N. korea intercepts us spy plane

[theavonlady 2]

http://story.news.yahoo.com/news?tm....h_korea

/avon winks at doctor shweitzer

[Tex -USMC- 0]

Those wacky Koreans... I guess this is their way of letting us know that they still want a hand-out.

[brgnorway 0]

Yes, it's something to think about I agree.

But what does one expect - being labeled as belonging to the "axis of evil" wouldn't make N.Korea much frendlier.

Actually, incidents like this was almost daily experience with norwegian and soviet fighters in the 70's and 80's.

[Tex -USMC- 0]

</span><table border="0" align="center" width="95%" cellpadding="3" cellspacing="1"><tr><td>Quote (brgnorway @ Mar. 04 2003,08:50)</td></tr><tr><td id="QUOTE">Yes, it's something to think about I agree.

But what does one expect - being labeled as belonging to the "axis of evil" wouldn't make N.Korea much frendlier.

Actually, incidents like this was almost daily experience with norwegian and soviet fighters in the 70's and 80's.<span id='postcolor'>

Yes, Bush and his foreign policy advisors are idiots. That 'axis of evil' thing is possibly the worst baseline for formulating international policy that I can think of. They tried to pull a Reagan and ended up realizing that America is more concerned with Joe Millionaire than the world, and the world isn't as keen to go along with the US, now that they don't have to worry about being incorporated into the Marxist/Leninist plan to bring about world socialism.

Yes, interceptions of spy planes in international airspace is common, but the fact that NK is doing it is reopening a dangerous precedent. NK hasn't intercepted a US signals aircraft since the 1960s.

[theavonlady 2]

I bet the next US spy plane up there won't be travelling alone.

[Mr. Snrub 0]

3--></span><table border="0" align="center" width="95%" cellpadding="3" cellspacing="1"><tr><td>Quote (theavonlady @ Mar. 04 2003,173)</td></tr><tr><td id="QUOTE">I bet the next US spy plane up there won't be travelling alone.<span id='postcolor'>

I hope the US doesn't decide to give the recon flights any fighter escorts - I wouldn't put it past the N.Korean govt., being the paranoid militants they are, to see these escorts as an 'offensive campaign against NK'. Having armed escorts might just serve to allow the N.Koreans to ratchet up the tension - they are so easy to provoke.

But if NK wants to shoot down an unarmed, passive US aircraft, then trying to avoid tension is kinda pointless...

The N.Koreans don't seem to have a particularly good understanding (or respect) of international boundaries - in 1968, a US surveillance ship (the USS Pueblo) was monitoring signals off NK, in international waters - the N.Koreans had a good idea of what it was doing, and just boarded it and towed it into harbour (after shooting it up a bit first).

[brgnorway 0]

</span><table border="0" align="center" width="95%" cellpadding="3" cellspacing="1"><tr><td>Quote (Tex [uSMC] @ Mar. 04 2003,08:55)</td></tr><tr><td id="QUOTE"><span id='postcolor'>

</span><table border="0" align="center" width="95%" cellpadding="3" cellspacing="1"><tr><td>Quote </td></tr><tr><td id="QUOTE">Yes, interceptions of spy planes in international airspace is common, but the fact that NK is doing it is reopening a dangerous precedent. NK hasn't intercepted a US signals aircraft since the 1960s.<span id='postcolor'>

I agree with you!

[cam0flage 0]

Interesting how CNN reported that the NK fighters "intercepted" the US aircraft. BBC reported that the NK planes just "approached" it. Intercepting sounds much more like shooting down a plane ... I admit that this is an interesting event, but I also think CNN has overreacted a bit.

[theavonlady 2]

</span><table border="0" align="center" width="95%" cellpadding="3" cellspacing="1"><tr><td>Quote (cam0flage @ Mar. 04 2003,14:19)</td></tr><tr><td id="QUOTE">Interesting how CNN reported that the NK fighters "intercepted" the US aircraft. BBC reported that the NK planes just "approached" it. Intercepting sounds much more like shooting down a plane ... I admit that this is an interesting event, but I also think CNN has overreacted a bit.<span id='postcolor'>

I don't know what your native language is but use of the word "intercept" is quite appropriate here.

</span><table border="0" align="center" width="95%" cellpadding="3" cellspacing="1"><tr><td>Quote </td></tr><tr><td id="QUOTE">in-ter-cept (v. in tuhr sept'; n. in'tuhr sept ) v. <-cept-ed,

-cept-ing> n.

v.t.

