Jackalope wrote:Gam, LMAO!! No no no not YOU guys the Koreins! Sorry guess that wasn't as clear as I thought it was.
Yeeeees, your 50 years behind us! lol! So what do you think about the new Ford Edsel ? 
Dude your a trip !
Edsel Ford? I think he's haughty and self-centered but knowledgable, and maybe, just maybe, he'll turn the company on its ear
Jbody4jc: That rather sounds like something a Roman Cæsar would do... Doesnt the fruit of the poisoned tree taint all that proceed it?
Anyhow, Kim Jong Il is not the Communist party in NK... He's propped up by many that share his same ideas, taking him out is like lopping the head off a hydra, 2 more take its place. Taking out the heart of the North Korean leadership is much harder than your idea. It's also begging for trouble from China. China, if you'll remember, is the 3rd Superpower that everyone ignored.
Transeat In Exemplum: Let this stand as the example.
interesting update japan says ok to placing patriot missles in japan. here we go
Japan is gonna let us put missles in its counrty ? Hey didn't we get all pissy when old Castro was gonna get missles from Russia ? Why is this any different ?
Bad idea, bad bad bad bad bad idea! nothing good can come of this you watch!
Semper Fi SAINT. May you rest in peace.
With Dubya at the helm, I didn't hold out much hope anyhow.
Transeat In Exemplum: Let this stand as the example.
IDK, I think the PM of Japan would have had to ask first or at least agree so that means Dubya ain't the only one.
Semper Fi SAINT. May you rest in peace.
Jackalope wrote:Just remembered them taking about this on Gams favorite news channel, FOX NEWS, they were speaking with the Pentagons spoakswomen about NK and the missle issue. She told them on tv that the US is in a posistion to shoot down whatever NK shoots up and that if it did make it to US air space that it would be considered an act of war and that the US would treat it as such. The reporter asked if that ment we'd hit them with nukes to which she responded NO, that the US has much better weapons that we could deploy against them. When pressed for an answer she said lets just say that if 3 nuclear subs anchored off the coast of Japan loaded to the gills with conventional ICBM's were given the word they could unload their arsonal on NK and destroy it almost completely. When he asked do we have subs off the coast of Japan she declined to comment. But Japan and us are good friends and good friends don't let something bad happen to each other, all the PM would have to do is ask and we'd have planes in the air.
If NK ever does get to the point where they could hit us and threatened to do so I doubt it would fair well for them.
GAM wrote:I love it.. answering a concrete question with a hypothetical, and then refusing to answer another concrete question, and getting facts screwed up in the process... brilliant!! Fox lobbing softballs to a White House/Gov't official? SAY IT AIN'T SO, PETE!!!
3 subs sitting off the coast of Japan seems unlikely to me, there aren't that many Ohio - Trident I/II class carriers that can maintain redundency coverage over the rest of the world with the way the Navy puts its boats out there (17 Ohio class, 2/3 on patrol at all times so figure 11, each has 24 missiles, but not all ICBMs aboard have Nuclear warheads). There are SRAM/IRBM or even Tomahawk Cruise missiles that can be lauched alternatively from surface ships and aircraft, but the real force multiplier is in the submarines (remember, you don't need an ICBM with a thermo-nuclear warhead when conventional fission weapons and intermediate ranged delivery systems will do the deed as well). I'm not sure of what other SSM boats are out there. The Minuteman II and Peacekeeper silo-based ICBM's wouldn't likely be deployed, there the heavy hitters... Either way, the defence systems the official was talking about, if it's the Patriot/PII missile system, I doubt it'd get to a short or intermediate range warhead in time to do anything in regards to an attack/invasion of South Korea.
It wasn't said that there were Ohio class subs there or even SSBNs. They said Nuclear Subs which includes every US sub (we have no diesel subs). I'd find it extremely unlikely that there isn't 3 subs off the coast of Japan. The Ohio class subs don't change their routine based on world events because they have all the targets covered anyway.
3 688i class subs fully loaded with tomahawk missiles could do serious damage to NK if given the chance.
I haven't seen anyone bring up North Korea's history of selling any technology that it has. If they can build nucear weapons and a delivery system, it wouldn't surprise me if they wouldn't' be willing to sell it to anyone with enough money. That entity and not North Korea could be the one to use the weapon against us or one of our allies.
Compairing the Patriot missle system to what happened in Cuba in the 60s isn't really right. Russia was placing offensive nukes in Cuba, if it goes forward, the US will be placing defensive coventional missles in Japan. Of course an action like that can be taken the wrong way by anyone, especially crack-pot dictators.
