U.S. weighs shootdown of N. Korea missile

June 20, 2006

WASHINGTON - The Bush administration is weighing responses to a possible North Korean missile test that include attempting to shoot it down in flight over the Pacific, defense officials told The Associated Press on Tuesday.

Because
North Korea has made it a practice not to announce its missile tests in advance, U.S. officials say they cannot be sure of the government's intentions. Under that circumstance, the
Pentagon is considering the possibility that it might need to attempt an interception, two defense officials said.

The officials agreed to discuss the matter only on condition of anonymity because of its political sensitivity.

Pentagon spokesman Bryan Whitman said he could not say whether the multibillion-dollar U.S. anti-missile defense system might be used in the event of a North Korean test. That system, which includes a handful of missiles that could be fired from Alaska and California, has had a spotty record in tests.

http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20060620/ap_on_go_pr_wh/missile_defense_korea;_ylt=A86.I2mFf5hEP0UAvQis0NUE;_ylu=X3oDMTA2Z2szazkxBHNlYwN0bQ--

Wouldn't this be considered an act of war if try to shoot down their missile?

Everyone knows our system doesn't stand a chance at taking out a missle unless the thing has a fucking homing beacon in it and holds REAL STILL. Boondoggle, thy name is Star Wars.

with a surface to air intercept, but actually have a buncha a/c in the sky ready to intercept on the fly. Then they could fart around trying to figure out what the capability of the NK bunch have to KNOW how they actually did it....

And, if they shut up about the method, they may be able to fool a few other folks as well.

Thats why the ABM thing was created in the first place. As a ballisitc missile it would actually be flying in space, just in a sub-orbital ballistic trajectory. When it re-enter the atmosphere it would probably be doing over Mach 10, so it is impossible that anything short of the missile dfence system could touch it, and highly unlikely that even that could do anything.

Who knows, really? All we've seen is a few grainy pics of the thing. It could be a Saddamish Long Gun, for all we know...

...it goes suborbital.

...don't seem to realize that the test may be more about probing our ability to intercept a long-range missile than a mere shakedown of the missile itself. If we can't hit it, the Koreans will let the world know that they can hit us.

Threatening destruction

to haunt Bush

Debating whether to attack the Italian army with spears.

and we end up with egg on our faces for spending billions of dollars on a system that only works when the incoming warhead is fitted with a transponder.

It has 0% chance of working. The implications of a demonstrable failure are so monstrous that they would never attempt a hot test.

trailors from Iraq?? :sarcasm:

Yep, george dun found them WMD out thar in the eyerackee sand yessireee.

Without it, there is no chance of interception.

If North Korea gives the time of launch, the direction, the altitude, and equips it with a powerful homing beacon. Perhaps a flashing light and a siren wouldn't hurt too.

Most of the time the interceptor didn't even make it off the launchpad.

Just ask them to aim their missile directly at the launch pad of the interceptor. That should do it.

The "Star Wars" missile defense system has been a con job of cinematic proportions -- billions looted from the taxpayers for a system that couldn't possibly work. Any attempt to shoot down a Korean test missile (in addition to being construed as an act of war) would end in failure, exposing the past four American Presidents as utter fools for ever spending a dime on the project. The only way to avoid that kind of embarrassment is to never attempt to actually use the system.

They cut elementary music programs from my kids' school this year -- the low-ball estimate for Star Wars is $100 billion...so far...and counting. The high-end estimate is that it could soak taxpayers for a trillion before it's all done.

Dumb shits.

How the hell will anyone know which side is even telling the truth?

We'll have to find an independant source in the area. -JJ

Maybe we could get a bunch of fisherman to sit off the NK coast?

The eastern half's an American lake, the western half's a Japanese one, and there's Russian, Chinese, Canadian, Australian, Indonesian, and other nations' ships all over the place on top of that, in addition to anyone from Europe or south/southwest Asia who have ships in the area for one reason or another.

On top of that, any self-respecting military airbases - to say nothing of a hell of a lot of civilian airports - would be able to track large chunks of anything that happens. Ballistic missiles with that kinda range go high, which means the horizon's going to be far, far away for them - which itself means that any radars within that horizon will be able to see what's up.

