North Korea Will Nuke American Cities if Provoked (will test-fire ICBM over US homeland)

Korea WebWeekly ^ | 5/3/03

[BOBWADE]

Sounds series.

[Joe Hadenuf]

Whoops....

[cpdiii]

Man, and I though Dachelle was a serious idiot! Kim takes the cake! Bush should park 2 fully nuclear armed subs off his coast and invite him to party!

They may or may not be off the coast of North Korea but they are always within striking distance of North Korea. The United States Navy Nuclear Subs are the most potent arm of war in history. With Mirved warheads one sub can place over 200 nuclear warheads on enemy soil.

[yonif]

In 1981 Israel didn't have the added complexity of also having to protect S. Korea and Japan.

True, however, there was the complexity of sparking a new war in the region because of Israel's actions.

[AbsolutePower]

Mess with the best and die like the rest

-AbsolutePower

[shaggy eel]

The testing, in this case, is planned over our soil. That is quite a difference than a test in the ocean. You don't test anything over U.S. soil. We could only assume it is real and armed.

,,, this possibility has arisen sooner than I would have thought it would but it's a predictable move after the missile shot near Japan recently was largely ignored. North Korea knows it's on the laundry list. It probably assumes the US wants a bit of a rest after the Iraqi cleanup and is being pushed by Beijing.

[fiftymegaton]

IMO, I dont think we would even attempt to park them off the coast. For 2 reasons: 1. Most of North Korea's naval assets are deployed near their coast and would therefore be somewhat of a threat to a nearby OHIO class launching missiles. 2. We wouldnt need to park them off the coast for the Trident II missiles have a range of something like 6,400 nautical miles. In conclusion I dont think we would fire our missiles anywhere under a few hundred miles away.

[Joe Hadenuf]

Two hundred miles off? That would do just fine....

[j_tull]

....but reduce our strike time.

Not true. A solid fueled missile must burn its entire fuel load. The short shots are actually harder to land within CEP (Circular Error Probable) than the longer shots because the flight path must be so much steeper.

[hoot2]

"The day they test something over our soil is the day they reach 10,000 degress in a 1/1000th of a second. "

[blam]

" In conclusion I dont think we would fire our missiles anywhere under a few hundred miles away."

We wouldn't even use ICBM's, we'd hit them with B2's coming out of Japan, straight up over South Korea. They'd never see'em and it'd be cheaper and stealthier.

[Joe Hadenuf]

So what is considered a short shot?

[hoot2]

""Recently, the warhead of North Korea's 'failed' ICBM was discovered in Alaska. " "

wondered why the klintoon administration gave away those last two aluetian islands....so they could salvage their best parts...

[ImphClinton]

I do not believe they would ever be that stupid. They have to know that we have subs just off their coast and their country would be toast within minutes of an unanounced launch in our direction. This would also be a very risky launch as they have never sucessfully done it and the last launch failed.

If they had more than a few nukes they would take one out into the ocean and detonate it just to prove they have them. We would and should do nothing for that. Although North Korea would have hell to pay for doing it in the long run.

[rundy]

I'm waiting for Sean Penn and the rest of that bunch to go to North Korea so they can apease KJI and then come back and tell us home right he is, and how wrong we are.

Pack your bags Sean baby.
We need you again. </sarcasm off>

[fiftymegaton]

Although definitely cheaper I dont think stealth would be a priority. Except maybe to keep the Russians or Chinese from getting nervous and maybe firing at us which makes your assessment the more likely possibility. Hey I am no expert just speculating. I do love the fact that we could do this a number of different ways.

[hoot2]

"North Korea Will Nuke American Cities if Provoked (will test-fire ICBM over US homeland) "

doug...what happens if they miss, n hit mexico? will mexico nuke em back???

[ConservativeLawyer]

Maybe this little perverted midget doesn't understand how quickly him and his starving nation would be incinerated if he even prepared his missiles for launch?

Exactly. Correct me if I'm wrong, but NK's long range missles are liquid-fueled, not utilizing solid propellants like our missles. Thus they have to be fueled before launch (like the main engines on the Space Shuttle).

It is my understanding that we had the technology many years ago to tell when the Soviets were fueling their liquid-fueled ICBMs. One can only guess we can do the same or better with NK.

My BS meter is redlining with this story.

[tomahawk]

Parking lot and sea of glass time.

[j_tull]

1/4 max range