NationStates Jolt Archive

At 11:30, Japan Time North Korea sent its missile up, bot sections splashed down in wrong areas (And the second stage far shorter than where projected). Japan has called for an emergency meeting of the UN Security Council to hold the North to account for this.
http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/as_nkorea_missile

So... what should be done, if anything?

http://forums.jolt.co.uk/showpost.php?p=14667830&postcount=26
Is there really a need to make another thread ?

Those crazed bastards are ready to wipe the place out, mark my words. Hope everything turns out to be fine NERVUN, although I doubt it'll end well, on whose end is still in question...

http://forums.jolt.co.uk/showpost.php?p=14667830&postcount=26
Is there really a need to make another thread ?
Didn't see the other thread, not to mention that it was built on pre-launch, this is post.

Didn't see the other thread, not to mention that it was built on pre-launch, this is post.Made an update about it being launched, but, meh, whatever.

As far as I know, no one shot at it, or even tried to shoot it down.

Seeing what Japan/US/S. Korea have to say is going to be interesting over the next few days.

Didn't see the other thread, not to mention that it was built on pre-launch, this is post.

just the run up to the launch was so small seems better to just put them into one thread.

Made an update about it being launched, but, meh, whatever.

As far as I know, no one shot at it, or even tried to shoot it down.

Seeing what Japan/US/S. Korea have to say is going to be interesting over the next few days.
Japan is in a tizzy right now about it. The Japanese government did confirm that it didn't take pot shots at the rocket as it went over Japan though.

just the run up to the launch was so small seems better to just put them into one thread.
Well if the Mods wish to merge I am hardly in a position to stop them. :tongue:

I dont think we're going to do anything. Everybody is going to be too afraid to go to war again. Last president who went to war had a political nightmare on his hands...

I dont think we're going to do anything. Everybody is going to be too afraid to go to war again. Last president who went to war had a political nightmare on his hands...

We didn't shoot anything down so there is no war.

I dont think we're going to do anything. Everybody is going to be too afraid to go to war again. Last president who went to war had a political nightmare on his hands...
Well no one really wants to go to war with North Korea because they could flatten Seoul which would be bad.

So... what should be done, if anything?
Make a thread in NSG. :p

Prepare plans for a nuclear party.

Make a thread in NSG. :p

Prepare plans for a nuclear party.

I'll bring the radioactive punch.

So... what should be done, if anything?

I hear putting paper bags over your head helps.

I wonder if the missile, when launched, started to slowly unravel at the seams like they do in the cartoons...

Is ignoring them an option? Because I'd seriously like to know if that is on the table.

Is ignoring them an option? Because I'd seriously like to know if that is on the table.
I think that would be the best and would just drive North Korea nuts.

Is ignoring them an option? Because I'd seriously like to know if that is on the table.
Well, ignore cannons work well on NS, but if the nuke is in the air...

If it does end up as a war shenanigan, I can only see it as North Korea being the aggressor... And lets be honest, so far all their missiles have been pretty epic fails, so I can't see it happening any time soon. I doubt that any other nations would want to risk being the country to tip it off and start a new war.

Honestly, I think North Korea would be someone hesitant in starting a war that is more than they can chew. China, Japan, US are all pissed off at them already, so I don't think any of them would be thrilled if they went and decided to grab Seoul.

I'll bring the radioactive punch.
Good! Anyone else willing to contribute for the party? We have yellow cake! :p

Is ignoring them an option?
If you are in NS II, yes. :D

I think that would be the best and would just drive North Korea nuts.

This launch proves to me one thing: Kim Jong-Il is an attention whore. :p

This proves to me one thing: Kim Jong-Il is an attention whore. :p

Kim Jung Il is Chavez with out oil and nuclear weapons that sort of work.

I wish we had shot it down...our Aegis system is the best, damn yellow bellies wouldn't know what to do if we shot it down. This nitwit Obama is too much of a pussy to do it...

...damn yellow bellies wouldn't know what to do if we shot it down...
Actually, they probably had it all written down already. Hard to know now what it might have been, but chances are it wouldn't have been pretty.

I wish we had shot it down...our Aegis system is the best, damn yellow bellies wouldn't know what to do if we shot it down. This nitwit Obama is too much of a pussy to do it...
Given that they threatened war if someone did...

Actually, they probably had it all written down already. Hard to know now what it might have been, but chances are it wouldn't have been pretty.

I suspect nuclear (given pretty crappy ones) and biological weapon strikes against Japan and maybe South Korea.

Given that they threatened war if someone did...