Stop worrying about NK. They have proven that their delivery system is unreliable at best. The have a nuclear device, but have never tested it. The science behind a nuclear device and a missle warhead are two different things as well. Just cause they can make a nuke doesn't mean they can make a nuke that can withstand a ride on a rocket or be small and light enough to deliver by rocket. The whole system must come together in a package that can be stored safely and work reliably when put to use. They are a long way off from that goal and they proved it once again yesterday.
They are simply attention seeking and man are they getting it. Just like the 3 year old that throws themselves on the floor and starts kicking and screeming in the toy dept at the local dept store. Just what do they want? Who knows, attention, that's all that is clear.
PAX
^ ^ ^ ^ ^ Thats the same issue we had with Saddam but what if and coulb be's no matter how well supported by proof are good enough reason for some. Me, I say get them before they get us! But we have to be smart about it,
smarter then we were with Iraq.
Semper Fi SAINT. May you rest in peace.
Jackalope wrote:Japan is gonna let us put missles in its counrty ? Hey didn't we get all pissy when old Castro was gonna get missles from Russia ? Why is this any different ?
Bad idea, bad bad bad bad bad idea! nothing good can come of this you watch!
There's a huge difference in placing patriot missiles (defensive) in Japan and Russia placing nuclear missiles (offensive) in Cuba.
GAM (The Kilted One) wrote:With Dubya at the helm, I didn't hold out much hope anyhow.
For once you can say @!#$ about him. he has handled this correctly in every way. maybe not the way everyone agrees with, but its the right way
Not to mention, there are those things that we have in our arsenal for anti-warhead defense. Not alot of people know about that program, but some due. It is not logical to just Nuke NK, that would spring everyone to launch their nukes, = end of the world. So the right move is exactly what the Pres. did. Place defensive weapons in statigic location such as Japan. Not only protects us, but does the same for Japan.
GIT 'ER DONE!
Rosario wrote:GAM (The Kilted One) wrote:With Dubya at the helm, I didn't hold out much hope anyhow.
For once you can say @!#$ about him. he has handled this correctly in every way. maybe not the way everyone agrees with, but its the right way
What has he done exactly Rosario: I'm being serious here.
After Afghanistan, the choices were Iraq, North Korea and Iran. We know which got picked, but consider for a moment what happend just after the Iraqi regime toppled: Bush was LOOKING FOR THE NEXT ONE. He started rattling his sabre at NK, and then realised that Iraq was going to be a lot tougher to tame, and that NK hadnt really done anything other than activate it's enrichment plants (which although dual use, had practical civillian use) and say little about it other than basically "watch us do it."
What did Dubya do to try and stop this?
Posture a whole lot by pulling away from disarmament negotiations, and then turn around and offer back the same deal CLINTON offered in 1998.
He hasn't handled a whole lot in this case, he's got his hands full with screwing up Iraq, Afghanistan, Ports Deals, and Federal Hurricane relief since then.
The CORRECT way to have run this is bi-laterally pressure NK by moving more US forces under UN mandate into SK, and get China to lean on them to disarm by promising freer trade with the US (meaning, they can ship more junk over here, and pay less tarriffs... they don't like US-made goods over there). You want to see Kim Jong Il north of the rock and south of the hard place: don't bother embargoing NK, get their only trading partner to frown on what they're doing. For selling their technology, that's fine, what are you going to do? Trot up to the Prime Ministerial compound, knock on the gate and ask if Kimmy would like to submit himself for trial on breaking the NNPT? Hell, the US has sold technology to Pakistan, and THEY SOLD IT ELSEWHERE!!! They're (Pakistan) just as complicit as NK, Russian republics, and Iran... what's been done about it? Squat.
As for the missile batteries... Who knows if they'll be effective, they haven't (to my knowledge) been tested on ballistic missiles that move faster than 5-8xMach, these new NK missiles seem to do that handily, even if they break up on launch. (IIRC, Trident I's are moving at 15xMach when they leave the atmosphere)
Labotomi:
I had said that Tomahawks would do the deed nicely.
I realise that you don't need ICBM's to dump a lot of nuclear hurtin' on NK, but, first response being atomic is pretty beligerant... That was the point I think I got away from in my response to Jack
Transeat In Exemplum: Let this stand as the example.
