North Korea about to launch ICBM

[Ironsight 1]

http://img506.imageshack.us/img506/773/missilelaunchkorea1am.jpg

Big Brother 2006

LOL check this out:

http://www.globalsecurity.org/wmd/world/dprk/no_dong-imagery.htm

[deanosbeano 0]

nice one ,try this too

missiile base

[Hornet85 0]

hope they are not so crasy so they lunch.

If it even gets close to the USA or any US Allied the NATO RF will probebly be landing in Korea realy fast.

And that might be the start of WWIII

[Balschoiw 0]

Huh ?

Quote[/b] ]the NATO RF will probebly be landing in Korea realy fast

Where do you get that bull from ?

Quote[/b] ]And that might be the start of WWIII

And that´s even more bull or do you think that china will come rushing in defense ?

[FriketMonkey 0]

Sanctions that hurt North Korea's Economy are more likely to occur then an invasion.

[Ares1978 0]

Sanctions that hurt North Korea's Economy are more likely to occur then an invasion.

North Korea has an economy?

[Ironsight 1]

Sanctions that hurt North Korea's Economy are more likely to occur then an invasion.

North Korea has an economy?

And the bit of economy they have is totally self-sufficient.

[Hornet85 0]

Huh ?

Quote[/b] ]the NATO RF will probebly be landing in Korea realy fast

Where do you get that bull from ?

Quote[/b] ]And that might be the start of WWIII

And that´s even more bull or do you think that china will come rushing in defense ?  

No i dont but if nukes starts droping down some wher more countrys will probebly ba angry

And you never know what Bush will do (never trust him) so its not inposible that a Invasion of North Korea will follow

Hej this is internet i belive what i whant

[Ironsight 1]

Huh ?

Quote[/b] ]the NATO RF will probebly be landing in Korea realy fast

Where do you get that bull from ?

Quote[/b] ]And that might be the start of WWIII

And that´s even more bull or do you think that china will come rushing in defense ?

No i dont but if nukes starts droping down some wher more countrys will probebly ba angry

Who said anything about nukes? It's just a test missile probably without any payload.

[Balschoiw 0]

It would be kind of mad to equip the first prototype with an active NBC warhead.

And even if they wanted, where should they have it from ? Peter Pan ?

It´s just the first test of a north corean ICBM.

Noone knows if it will work and as a matter of fact this test is directed towards the missile itself and the guidance system, not the delivery of any warhead.

Any country in the world can develope an ICBM carrier system. There´s little you can do about. It´s not illegal.

Quote[/b] ]And you never know what Bush will do (never trust him) so its not inposible that a Invasion of North Korea will follow

Even Bush is smart enough to know that an attack on NK without the backing of an international force would be rather suicidal for his political goals (read upcoming votes) and would expose south corea to risks that he can´t cope with.

Unless NC attacks a neighbouring country there´s nothing he will do.

Furthermore the NATO is a defense alliance. Attacking NK, unless NK itself has attacked a NATO ally is not on the list. NATO has not adopted the preemptive strike scheme of the US and will not be able to as it´s ruled out by NATO legal terms.

So even if this is the internet, you´re talking bullshit.

[echo1 0]

Sanctions that hurt North Korea's Economy are more likely to occur then an invasion.

The originality!

Quote[/b] ]Even Bush is smart enough to know that an attack on NK without the backing of an international force would be rather suicidal for his political goals (read upcoming votes) and would expose south corea to risks that he can´t cope with.

What votes? This is his last term, he cant serve another term (thank God)

Quote[/b] ]Furthermore the NATO is a defense alliance. Attacking NK, unless NK itself has attacked a NATO ally is not on the list. NATO has not adopted the preemptive strike scheme of the US and will not be able to as it´s ruled out by NATO legal terms.

Emm, remember Kosovo? NATO went in there, and they werent being attacked. I wouldnt rule out a NATO attack on N. Korea. As unlikely as it is, it could happen.

[Messiah 2]

Quote[/b] ]Furthermore the NATO is a defense alliance. Attacking NK, unless NK itself has attacked a NATO ally is not on the list. NATO has not adopted the preemptive strike scheme of the US and will not be able to as it´s ruled out by NATO legal terms.