Pffft, like those damn yella bellies know anyting about war.



/sarcasm

I wish we had shot it down...our Aegis system is the best, damn yellow bellies wouldn't know what to do if we shot it down. This nitwit Obama is too much of a pussy to do it...
Was the nitwit Bush too much of a pussy to shoot down the one they fired in 2006?
Just curious.

Was the nitwit Bush too much of a pussy to shoot down the one they fired in 2006?
Just curious.

God, I love facts. And you, too, for posting them.

Was the nitwit Bush too much of a pussy to shoot down the one they fired in 2006?
Just curious.

I think so actually, why not, certainly they wouldn't let an unfriendly warplane enter their airspace, so why let a missile do the same? I think its dangerous to allow them to keep shooting missiles over japan, especially since they don't always seem to land where they mean them to.

why cant we all just get along, instead of fail launching missiles? :(

I wish we had shot it down...our Aegis system is the best, damn yellow bellies wouldn't know what to do if we shot it down. This nitwit Obama is too much of a pussy to do it...

Uh...over territory and in airspace that isn't ours? Are you okay?

I wish we had shot it down...our Aegis system is the best, damn yellow bellies wouldn't know what to do if we shot it down. This nitwit Obama is too much of a pussy to do it...

I should point out, AEGIS is our ship-based radar detection system, which feeds into the PHALANX ship-defence anti-missile system - which is designed to nail incoming aircraft and sea-skimmers, and is quite useless against ballistic missiles.

In point of fact, the US threats (and the Japanese ones, probably) were mostly bluff. Latest model PATRIOT anti-missiles MIGHT stop an incoming ballistic missile in it's terminal stage, when descending upon a target, but cannot engage such weapons at any other time. Our vaunted "missile shield" does not, in fact, work - and wouldn't even if it was complete, which it won't be until next year. Provided Obama doesn't deep-six it. Which he likely will, because, as I said before, it doesn't work.

(I actually hope he doesn't. Messing around and testing a system that doesn't work, but comes close, is a good way to develop a system that does.)

If all else fails, we can fire the IGNORE CANNON ON NORTH KOREA!!! no... it cant be... they already destroyed our ignore cannons with their ignore cannons... WHAT THE #%$@ DO WE DO!

I should point out, AEGIS is our ship-based radar detection system, which feeds into the PHALANX ship-defence anti-missile system - which is designed to nail incoming aircraft and sea-skimmers, and is quite useless against ballistic missiles.

In point of fact, the US threats (and the Japanese ones, probably) were mostly bluff. Latest model PATRIOT anti-missiles MIGHT stop an incoming ballistic missile in it's terminal stage, when descending upon a target, but cannot engage such weapons at any other time. Our vaunted "missile shield" does not, in fact, work - and wouldn't even if it was complete, which it won't be until next year. Provided Obama doesn't deep-six it. Which he likely will, because, as I said before, it doesn't work.

(I actually hope he doesn't. Messing around and testing a system that doesn't work, but comes close, is a good way to develop a system that does.)

They could also hit it at the initial boost stage.

We need the STOP THAT cannons from Phil Foglio's book Illegal Aliens.

I should point out, AEGIS is our ship-based radar detection system, which feeds into the PHALANX ship-defence anti-missile system - which is designed to nail incoming aircraft and sea-skimmers, and is quite useless against ballistic missiles. We actually have ABMs that can hit targets during the coasting phase, it's just a bitch to find the real target, and they're hard to position due to their size.

They could also hit it at the initial boost stage.

Only if the Patriot is within a quite small radius of the launch site - which would place it inside NK territory.

Na ka ja inmin kunde
inmine joguk ul ji ki za
mok sum uro ji ki za

We actually have ABMs that can hit targets during the coasting phase, it's just a bitch to find the real target, and they're hard to position due to their size.

Well, yes, we can. But we have only a 1-in-five record of success in doing that - and that was with missiles we were tracking via telemetry since launch, i.e. test missiles. I suspect our chances of managing it against an enemy are pretty much non-existent, at least until we upgrade our tech a fair bit.

... aaaaaand fails.

North Korea space launch 'fails' (http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/asia-pacific/7984254.stm)
North Korea failed in its attempt to get a satellite into space after a rocket launch early on Sunday, US and South Korean officials say.

At 11:30, Japan Time North Korea sent its missile up, bot sections splashed down in wrong areas (And the second stage far shorter than where projected). Japan has called for an emergency meeting of the UN Security Council to hold the North to account for this.

