North Korea Launches "Communication Satellite" Rocket 492
Mad Ivan writes "The BBC has just reported that North Korea has launched a long-range rocket, which they say is a communications satellite, but that the US and Japan fear may actually be a ballistic missile. Details are still arriving; the rocket passed over northern Japan on its way up."
Re:Long-range rocket? You mean like Iraq's WMD? (Score:5, Informative)
But if they are really testing ICBM's (i.e. not expecting something to reach orbit) they would be a fool to announce it before hand.
They'd be fools to not announce it beforehand. You do not go launching major rockets of any sort, young man, unless people are warned. Otherwise, you run the risk of being very swiftly annihilated.
*slaps with rolled-up newspaper*
Re:capabiliy (Score:3, Informative)
The only thing stopping any country from doing anything is the inevitable retaliation.
You're forgetting that sanity has to apply to that equation as well. Tinpot dictatorships don't have any of that and are more then willing to sacrifice their people as long as the glorious leadership and it's selected people survive.
Re:Satellite (Score:3, Informative)
It's not clear yet whether or not the third stage, which would propel it to orbit, fired.
It seems like the first two stages are all the North Koreans really wanted to show off, anyway. The first two stages are all they need to threaten a large radius in Asia.
Re:Summary is hopelessly wrong... (Score:5, Informative)
A friend pointed me to this site [www.vbs.tv], (possibly NSFW depending on certain links) which has a couple of people going inside North Korea to shoot video. What they shoot is not concentration camps. It's not executions. It's not poverty (strictly speaking). It's just the completely bizarre world that is North Korea. I wish I could describe it, but my words just wouldn't do it justice.
Re:Summary is hopelessly wrong... (Score:4, Informative)
North Korea doesn't even need nukes to cause major economic damage to the West. All it has to do is start shelling Seoul and that would cause immense economic chaos in hours as the manufacturing supply chain for a lot of goods worldwide is cut.
Also, DPRK doesn't have to have a high tech delivery system to do damage with a nuclear vice. There are a lot of terrorist groups who would pay high dollars for a fully functioning bomb, and they would do the rest of the work.
Re:capabiliy (Score:3, Informative)
Re:Coverage has been slow (Score:5, Informative)
Re:Summary is hopelessly wrong... (Score:3, Informative)
And there you have it. This is not about North Korea using such weapons offensively against others. The Korean peninsula is in permanent stalemate, because North Korea cannot attack the South without being completely defeated, and the South cannot attack the North without losing Seoul to massed artillery.
The two Koreas actually agree on one thing. Neither wants the North Korean state to fail, because that means a few million North Koreans appearing in Seoul in the first couple of days looking for something to eat, and the South simply cannot afford to deal with them.
The South Koreans are so upset by this test that a total of about 100 right wing fanatics were protesting in downtown Seoul when I passed them today. Nobody else cares, because it is a sideshow.
The real problem has always been the potential for proliferation.
Re:Summary is hopelessly wrong... (Score:5, Informative)
We knew they had weapons of mass destruction because we sold them to them - Saddam got Sarin gas from the USA. We also knew that they no longer had weapons of mass destruction because we sold them to them - and we knew the Sarin gas was expired. The ONLY WMD evidence found when we went in was some shells which had traces indicating they once held Sarin. Your comment is utterly devoid of value.
Re:Outstanding. (Score:3, Informative)
"Personally, I wish we'd dealt wish North Korea a long, long time ago"
This is indeed wishful thinking, but one must consider many factors that were not present or as pressing in the case of Iraq.
NK is armed to the teeth. Pretty much, every North Korean over 14 has been trained to use an AK 47. Their citizens are indoctrinated at levels perhaps unprecedented in post-WWII history. Not only that but they have actually built a nuclear weapon.
Before anyone starts planning for invasion in the North, he has to answer the following questions:
a) What would the human toll on South Korea be?
For example, Seoul is within artillery range from NK.
b) Apparently military victory over NK can be achieved but what would be the human and financial cost on the US? Given the size of the enemy military, I would guess this would be far more than the cost of the 1st Gulf war.
c) How would South Korea and the global economy deal with the major interruption in production of the South Korean goods (cars, ships, electronics etc) the world has come to rely on?
d) What would the human toll on North Korea be? From prior experience, "collateral"damage cannot be avoided. And this is particularly true in the case of NK, the leader of which has no regard for the lives of his citizens. Do we really think that the response to heavy shelling or nuking of Seoul would be surgical bombings? Think hordes of B-52s flying over Pyongyang, dropping 20000 lb bombs day and night instead.
e) How do you deal with the subsequent occupation of North Korea? How can you change the minds of the indoctrinated North Koreans? How can you make them understand that South Koreans are their brothers and not their sworn enemies, especially after a second brutal war?
f) And perhaps the most important of all: do you really think China will just sit back and watch as US takes under its control all the Korean Peninsula? What about Russia? China created this regime and for a good reason (from their point of view). This reason has not ceased to exist.
I gather that the US foreigh policy makers have considered these factors and decided that it is not worth the trouble, even if North Korea develops both ICBM nuclear capability.
Re:First post! (Score:2, Informative)
Umm...you do know the original source of that bit of dialog [wikipedia.org], and that it was merely sampled by G&R, right?
Re:Coverage has been slow (Score:1, Informative)
That article says it had 3 stages, and 2 of the stages went into the ocean. It didn't say anything about the launch failing to make orbit. Still waiting for some non-state backed news (sooner than later likely from sky watching / astronomer sorts) to say they've confirmed it is in orbit or not.
Re:Summary is hopelessly wrong... (Score:5, Informative)
"In a statement, Obama said the launch was "a clear violation of United Nations Security Council Resolution 1718, which expressly prohibits North Korea from conducting ballistic missile-related activities of any kind."
Re:Summary is hopelessly wrong... (Score:2, Informative)
40 currently in service, according to Wikipedia [wikipedia.org].
Re:Summary is hopelessly wrong... (Score:3, Informative)
Sorry, I'm confused. How exactly do 500,000 men stop approximately 6000 artillery pieces from hitting a target the size of a city when they're already loaded, aimed, ready to fire and hiding in heavily fortified positions?
If North Korea decided to shell Seoul, nothing short of a pre-emptive nuke will stop them - and frankly, I'd expect a few guns to fire on Seoul even then.
Antiquated hardware? Even 100 years ago artillery was more than capable of hitting something the size of Seoul. North Korea hasn't exactly ignored their kit since..