1. to take, seize, or halt (someone or

something on the way from one place to

another); cut off from an intended

destination: to intercept a messenger.<span id='postcolor'>

[Die Alive 0]

</span><table border="0" align="center" width="95%" cellpadding="3" cellspacing="1"><tr><td>Quote (cam0flage @ Mar. 04 2003,07:19)</td></tr><tr><td id="QUOTE">Interesting how CNN reported that the NK fighters "intercepted" the US aircraft. BBC reported that the NK planes just "approached" it. Intercepting sounds much more like shooting down a plane ... I admit that this is an interesting event, but I also think CNN has overreacted a bit.<span id='postcolor'>

Didn't China "approached" an US Spy plane in 200? (some time ago, like 2 years ago or something, in April....) Those NK better keep their distance, those Spy planes/SUVs are good at knocking you out of the sky.

-=Die Alive=-

[Tex -USMC- 0]

</span><table border="0" align="center" width="95%" cellpadding="3" cellspacing="1"><tr><td>Quote (Die Alive @ Mar. 04 2003,14:32)</td></tr><tr><td id="QUOTE">Didn't China "approached" an US Spy plane in 200? (some time ago, like 2 years ago or something, in April....)  Those NK better keep their distance, those Spy planes/SUVs are good at knocking you out of the sky.

-=Die Alive=-<span id='postcolor'>

Yeah, China 'approached' a US plane. That is, if by 'approach' you mean 'collide with and shear off half the aircraft's nose'.

Intercept is the right word for use here, semantics aside. The Koreans sent some airplanes 150 miles into international airspace just to let us know they cared. It happened all the time back during the Cold War, so it isn't a major deal. Still, as I said, NK hasn't done this since the Sixties, which means someone seems to think world diplomacy has gone back in time a few decades. Not good, but then, not completely bad.

[Othin 0]

Last time the North Koreans approached an American spy plane they shot it down. If I remember correctly this was shortly after they seized the Pueblo.

[The_Replicator 0]

</span><table border="0" align="center" width="95%" cellpadding="3" cellspacing="1"><tr><td>Quote </td></tr><tr><td id="QUOTE">A dispute between the United States and North Korea (news - web sites) over nuclear weapons development increased last week when North Korea restarted a 5-megawatt reactor that could produce plutonium for such weapons. North Korea said Saturday that nuclear war could break out at "any moment."

<span id='postcolor'>

[Othin 0]

</span><table border="0" align="center" width="95%" cellpadding="3" cellspacing="1"><tr><td>Quote (cam0flage @ Mar. 04 2003,04:19)</td></tr><tr><td id="QUOTE">Interesting how CNN reported that the NK fighters "intercepted" the US aircraft. BBC reported that the NK planes just "approached" it. Intercepting sounds much more like shooting down a plane ... I admit that this is an interesting event, but I also think CNN has overreacted a bit.<span id='postcolor'>

</span><table border="0" align="center" width="95%" cellpadding="3" cellspacing="1"><tr><td>Quote </td></tr><tr><td id="QUOTE">At one point one of the fighters "locked on" to the U.S. plane with its fire-support radar, Davis said. This is an action that would indicate a possible intent to fire, although in this case there was no hostile fire. <span id='postcolor'>

Given that fact that the North Koreans locked on, I would definetely classify it as an interception.

[Diplomata 0]

</span><table border="0" align="center" width="95%" cellpadding="3" cellspacing="1"><tr><td>Quote </td></tr><tr><td id="QUOTE">At one point one of the fighters "locked on" to the U.S. plane with its fire-support radar, Davis said. This is an action that would indicate a possible intent to fire, although in this case there was no hostile fire. <span id='postcolor'>

</span><table border="0" align="center" width="95%" cellpadding="3" cellspacing="1"><tr><td>Quote </td></tr><tr><td id="QUOTE">The closest the fighters came was about 50 feet, Davis said. <span id='postcolor'>

That sounds odd... If they got so colse they didn't need the radar to lock on, unless they wanted to be noticed. IMO this incident cannnot be called "interception".