So... what should be done, if anything?

wiki: Resolution 1718 (the official UN site won't open it!)
The resolution's provisions include:

North Korea must "not conduct any further nuclear test or launch of a ballistic missile", "suspend all activities related to its ballistic missile programme" and "abandon all nuclear weapons and existing nuclear programmes in a complete, verifiable and irreversible manner".

Since NK claimed it was an attempt to place an object in orbit, it wasn't a test of a ballistic missile.

Unless sending up a Delta, a Sojuz or an Ariane qualifies as firing a ballistic missile, too.

Since NK claimed it was an attempt to place an object in orbit, it wasn't a test of a ballistic missile.
So you believe North Korea's claim? I have a wonderful bridge I'd like to sell you in New York, lovely view of Brooklyn.

I wish we had shot it down...our Aegis system is the best, damn yellow bellies wouldn't know what to do if we shot it down.

AEGIS? Actually the AEGIS isn't made to intercept missiles. It's built to guide missiles to surface targets. Maybe you're thinking of the PAC-3 or of the Phalanx (which are still far from being effective as ABM).

Maybe the only things close to a real ABM are the S-300 and the S-400, given that the old ABM treaty allowed the Russians to place ABM around Leningrad and Moscow.

Btw, shooting down, outside of US territory, a vehicle of a foreign country the US are in peace with. Tsk. Such action would not very easy to defend at the Security Council, expecially after the megafail of Colin Powell's about Iraqi WMDs.

So you believe North Korea's claim? I have a wonderful bridge I'd like to sell you in New York, lovely view of Brooklyn.

I don't believe nor disbelieve it. I'm merely saying that by any legal standard the burden of proof is on those who launch the allegation of a violation of sorts.

NK claims it was a civilian space test. Japan claims it was a military test. Burden of proof is on Japan.

Btw, how can anyone believe US claims about WMD after what Powell claimed at the UN?

Btw, how can anyone believe US claims about WMD after what Powell claimed at the UN?Because it's N. Korea?

Because it's N. Korea?

So first we believed "because it's Saddam". Should we buy it "because it's NK"?

The fact that a country is ruled by a dispotic regime doesn't mean that we have to forfeit logics, international standards and intellectual honesty. Like we did with Iraq in 2003.

Do Japan and the US have some solid proof that this was a test of a military missile? This is the point: burden of proof.

O shi-

Do Japan and the US have some solid proof that this was a test of a military missile? This is the point: burden of proof.

It's not just them saying it. Even the EU are.

It's not just them saying it. Even the EU are.

OK. So what? The point isn't just "who claims". The point is "is the claim supported by evidence" ?
Until I see proof, I'm not buying it. No chance.

So first we believed "because it's Saddam". Should we buy it "because it's NK"?

The fact that a country is ruled by a dispotic regime doesn't mean that we have to forfeit logics, international standards and intellectual honesty. Like we did with Iraq in 2003.

Do Japan and the US have some solid proof that this was a test of a military missile? This is the point: burden of proof.

It doesn't have to be a military missile, ICBMs and civilian orbital rockets are essentially the same technology, if you have one then you have the other.

So first we believed "because it's Saddam". Should we buy it "because it's NK"?

Unlike Saddam, the NK's have actually lit off a nuclear weapon, which is indicative of an actual desire and capability to possess such a device.



Do Japan and the US have some solid proof that this was a test of a military missile? This is the point: burden of proof.

It would help if they'd be as open about their space programs as everyone else.

AEGIS? Actually the AEGIS isn't made to intercept missiles. It's built to guide missiles to surface targets. Maybe you're thinking of the PAC-3 or of the Phalanx (which are still far from being effective as ABM).

Uh, no. The AEGIS system is an integrated weapons system originally designed as a SAM countermeasure to Soviet Maritime Aviation in the North Atlantic. It has evolved since its inception and now integrates a not insubstantial ABM capability that is as effective, if not more so, than the ground based mid-course defense that gets so much attention.

IMPROVE ZEEEE MIND!

http://www.globalsecurity.org/military/systems/ship/systems/aegis-bmd.htm
http://www.fas.org/man/dod-101/sys/ship/weaps/aegis.htm
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Aegis_Ballistic_Missile_Defense_System
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Aegis_combat_system

I can't quite remember the name of the guidance system that I think you're talking about, but it's definitely not AEGIS.

Maybe the only things close to a real ABM are the S-300 and the S-400, given that the old ABM treaty allowed the Russians to place ABM around Leningrad and Moscow.