If anything big and foomy goes on anywhere over any part of the Pacific north of the equator, there'd be one hell of a lot of opportunities for independent verification. Once you get into the southeastern Pacific, that's more into territory with essentially exclusive US jurisdiction, but even there there's plenty of neighbors.

but that doesn't mean Rummie & Co won't lie about our abilites. Oh yeah, we shot it down - whose going to prove them wrong?

I'm just saying that it's not gonna be something without witnesses, and it only takes one piping up to cause a whole lot of scurrying in the DOD.

that they had already put the fuel in the missile. If that was true, then there was a 24-48/hr window to launch the thing. Does that jive with what you know about these things?

If that is the case, then we're definitely past the 48 hr mark, so I would assume all of this is just posturing anyway. Especially, since it looks like the invade Iran idea is on hold for now.

It depends on what it's fueled with.

Liquid fuels tend to involve a launch window, either because they're corrosive to the missile(!), or because they're cryogenic and it's expensive as hell to keep them cold, etc. If it's solid fuel, you could load it on New Year's Day and fire it on New Year's Eve without any appreciable ill effects. Most ICBMs use solid fuels so they can be ready to launch on short notice; some other ballistic missiles (a lot of the Chinese arsenal and most other warheads meant for some kind of battlefield use) don't bother.

Some liquid fuels can hang around for awhile without special help - obviously, since our cars don't dissolve or explode (much). I don't know what this specific missile uses; if it's something simple and kerosene-based, or most types of solid fuel, then the launch window is as wide as Korea wants it to be.

That assumes they actually did fuel the missile, of course!

If it's something more volatile, then as you said, there's a short window, which may have already passed.

(This is so not my subject and if I am wrong please correct me.) Anyway if the liquid fuel was liquid oxygen wouldn't it just evaporate away? What is the liquid fuel ued with oxygen?

When they claim Bush jumps up from an aircraft carrier deck and wrestles that commie/terror missile down with his own bare hands.

LOL

why I bother to feel bad when I throw away meat and fruit that goes bad because I didn't get around to eating it.

They did that when Raygun was still wearing a loincloth.

they aren't going to demonstrate to the world that their system doesn't work. this 'sky is falling' response to a simple missile test is laughable.

After this "challenge" by the US, what if North Korea now decides arm the missile with a nuclear weapon and launch it at Los Angeles? Then the US military tries to intercept with the latest version of "Star Wars" and it
. . . fails???

What kind of unnecessary bullshit escalation is this Administration engaging in?

that Seattle and Portland are closer, as the crow flies. As the missile flies....

ICBMs don't fly in a straight line because the world is round. It has to go up and over. So to hit LA, the missile would have to fly by Seattle and San Fran first. That gives us 13 attempts at shooting it down before it gets to LA. If they try to go further east, it gives us even more chances.

It is more likely they would target Seattle since it limits our chances at shooting it down.

Now with our response. within seconds we can fire several ICMBs with multiple warheads that are 10 times more powerful than anything North Korea has. We can vaporize their entire country. And that is exactly what would happen if Kim Jong Ill even attempts to fire a nuke over here.

GLOBAL THERMONUCLEAR WAR!. But then that's exactly what Mad George and the 'end timers' are trying to bring about, isn't it?

First, I'll take your word on the ballistics but shooting it at Seattle or SF is not really better than shooting it at LA.

Second, I appreciate that we can vaporize their country but if it really is true that Kim Jong Il is a "madman" then that's not much of a detterent. Plus, I'm not sure I want to take that chance by ratching up the military response. It violates the basic principle of proportionate response. And there's China to consider - the mushroom clouds might very well float over their country.

Your second is exactly right - the capacity for massive retaliation assures no state will attack the U.S., especially a rogue state with only a handful of weapons.

and canned goods...and then I am going to lock myself in my basement until the world war has ended...

;-)

and plastic sheeting for the windows.

:evilgrin:

now North Korea wants to hold talks with the US, now that is scary, now we have Iran and North Korea at our doorstep, and it's even worse with this non diplomatic regime we have. It just never stops huh?

Let's grab a front row seat.

That way we'd get to see s00per kewl rocket trails in the sunset.

See here:
http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_mesg&forum=102&topic_id=2345825&mesg_id=2346829