[Othin 0]

</span><table border="0" align="center" width="95%" cellpadding="3" cellspacing="1"><tr><td>Quote (Diplomata @ Mar. 04 2003,11:48)</td></tr><tr><td id="QUOTE"></span><table border="0" align="center" width="95%" cellpadding="3" cellspacing="1"><tr><td>Quote </td></tr><tr><td id="QUOTE">At one point one of the fighters "locked on" to the U.S. plane with its fire-support radar, Davis said. This is an action that would indicate a possible intent to fire, although in this case there was no hostile fire. <span id='postcolor'>

</span><table border="0" align="center" width="95%" cellpadding="3" cellspacing="1"><tr><td>Quote </td></tr><tr><td id="QUOTE">The closest the fighters came was about 50 feet, Davis said. <span id='postcolor'>

That sounds odd...  If they got so colse they didn't need the radar to lock on, unless they wanted to be noticed. IMO this incident cannnot be called "interception".<span id='postcolor'>

A close proximity to target has nothing to do with radar lock. The warhead is armed through the lock on process.

[suchey 0]

Call me crazy, but shouldn't their first concern be to feed the starving population rather than bring the world to the brink of war? It sort of seems like a blackmail effort to make the world compenaste them for their own mistakes. Look across the border and see the South enjoying such novelties as food and economic development...get mad and decide that its time for a hand out..."give us stuff or we will blow stuff up". Doesn't exactly seem like the most sane approach for obtaining aid. The more this continues the more it seems that they are looking for any opportunity to launch the world into disaster. Its like a spoiled child saying if I can play then Ill break the toy.

[toadeater 0]

</span><table border="0" align="center" width="95%" cellpadding="3" cellspacing="1"><tr><td>Quote (Suchey @ Mar. 04 2003,21:08)</td></tr><tr><td id="QUOTE">Call me crazy, but shouldn't their first concern be to feed the starving population rather than bring the world to the brink of war?  It sort of seems like a blackmail effort to make the world compenaste them for their own mistakes.  Look across the border and see the South enjoying such novelties as food and economic development...get mad and decide that its time for a hand out..."give us stuff or we will blow stuff up".<span id='postcolor'>

So uh... what are you going to do about it? I don't see Bush doing anything about this.

Should have never started all that "Axis of Evil" talk. Is it my faulty memory, or didn't Bush publically say that NK was in need of a regime change? What is Kim Jong Il going to do after hearing that and seeing what is going on in Iraq?

Send him his petty food aid and leave him alone.

[FSPilot 0]

I'd hate to be a surveillance pilot right about now.

[theavonlady 2]

</span><table border="0" align="center" width="95%" cellpadding="3" cellspacing="1"><tr><td>Quote (FSPilot @ Mar. 04 2003,22:49)</td></tr><tr><td id="QUOTE">I'd hate to be a surveillance pilot right about now.<span id='postcolor'>

Over the UN building? I wouldn't worry.

[FSPilot 0]

We know Iraq is hiding weapons of mass destruction SOMEWHERE in the UN building, but all we've found out from surveillance photos is that they're not on the roof.

[suchey 0]

</span><table border="0" align="center" width="95%" cellpadding="3" cellspacing="1"><tr><td>Quote (toadeater @ Mar. 04 2003,02:30)</td></tr><tr><td id="QUOTE">Should have never started all that "Axis of Evil" talk. Is it my faulty memory, or didn't Bush publically say that NK was in need of a regime change? What is Kim Jong Il going to do after hearing that and seeing what is going on in Iraq?

Send him his petty food aid and leave him alone.<span id='postcolor'>

I see your point...but the world can also not be bullied into providing aid...what happens when he decides he needs 50 billion dollars to stabalize his countries economy...or he needs something else...it sets a pattern of bowing to military threat. Give us money or we blow stuff up...give us this, give us that or we blow stuff up. Where does it end? I doubt that this would all simply blow over if food aid was fully restored.

[FSPilot 0]

I think we were giving him food under the conditions that he abandon any WMD program. But we all know how that worked out.

[Hit_Sqd_Maximus 0]

Did he even give the food to the people?

[E6Hotel 0]

</span><table border="0" align="center" width="95%" cellpadding="3" cellspacing="1"><tr><td>Quote (Suchey @ Mar. 04 2003, 0230)</td></tr><tr><td id="QUOTE">Give us money or we blow stuff up...give us this, give us that or we blow stuff up.  Where does it end?<span id='postcolor'>

For some reason, the phrase "frickin' sharks with frickin' laser beams attached to their frickin' heads" keeps running through my head...

Semper Fi