Once again, not really as both the US, Israel, Japan and India have made significant strides in developing limited (in scope) ballistic missile countermeasures.

OK. So what? The point isn't just "who claims". The point is "is the claim supported by evidence" ?
Until I see proof, I'm not buying it. No chance.

If they have any real damning evidence, it will most likely be classified at this point in time.

If they have any real damning evidence, it will most likely be classified at this point in time.And for the next fifty years.

And for the next fifty years.

In the US? You gotta be kidding. The US has trouble keeping much classified for five years.

If they have any real damning evidence, it will most likely be classified at this point in time.

Although, we as civilians can put together a pretty tight circumstantial case.

First and foremost is the closed nature of the DPRK's missile program. Unlike virtually every other spacefaring nation, the DPRK does not involve other countries in the operations and designs of their technology, even though they would almost certainly benefit from doing so. Cooperation is an integral part of space exploration for everyone else, and it has led to significant success in ventures ranging from the Apollo-Soyuz missions to the International Space Station. The DPRK does not even allow foreign observers to come take a look at their rocket or its facilities--never mind the level of prestige (which Kim so desperately craves) that they would get if, say, the Director of NASA or the ESA were to hang out at the launch site for a few days.

Secondly, the nature of the program within North Korea. It's run out of the military, it's staffed by the military, and all resources that go into it are derived from the military.

Third, the stated goal of the "satellite" that the DPRK claims they were launching was for the purpose of broadcasting patriotic songs out into space. I'm sorry--at least include a thermometer for taking the temperature, or something. This is a country where millions are people are starving to death, and ol' Kim is trying to create a Juche version of XM satellite radio? Seriously?

Fourth, the nature of the facility. It's a concealed, fortified, isolated and secured location. Most of the Musudan Ri facility (http://www.globalsecurity.org/wmd/world/dprk/nodong.htm) is underground, the staff works above ground only during hours when imaging satellites are either not present, or impeded by weather conditions. The entire region has been evacuated of civilians, and it's tucked away where no foreigner could ever get to it.

http://sitrep.globalsecurity.org/articles/090405289-the-meaning-of-north-korean-mi.htm

In the US? You gotta be kidding. The US has trouble keeping much classified for five years.Officially, anyways. ;)

I don't disagree with you, Andaluciae, the NK rocket program is rather clearly a thinly-veiled attempt at making a long-range missile. However, I would point out that it's operations, as you've described them, are very similar to the X-Project security levels the US imposed in the 1950s and 60s before that project went public.

The X-Project was designed to improve our capabilities with regard to aircraft, not to directly threaten another country. High-security doesn't necessarily imply threat.

I don't disagree with you, Andaluciae, the NK rocket program is rather clearly a thinly-veiled attempt at making a long-range missile. However, I would point out that it's operations, as you've described them, are very similar to the X-Project security levels the US imposed in the 1950s and 60s before that project went public.

The X-Project was designed to improve our capabilities with regard to aircraft, not to directly threaten another country. High-security doesn't necessarily imply threat.

I think the difference here comes from the fact that any advances NK is making with its rocketery were made by the West and China 30 years ago. I don't understand what it is trying to hide unless it is a weapon to threaten the region.

I think the difference here comes from the fact that any advances NK is making with its rocketery were made by the West and China 30 years ago. I don't understand what it is trying to hide unless it is a weapon to threaten the region.

Aye, the ROK's are going to launch a satellite later this summer, and they've made use of US, Japanese and Russian expertise in the field. As a result, the rocket they send up will likely not only be more advanced than the 1950's space jalopy the NK's built, but it will be highly observed by the international community. Oh, and it will likely succeed in, you know, actually flying without crashing.

And the Dark Lord sends Kim Jong-Il an iPod loaded with his speeches warning North Korea not to launch and threatening to be very, very disappointed if they do. :rolleyes:

It doesn't have to be a military missile, ICBMs and civilian orbital rockets are essentially the same technology, if you have one then you have the other.

Hence a launch of let's say an Ariane 5, of a Delta IV, or of a Sojuz are military tests.

Yeah.:rolleyes:

Unlike Saddam, the NK's have actually lit off a nuclear weapon, which is indicative of an actual desire and capability to possess such a device.
Yes. And how does this imply that whenever they fly something it's a weapon?

By the same standard, every time China, India, Europe, Russia, or the USA launch something into orbit we should assume it's a weapon. Because China, India, Britain, France, Russia and the USA have nuclear weapons (and one of these countries actually used them in a war, so this is indicative of an actual desire and capability to possess and use such a device).


