To intercept or not? - Page 6




 
--
 
June 21st, 2006  
c/Commander
 
 
Your "sovereign nation at war" goes two ways - the United States, being at war with North Korea, is allowed to defend itself if it feels that it or its interests are being threatened.

Also, in 1998 North Korea tested the first iteration of this missile, the Taepodong I, by shooting it right over northern Japan. I call that a direct threat, especially if you don't know what the payload, if any, is.

If the missile is detected on a bearing that could threaten the US or its allies, shoot it down. If it's headed towards the Arctic, I don't see that that's a huge problem.
June 21st, 2006  
Maytime
 
 
Up here in Alaska, a good portion of the state is in the Arctic, and we have a large military presence. If a DPRK missile flies toward us, we will treat it with a little more urgency than other places (not all, but some, so don't stomp on my nuts). I won't go into too many details out of OPSEC, but I will say that we have some sensitive assets up here that we wouldn't want to lose.
June 21st, 2006  
Senior Chief
 
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by Maytime
Up here in Alaska, a good portion of the state is in the Arctic, and we have a large military presence. If a DPRK missile flies toward us, we will treat it with a little more urgency than other places (not all, but some, so don't stomp on my nuts). I won't go into too many details out of OPSEC, but I will say that we have some sensitive assets up here that we wouldn't want to lose.
Of course you are speaking of your assets, right?

Stand tall, stand proud and do your job!

Thanks for doing your job.
--
June 21st, 2006  
Maytime
 
 
Hehe, you got that right Senior Chief. Our asses are very sensitive, but not in a gay way.
June 22nd, 2006  
Dean
 
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by c/Commander
Your "sovereign nation at war" goes two ways - the United States, being at war with North Korea, is allowed to defend itself if it feels that it or its interests are being threatened.
It does indeed, and that is why I believe that NK will not send their missile anywhere close to any Allied countries or their interests. It would not overly surprise me if the missile went into the ocean off of South China, and that would tell me that the Chinese gave tacit approval for the launch. If it does happen that way, the Chinese protests that you will hear afterwards will be for show only.

Quote:
Originally Posted by c/Commander
Also, in 1998 North Korea tested the first iteration of this missile, the Taepodong I, by shooting it right over northern Japan. I call that a direct threat, especially if you don't know what the payload, if any, is.
It is indeed a threat, and that is, IMO, a definite shootdown.

Quote:
Originally Posted by c/Commander
If the missile is detected on a bearing that could threaten the US or its allies, shoot it down. If it's headed towards the Arctic, I don't see that that's a huge problem.

It is not a problem at all. Most missile tests take great pains to avoid other country's territories to avoid this kind of tension. if you do have to fly it over someone else, then you ask permission. The US has routinely tested missiles over Canada, and France has also had to ask permission to test their missiles. If you do not, and the missile gets shot down, well, hey, you're asking for it. I simply hope (although it is a small hope) that NK will be allowed to finish this test, simply because we will learn more about their capabilities if the missile actually flies to it's target. But given their geographic location, they do not have a lot of choice. Besides, if the US does have to shoot it down, it would also be a great test for the anti-missile system, and it would save money to boot!

Dean.
June 22nd, 2006  
c/Commander
 
 
Depending on the set course and the actual range of this weapon, a missile over the Arctic could easily hit the northern United States. If a trajectory that would allow that missile to hit is detected, obviously, that's another shootdown.

A shootdown solely to make a political statement could go either way - it depends on how the Koreans would react - which I doubt anyone actually can guess to.
June 22nd, 2006  
Rob Henderson
 
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by c/Commander
Depending on the set course and the actual range of this weapon, a missile over the Arctic could easily hit the northern United States. If a trajectory that would allow that missile to hit is detected, obviously, that's another shootdown.

A shootdown solely to make a political statement could go either way - it depends on how the Koreans would react - which I doubt anyone actually can guess to.
Sure...No one thought Japan would kamakazi Pearl Harbor, but they did...Guess it's an Asian spark of spontanaity..haha Just kidding to all the Asians here.
June 22nd, 2006  
Rabs
 
 
Quote:
Sure...No one thought Japan would kamakazi Pearl Harbor, but they did
No, there were no Kamikazis at pearl harbor.
June 22nd, 2006  
Rob Henderson
 
 
It was a joke...Im sorry. Let me rephrase it..."No one thought Japan would ATTACK Pearl Harbor, but they did
June 23rd, 2006  
CDT.Ensign
 
 
yeah and nobody thinks nk will acctually launch a nuke, but they MIGHT...
 


Similar Topics
WWII Quiz