shot down en route, the subject could be approached in a peaceful manner and more rational--although the attacked nation has every right to be on the defensive and to know what the hell is going on. So in my mind, shooting the missile down is the best option--no casualties, and the matter can be brought before the international community for any sort of combined response (repurcussions).

Now I will read the other posts and see if I am just repeating somebody else...

Take it as an act of war and eliminate their Launch sites, their nuclear facilities, and their missile batteries. Take out leadership targets, try to get Kim Jong Il, and take out the missiles pointed at South Korea first.

If we're honest with our selves we know that if we or the UN don't do it, the Japanese will do it with the nuclear weaponry that they "don't have".

Quite true--it would provide a pretense (justifiable) for taking extreme measures. At the very least, perhaps remove their sites with some precision airstrikes, minimize civilian casualties, and prepare our units in the area for an impending counterattack if follow-on discussion fails.