It would help if they'd be as open about their space programs as everyone else.

The burden of proof is not on NK, anyway. They say it's not a weapon: I still have to see proof that it is a weapon.

By the way, how much open about their own space programs were the USA and CCCP back at the beginning of the space age?

Yes. And how does this imply that whenever they fly something it's a weapon?

By the same standard, every time China, India, Europe, Russia, or the USA launch something into orbit we should assume it's a weapon. Because China, India, Britain, France, Russia and the USA have nuclear weapons (and one of these countries actually used them in a war, so this is indicative of an actual desire and capability to possess and use such a device).



The burden of proof is not on NK, anyway. They say it's not a weapon: I still have to see proof that it is a weapon.

By the way, how much open about their own space programs were the USA and CCCP back at the beginning of the space age?
We also have international observers for our space program launches.
We have established a protocol for these things in order to prevent war, and that North Korea is in flagrant violation of.

Secondly, the nature of the program within North Korea. It's run out of the military, it's staffed by the military, and all resources that go into it are derived from the military.

Just like the US and CCCP space programs were in the beginning...


Third, the stated goal of the "satellite" that the DPRK claims they were launching was for the purpose of broadcasting patriotic songs out into space. I'm sorry--at least include a thermometer for taking the temperature, or something. This is a country where millions are people are starving to death, and ol' Kim is trying to create a Juche version of XM satellite radio? Seriously?
Sputnik I didn't make much more than broadcast a beep.


Fourth, the nature of the facility. It's a concealed, fortified, isolated and secured location. Most of the Musudan Ri facility (http://www.globalsecurity.org/wmd/world/dprk/nodong.htm) is underground, the staff works above ground only during hours when imaging satellites are either not present, or impeded by weather conditions. The entire region has been evacuated of civilians, and it's tucked away where no foreigner could ever get to it.

You know, when one is surrounded by the allies of a country which is known for using stealth bombers and cruise missiles fired from off-coast to take down facilities without pre-emptive notice... (see US bombings in Africa in 1999 iirc) ... or to support an ally in Near East which routinely conducts airstrikes into foreign territory (Israel striking into Syrian, Iraqi, Sudanese territory)... well, I can understand why one makes it fortified and underground.

I'm not saying that it CANNOT be a weapon or that it CANNOT be used to build weapons. It could be. Just like aircrafts. Or steel pipes. Or wheels.

The point is: did they test an actual and working offensive weapon? are they preparing to attack someone? Proof requested to avoid Iraq 2.

Here is a accurate assessment of the situation I think. Not to worry this commentary says..... at least not right now.


http://www.cnn.com/2009/POLITICS/04/05/cirincione.north.korea/index.html

I dont think we're going to do anything. Everybody is going to be too afraid to go to war again. Last president who went to war had a political nightmare on his hands...

It' also be an economical nightmare. The USA having to spent billions on non-productive stuff like war, that'd be... bad. Beyond the usual concerns about war as such.

We also have international observers for our space program launches.
Now. Time before, we didn't.
We have established a protocol for these things in order to prevent war, and that North Korea is in flagrant violation of.

NK isn't a party to the NPT. What other protocol are you referring to?

btw, wiki: npt
On September 19, 2005, North Korea announced that it would agree to a preliminary accord. Under the accord, North Korea would scrap all of its existing nuclear weapons and nuclear production facilities, rejoin the NPT, and readmit IAEA inspectors. The difficult issue of the supply of light water reactors to replace North Korea's indigenous nuclear power plant program, as per the 1994 Agreed Framework, was left to be resolved in future discussions[35]. On the next day North Korea reiterated its known view that until it is supplied with a light water reactor it will not dismantle its nuclear arsenal or rejoin the NPT [36].
I think they're mostly trying to apply pressure.

I think so actually, why not, certainly they wouldn't let an unfriendly warplane enter their airspace, so why let a missile do the same? I think its dangerous to allow them to keep shooting missiles over japan, especially since they don't always seem to land where they mean them to.

Or DO they? Probably it's all a sinister plan to blame bad engineering once they actually hit Tokyo. The North Koreans' schemes are Il, I say!

The whole ordeal is a bunch of paranoia. The North Koreans aren't going to try anything against the United States. We should still watch it just to be safe, but noone should go off convinced that the North Koreans are out to kill us all.

According to the Associated Press, it Fizzled anyway....

So, it was an Epic Failure...I say we cut em off from all support, or contact from anyone, and carry on...

Now. Time before, we didn't.