Emm, remember Kosovo? NATO went in there, and they werent being attacked. I wouldnt rule out a NATO attack on N. Korea. As unlikely as it is, it could happen.

thats not quite the same situation tho CH.... Kosovo was a humanitarian/peacekeeping/disarmament mission, sanctioned by the UN - it was in no way a 'liberation' or 'Pre-emptive' mission like iraq is/north korea would be

[Balschoiw 0]

Quote[/b] ]What votes? This is his last term, he cant serve another term (thank God)

Ding Dong:

2006 Midterm elections

Quote[/b] ]Emm, remember Kosovo? NATO went in there, and they werent being attacked. I wouldnt rule out a NATO attack on N. Korea. As unlikely as it is, it could happen.

Totally different book.

[Sophion-Black 0]

Story

This is a biggie, pretty sure it doesn't go under USA politics thread due to its [assumed] severity.

My suggestions:

1) Consult the UN Security Counsel

2) Rally all willing nations for possible (even nuclear) war

3) Deploy more bombers (Nuclear capable) to the pacific

4) Re-evaluate US and Allied positions

5) Have the bombers fly patrols loaded with live nuclear cargo

6) Move the parts of the US Pacific fleet to striking positions

7) Wait

But im sure most of these steps have been furfilled already.

Any comments?

[HotShot 0]

Check this thread.

You wait for one to go off and then they send off 3 all at once.

Wonder if the US had a go at shooting them down? Or if they even knew about them being fired before they crashed?

[Marco.A.Aguilar1 0]

I just read this earlier, not enough action is taken but I still believe that the amount that has been contributed is fair enough.

[Sophion-Black 0]

supposedly:

NORAD says the missiles fired are "Normal" land to air missiles, and not ballistic from NK. Two missiles detected and presumed to land in the sea of Japan.

White House says its NK tyring to get attention (most attention has been on Iran). They say NK wants help, they want to talk to the US.

That is why US military has been alert but not active

[echo1 0]

1) Consult the UN Security Counsel

2) Rally all willing nations for possible (even nuclear) war

3) Deploy more bombers (Nuclear capable) to the pacific

4) Re-evaluate US and Allied positions

5) Have the bombers fly patrols loaded with live nuclear cargo

6) Move the parts of the US Pacific fleet to striking positions

7) Wait

"Sir, they test fired a dud missile!"

"Let's bomb those b*****ds!"

I dont think that theyre gona go to war over this. Its just gona make things more difficult for N. Korea in the long run.

[Homefry 0]

I did almost laugh when I heard the missile in question wasn't successful. Talk about over-exaggeration. It didn't make it 1,000 kilometers, let alone 6,000.

[Bordoy 0]

I did almost laugh when I heard the missile in question wasn't successful.  Talk about over-exaggeration.  It didn't make it 1,000 kilometers, let alone 6,000.

What the point in TESTING if you know it works, waste of resources.

[Homefry 0]

I did almost laugh when I heard the missile in question wasn't successful. Talk about over-exaggeration. It didn't make it 1,000 kilometers, let alone 6,000.

What the point in TESTING if you know it works, waste of resources.

I'm not arguing the importance of testing. I just found it comical that such large estimates were made, and the missile didn't come close. That's all.

[Ares1978 0]

I did almost laugh when I heard the missile in question wasn't successful.  Talk about over-exaggeration.  It didn't make it 1,000 kilometers, let alone 6,000.

What the point in TESTING if you know it works, waste of resources.

I'm not arguing the importance of testing.  I just found it comical that such large estimates were made, and the missile didn't come close.  That's all.

Well, this test says absolutely nothing about the capabilities of the system. The test didn't fail because the missile type couldn't fly that far, it failed because that particular missile malfunctioned.

What I found comical, is that the test failed when the whole world was looking.

[echo1 0]

The missile, from what I heard, had a maximum range that would have allowed it to hit Alaska only. What is in Alaska of great strategic importance that the Koreans could target?

[EiZei 0]

The missile, from what I heard, had a maximum range that would have allowed it to hit Alaska only. What is in Alaska of great strategic importance that the Koreans could target?

When you are fighting a nuclear war with sixties technology against united states you really don't go for the counterforce targets.

[Placebo 29]

Two North Korea missile topics merged, search before posting in future please.