To intercept or not? - Page 4




 
--
 
June 20th, 2006  
Ace
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by Missileer
Every "stunt" as you put it has been pulled for years without the UN. They talk a good game but they are peacekeepers only, not offensive strategic forces. And we obviously don't need China or Russia's blessings since the Allied Forces and the US have addressed every operation without them in the past.
Ill just hope you have a interest in keeping those allies in the future. And the key to that is of course UN.....
June 20th, 2006  
Rabs
 
 
Quote:
Ill just hope you have a interest in keeping those allies in the future. And the key to that is of course UN.....
We have our allies, Japan and Austrailia being the two big ones in the regeion.

Are you saying we have to have permission from the UN to use our own missile defenses?
June 20th, 2006  
Ace
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by Rabs
We have our allies, Japan and Austrailia being the two big ones in the regeion.

Are you saying we have to have permission from the UN to use our own missile defenses?
In theroy yes if you plan to use them before the missiles enter US teritory...

PS: Not my opinion but international law. You wouldnt like if NK shoot down something you were testing in nevada dessert would you?
--
June 20th, 2006  
Rabs
 
 
Quote:
PS: Not my opinion but international law. You wouldnt like if NK shoot down something you were testing in nevada dessert would you?
That would be over US territory. This missile will cross into International waters and probally heading towards the US. Its our right to shoot the dam thing down if we think its a threat.
June 20th, 2006  
Fox
 
 
USA is big friggin' country than NK. So, we can use missile test.
June 20th, 2006  
Senior Chief
 
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by Ace
In theroy yes if you plan to use them before the missiles enter US teritory...

PS: Not my opinion but international law. You wouldnt like if NK shoot down something you were testing in nevada dessert would you?
We are mixing apples and oranges here. There is no way that anyone could conclude that we were firing a weapon toward their country from the Nevada Desert. Besides, we would not fire a missile in the general direction of any country that we see as an unfriendly.

NK on the other hand has only one basic direction they can fire their "we can reach your shores" missile and that is in the general Easterly direction, towards the U.S.

I do not think the international society would even blink an eye if we took out a missile that was half way across the pond. If we waited for it to enter our air space the radiation from a nuc would wipe out a considerable number of citizens.

Besides, asking forgiveness is always easier than asking for permission.
June 20th, 2006  
Ace
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by Senior Chief
We are mixing apples and oranges here. There is no way that anyone could conclude that we were firing a weapon toward their country from the Nevada Desert. Besides, we would not fire a missile in the general direction of any country that we see as an unfriendly.

NK on the other hand has only one basic direction they can fire their "we can reach your shores" missile and that is in the general Easterly direction, towards the U.S.

I do not think the international society would even blink an eye if we took out a missile that was half way across the pond. If we waited for it to enter our air space the radiation from a nuc would wipe out a considerable number of citizens.

Besides, asking forgiveness is always easier than asking for permission.
True
But if NK publicly states that this is a test launch, would US trust that and leave them alone or shoot it down because:
1. US i afraid and dont trust them
2. US wants to humiliate NK and demonstrate their arsenal for the rest of the world.

Anyway, do anybody have a good reason for why NK would even consider firering nucs against US....
June 20th, 2006  
Senior Chief
 
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by Ace
True
But if NK publicly states that this is a test launch, would US trust that and leave them alone or shoot it down because:
1. US i afraid and dont trust them
2. US wants to humiliate NK and demonstrate their arsenal for the rest of the world.

Anyway, do anybody have a good reason for why NK would even consider firering nucs against US....
I don't think they would really need a reason other than to show the world that they could and would.

There are some countries that have not proven trustworthy, North Korea is one of them. Iran might be another. Bad news is that if anyone starts lobbing nukes we are all in for some heavy duty Super High Intensity Training (S.H.I.T.)
June 20th, 2006  
Ace
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by Senior Chief
I don't think they would really need a reason other than to show the world that they could and would.

There are some countries that have not proven trustworthy, North Korea is one of them.
Why?
Quote:
Originally Posted by Senior Chief
Iran might be another.
Why?
Quote:
Originally Posted by Senior Chief
Bad news is that if anyone starts lobbing nukes we are all in for some heavy duty Super High Intensity Training (S.H.I.T.)
LOL
June 20th, 2006  
c/Commander
 
 
I'm biased, as my girlfriend is in Japan right now, but, I say, if they launch that thing over the Sea of Japan, take it out. SM-3 up the tailpipe. Japan is close enough that any launch is a major threat to both the Japanese population and US interests in the region.
 


Similar Topics
WWII Quiz