NK isn't a party to the NPT. What other protocol are you referring to?

btw, wiki: npt

I think they're mostly trying to apply pressure.

Its not NPT. It is law of the high seas, and national sovereignty in international law. It it really a no brainier you fly anything that fly's over someone's territory You invite international observation from the site of launch, and ask permission. They have violated Japan's Sovereign Air space, with out permission and with out outside observation of what the cargo of the rocket was. That alone is considered Causa Bellum.

Hence a launch of let's say an Ariane 5, of a Delta IV, or of a Sojuz are military tests.

Yeah.:rolleyes:

That's not what I said. The technologies are the same and they are technologies that the west doesn't want NK to have access to.

Also, you fail to appreciate that it is the North Korean military that has conducted this missile launch, by definition it is a military launch.

Just like the US and CCCP space programs were in the beginning...

Did I ever deny that?

In this case, UNSC Resolution 1718 (2006) explicitly forbids the DPRK from developing or testing long range rocket technology. Neither of the superpowers were subject to UNSC resolutions limiting their rocket development, making this situation fundamentally different.


Sputnik I didn't make much more than broadcast a beep.

Uh, no, not really.

It "helped to identify the upper atmospheric layer's density, through measuring the satellite's orbital changes. It also provided data on radio-signal distribution in the ionosphere. Pressurized nitrogen, in the satellite's body, provided the first opportunity for meteoroid detection. If a meteoroid penetrated the satellite's outer hull, it would be detected by the temperature data sent back to Earth." -wikipedia



You know, when one is surrounded by the allies of a country which is known for using stealth bombers and cruise missiles fired from off-coast to take down facilities without pre-emptive notice... (see US bombings in Africa in 1999 iirc) ... or to support an ally in Near East which routinely conducts airstrikes into foreign territory (Israel striking into Syrian, Iraqi, Sudanese territory)... well, I can understand why one makes it fortified and underground.

Then let it be a facility that is open to international observation, so as to clear it up. Fortification behavior merely achieves the goal of making the US and its allies in the region even more suspicious.

I'm not saying that it CANNOT be a weapon or that it CANNOT be used to build weapons. It could be. Just like aircrafts. Or steel pipes. Or wheels.

Except the tires on a Fiat 500, the plumbing in my house, and the plane I flew on two weeks ago are not manufactured, owned and operated by the military. The Taepodong-2 is solely a project within the DPRK military.

The point is: did they test an actual and working offensive weapon? are they preparing to attack someone?

They attempted to test a long-range missile whose purpose is likely that of the deployment of a nuclear weapon in contradiction to UNSC Resolution 1718.

It's definitely not a working weapon, that's for sure. They don't make many things that work in the DPRK.

Proof requested to avoid Iraq 2.

Where did that come from? Who was talking about a war, because I certainly wasn't.

...or are you just building a strawman?

I don't trust the Koreans. And I never will. I can never forgive them for the death of my boy.

Yes. And how does this imply that whenever they fly something it's a weapon?

The Taepodong-2 is operated by the DPRK military. If it were operated by a civilian space agency--a DPRK version of NASA or the ESA--then it would be different. If they opened the program up to some outside observation, it would be different, but they don't.

By the same standard, every time China, India, Europe, Russia, or the USA launch something into orbit we should assume it's a weapon. Because China, India, Britain, France, Russia and the USA have nuclear weapons

Didn't I already address the qualitative difference here? Whenever any of these other powers make a space launch, it's done in the open, with significant international cooperation in the development of the payload, and significant observation on site. We can positively confirm that when a launch occurs, that they're lofting a GPS satellite, a space telescope or the Backstreet Boys. North Korea did not make the launch facility open to international inspection, and that casts doubts.

(and one of these countries actually used them in a war, so this is indicative of an actual desire and capability to possess and use such a device).

1945 was 64 years ago. Currently, none of the decision-makers in the government were in a position to influence the decision to detonate the bombs over Japan. Hence, fail.

North Korea, though, remains ruled by Kim Jong Il, who was in charge in 2006 when the country attempted to detonate an atomic bomb (in violation of UNSC resolutions). He launched a wide series of rockets in 2006 He was in charge in 1996, when they tried, and failed, to launch a Taepodong-1 missile.


The burden of proof is not on NK, anyway. They say it's not a weapon: I still have to see proof that it is a weapon.

And, yet, they deliberately obscure the purpose of the missile that was launched. I'd be less leery about this if they were to, you know, let international reps take a look at what they're doing.

By the way, how much open about their own space programs were the USA and CCCP back at the beginning of the space age?