I have nothing important to add except:
edit: BBCode > me
Edited 1 time(s). Last edited Wednesday, July 05, 2006 7:29 PM
Ill be honest with you, i just skimmed over what you wrote because i can barely keep my eyes open, but thing that caught my eye is
Quote:
The CORRECT way to have run this is bi-laterally pressure NK by moving more US forces under UN mandate into SK, and get China to lean on them to disarm by promising freer trade with the US (meaning, they can ship more junk over here, and pay less tarriffs... they don't like US-made goods over there).
I forgot how you KNOW EVERYTHING ABOUT THE US! You should be the @!#$ president
LOL...
Yes. If it weren't the fact that I'm Canadian, I'd probably end up abolishing the 2 party system, legalising EVERYTHING that didn't harm people, and even some things that do hurt people (like tobacco, weed, etc... ). Less Government is good government and all...
Anyhow.. Thanks for your endorsement... I plan to run on the Tartan Ticket in 2008.
Transeat In Exemplum: Let this stand as the example.
GAM (The Kilted One) wrote:[Labotomi:
I had said that Tomahawks would do the deed nicely.
I realise that you don't need ICBM's to dump a lot of nuclear hurtin' on NK, but, first response being atomic is pretty beligerant... That was the point I think I got away from in my response to Jack
Not sure if you're still talking subs or not but the US does not deploy nukes on attack subs. That would be classified as a tactical nuclear weapon and afaik that is something that we're not allowed to use because of one of the treaties we're a party to (not sure which one). Also if there is a missile on a SSBN, then it's nuclear unless it's a practice missile. I never heard of us loading a non nuclear missle when I was there. There is talk of transforming one or two of the tridents into a conventional weapon launching platorm. I think they said each tube could hold around 5 tomahawks.
When I was in the Navy the blurb was something like...it's not the policy of the US to deploy nuclear weapons on fast attack class submarines..blah, blah, blah...but I can't confirm nor deny the presence of nuclear weapons onboard any particular submarine. When a sub is referred to as being nuclear, it's referring to the propulsion plant and not the weapons carried and all US subs have nuclear propulsion plants even the NR-1 with it's 12 man crew and 3 knot speed has a tiny reactor.
I think that the US probably has a few subs in the general area of NK ready to respond with conventional tomahawk missiles, but the boomers with the strategic missiles are on their routine patrols.
its not called the peoples republic of china for nothing they are not on are side and and they will not be. we are not just gonna be fighting NK on this one it will be NK and China mark my words
Ok your words have been marked. Buuuuut when the UN met for an emergency meeting China who has always been on NK's side did not come to the rescue! In fact the Chinese representatives denounced the firing of the missles and wouldn't even address the NK's representatives at all according to the news this morning. They also said China is pissed at Kim Jong Ill for firing them and disgracing the region like he did. Now IDK how it was a disgrace but the Chinese are not happy with Kim.
Semper Fi SAINT. May you rest in peace.
Corp.Punishment: (is that in the same division as Gen. Chaos, Maj. Woody, and Pvt. Parts?
Just wondering... )
China has been playing their own side since the 50's and the rise of the Maoist regime, and their not seeing eye to eye with Russian Communists. If you notice, they basically played both sides against the middle in the Korean War, Vietnam, and kept a very thick and wet blanket thrown over Tibet.
They're playing for keeps, but they don't want a satellite state provoking a direct confrontation with the US/UN. The Maoist party is trying to get the economy going, and without Russia to prop them up in the event of an embargo, the dragon has to tread carefully.
Transeat In Exemplum: Let this stand as the example.
Maj. Woody is my commanding officer. I take alot of my orders from him. i remember a thing on cnn a couple of weeks ago. they said that the chinese PM said he was very interested in seeing if the missle worked and hoped the results would be promising. i will look for the article and post it. and a random quote here form south park.... BLAME CANADA!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
Jackalope wrote: Now IDK how it was a disgrace but the Chinese are not happy with Kim.
Mao is probably thinking the same thing every other major country leader is thinking... "Oh great, we have to be nice to the North Korean's now".
John Wilken
2002 Cavalier
2.2 Vin code 4
Auto
Mao? Mao Tse Tung?
I don't think he's thinking much of anything just now... He's been dead since the 50's IIRC.
China's current President is Hu Jintao.
Transeat In Exemplum: Let this stand as the example.
I sometimes wonder if GAM has time to eat sleep shower or @!#$ if he in fact does go to work , since he can search the interweb for every damn thing known to man to make responses like he does