There were no security council resolutions against their actions, and it doesn't hurt that neither of them were lead by Kim Jong Il.

Sounds like what I said would happen is what happened...

Heh. It was such a big deal that I didn't hear about it here in Osaka for a good 12 hours afterwards. Not one word about it from anybody at the hanami.

I can't quite remember the name of the guidance system that I think you're talking about, but it's definitely not AEGIS.
Oh.
Must have mixed them.

Once again, not really as both the US, Israel, Japan and India have made significant strides in developing limited (in scope) ballistic missile countermeasures.
Meh... I think that Israel, Japan and India are trying to intercept much shorter-range missiles than the ICBMs the USA and Russia want to be able to take down.

ps.I see you know fas.org . You're a pro, buddy.

Heh. It was such a big deal that I didn't hear about it here in Osaka for a good 12 hours afterwards. Not one word about it from anybody at the hanami.
It was a hanami... you're surprised that they didn't talk about something other than alcohol? ;)

The Taepodong-2 is operated by the DPRK military.
...North Korea did not make the launch facility open to international inspection, and that casts doubts.
Cast doubts? Yes.
Proves anything? No.

North Korea, though, remains ruled by Kim Jong Il, who was in charge in 2006 when the country attempted to detonate an atomic bomb (in violation of UNSC resolutions).
They were answering the violations to the Six-Party treaty. It may not be nice, but it's logical, and also saved them from being invaded by Bush.


And, yet, they deliberately obscure the purpose of the missile that was launched. I'd be less leery about this if they were to, you know, let international reps take a look at what they're doing.

I still say, it's just like when they detonated the bomb. They're trying to have the US apply that sort of "aid in change of disarming" deal (which includes giving NK a light-water reactor btw).

There were no security council resolutions against their actions, and it doesn't hurt that neither of them were lead by Kim Jong Il.
Maybe because both of them place their arses on the comfy permanent veto power seats? Could it be because of that? :eek2:
Anyway one of them was led by Stalin. I get that Stalin was a very nice guy, since he never got tsk-tsk-ed by the UNSC. :rolleyes:

Did I ever deny that?

In this case, UNSC Resolution 1718 (2006) explicitly forbids the DPRK from developing or testing long range rocket technology.
As I stated before I couldn't access the site at the UN with that resolution, but wiki about res.1718 spoke about ballistic missiles, not about orbital rockets.



Then let it be a facility that is open to international observation, so as to clear it up. Fortification behavior merely achieves the goal of making the US and its allies in the region even more suspicious.

As I stated before, if it was in the open it is very likely that the US would lead a strike on it. I think that it's perfectly understandable that NK doesn't trust the US.

The Taepodong-2 is solely a project within the DPRK military.

Yes. Just like the USAF did with the first Explorer series. Or like CCCP in the beginning - well... not if you consider KGB civilian.
So what?



They attempted to test a long-range missile whose purpose is likely that of the deployment of a nuclear weapon in contradiction to UNSC Resolution 1718.
Likely, you say. You're not sure.


It's definitely not a working weapon, that's for sure. They don't make many things that work in the DPRK.

So why are you scared?


Where did that come from? Who was talking about a war, because I certainly wasn't.
...or are you just building a strawman?
I wasn't addressing you specifically. But be assured that many people were advocating airstrikes and invasions of NK - you know, rogue countries, axis of evil, etc, etc... (see newspapers of, let's say, 4 to 6 years ago?) Though those people have got somewhat less vocal since NK detonated the bomb, that is.
Anyway, shooting down an orbital rocket could be a casus belli if not a downright act of war.
Also, remember who the thing whit Iraq-2003 started. Lies lightly shrouded by "it's likely", "we don't know that there aren't hence there are", "he's evil anyway"...


To sum it up: if anybody wants to screw the NK military, the best thing to do is to keep to that bloody Six-Party deal and give NK the aid they were promised in exchange for their dismantling of their nuclear weapons project.

And the Dark Lord sends Kim Jong-Il an iPod loaded with his speeches warning North Korea not to launch and threatening to be very, very disappointed if they do. :rolleyes:

You think that's clever.

At 11:30, Japan Time North Korea sent its missile up, bot sections splashed down in wrong areas (And the second stage far shorter than where projected). Japan has called for an emergency meeting of the UN Security Council to hold the North to account for this.
http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/as_nkorea_missile

So... what should be done, if anything?

Change the Stars and Stripes to a big, white Flag with a donkey on it, and the word "Gelded."

It was a hanami... you're surprised that they didn't talk about something other than alcohol? ;)

Actually, considering it was the union hanami, and all sorts of politics was spoken of, yeah, I was a bit...

As I stated before I couldn't access the site at the UN with that resolution, but wiki about res.1718 spoke about ballistic missiles, not about orbital rockets.
An orbital rocket IS a ballistic missile.

An orbital rocket IS a ballistic missile.

No.
wiki: ballistic missile
A ballistic missile is a missile that follows a sub-orbital ballistic flightpath with the objective of delivering a warhead (often nuclear) to a predetermined target.

wiki: orbital vehicle (redirecting to spacecraft)
A spacecraft is a craft or machine designed for spaceflight. On a sub-orbital spaceflight, a spacecraft enters space then returns to the Earth. For an orbital spaceflight, a spacecraft enters a closed orbit around the planetary body.

True, the Russians derived ICBMs from orbital rockets, but to say "ballistic missile = orbital rocket" is a bit like saying "DC-3 Dakota = F-15 Eagle".

As I stated before I couldn't access the site at the UN with that resolution, but wiki about res.1718 spoke about ballistic missiles, not about orbital rockets.

I haven't seen any evidence that this is an orbital rocket, given that, from what I can tell, it didn't follow an orbital trajectory--it didn't even obtain a ballistic trajectory, although it did explode some 2000 miles downrange.



As I stated before, if it was in the open it is very likely that the US would lead a strike on it. I think that it's perfectly understandable that NK doesn't trust the US.

The US could easily strike it if it were a closed site--hiding what is occurring does not change this. Further, there are plenty of competent and neutral international observers, rather than observers from the US. The classic examples being Sweden or Switzerland.


Yes. Just like the USAF did with the first Explorer series. Or like CCCP in the beginning - well... not if you consider KGB civilian.
So what?

And they both used these early tests for military purposes.

Likely, you say. You're not sure.

Of course. I'm arguing a circumstantial case, and while I feel that the burden of proof has been met to prove that the DPRK is in violation of UNSC 1718, I'll admit that I might be wrong. It's intrinsic when dealing with indirect analysis.

So why are you scared?

I'm not scared. I am bothered that the DPRK is so flagrantly violating international law, and that in doing so, they are setting an example to other states.


To sum it up: if anybody wants to screw the NK military, the best thing to do is to keep to that bloody Six-Party deal and give NK the aid they were promised in exchange for their dismantling of their nuclear weapons project.

Except for the fact that the DPRK has routinely done what it wants regardless of the UN and other major regional stakeholders.

No.
wiki: ballistic missile
A ballistic missile is a missile that follows a sub-orbital ballistic flightpath with the objective of delivering a warhead (often nuclear) to a predetermined target.

wiki: orbital vehicle (redirecting to spacecraft)
A spacecraft is a craft or machine designed for spaceflight. On a sub-orbital spaceflight, a spacecraft enters space then returns to the Earth. For an orbital spaceflight, a spacecraft enters a closed orbit around the planetary body.

True, the Russians derived ICBMs from orbital rockets, but to say "ballistic missile = orbital rocket" is a bit like saying "DC-3 Dakota = F-15 Eagle".I was simply going by the original meaning of "ballistic", that it throws things up high. Your sentence came across to me like "The ban wasn't against Rolls Royces, it was against automobiles!"

Cast doubts? Yes.
Proves anything? No.

And I doubt we could prove it either way from the amount of information we all have here. That it casts doubt, though, is significant in that we can no longer take the DPRK's claims at face value.


They were answering the violations to the Six-Party treaty. It may not be nice, but it's logical, and also saved them from being invaded by Bush.

I think a whole host of other factors restrained military action from being carried out against the DPRK, including the health and well being of allies in the region, the comparatively limited military capacity of the US and support from its Chinese patron, amongst other things. The bomb was more a bargaining chip for other stuff.


I still say, it's just like when they detonated the bomb. They're trying to have the US apply that sort of "aid in change of disarming" deal (which includes giving NK a light-water reactor btw).

Why? The PRC provides DPRK with a rather large quantity of open market and black market goods, including weapons and food, as well as industrial and luxury goods.

Maybe because both of them place their arses on the comfy permanent veto power seats? Could it be because of that? :eek2:
Anyway one of them was led by Stalin. I get that Stalin was a very nice guy, since he never got tsk-tsk-ed by the UNSC. :rolleyes:

And the DPRK has a security council patron who protects it just as much as the US protects the Israelis, just as zealously as they protect themselves.