North Korea fires missile from Pyongyang towards the east: South Korea

[overherebc]

21 minutes ago, inThailand said:

Japan should have shot it down. But they are smart, and will let the Americans get into another messy and costly skermish, why they sit it out.

How much of these rockets actually hits the water? 

Complete, burned out bits on re-entry, partially burned out on re-entry.

If complete then there's still a lot of energy when it hits.

Very unlikely but, what if it hit a ship in the area, worst case scenario a passenger liner.

Don't suppose the NK mob check the splash down area before firing.

 

[White Christmas13]

32 minutes ago, inThailand said:

Japan should have shot it down. But they are smart, and will let the Americans get into another messy and costly skermish, why they sit it out.

Here is your answer

 

http://www.news.com.au/technology/innovation/the-scary-reason-why-nobody-has-attempted-to-shootdown-one-of-north-koreas-missiles/news-story/66b2a67ef21952e3d4af0381d74de0e0

[canuckamuck]

For those who say, just accept that he has nukes. I can see that you are not afraid of one or two ICBMs. But what about when Kim has 10 and he goes: Tokyo, Osaka, Guam, Washington, LA, Chicago, Seattle, Houston, San Francisco, Atlanta, and one more again for Washington, and artillery for Seoul. Sure America would retaliate, North Korea would be annihilated and the US might knock out one or two of those missiles. But the economy is finished regardless.

[tonray]

4 minutes ago, canuckamuck said:

For those who say, just accept that he has nukes. I can see that you are not afraid of one or two ICBMs. But what about when Kim has 10 and he goes: Tokyo, Osaka, Guam, Washington, LA, Chicago, Seattle, Houston, San Francisco, Atlanta, and one more again for Washington, and artillery for Seoul. Sure America would retaliate, North Korea would be annihilated and the US might knock out one or two of those missiles. But the economy is finished regardless.

 

Ok you have convinced me...another bogeyman...but wait shouldn't we attack Iran also while we are at it ? I mean clearly let's get them before they start....seeing how well Iraq turned out.

 

Stop being led by the nose by the fear mongers....think for yourself don't let Fox news think for you.

[Scott]

Please stay on the topic of NK.   There is another thread on Iran.  

[davemos]

The range of the rocket fired today can hit most of Thailand.Time for a submarine?

[smutcakes]

Who are NK carrying out these proxy actions for? I believe they are doing this on another countries behest to see how far they are allowed to go. It makes zero sense for them to do this otherwise.

[selftaopath]

Aren't all countries legally/morally allowed to shoot down anything that violates it's air-space? 

[quadperfect]

4 hours ago, ezzra said:

The real big question here is whether the boy in the pinstripe suite will be crazy enough to go all in against the US thinking that Russia and China will not allow a  total  annihilation  of his country, and that assumptions gives him the courage to play with fire, but than again, Trump is and can be mad as a hatter and unpredictable and thus the same question is also on fat boy minds... will he or won't he?....

I think if trump was insane we would have had a war months ago. He is not insane and if there is a war the  civilized world will support the war. But with a few thai visa posters strongly opposing

[tonray]

34 minutes ago, selftaopath said:

Aren't all countries legally/morally allowed to shoot down anything that violates it's air-space? 

The technology does not exist that can reliably do so despite the hundreds of billions that has been spent convincing you otherwise. 

[craigt3365]

9 minutes ago, tonray said:

The technology does not exist that can reliably do so despite the hundreds of billions that has been spent convincing you otherwise. 

You're trolling.  I've yet to see a report that says THAAD works perfectly.  All say it's brand new technology.

[canuckamuck]

Quote

Aren't all countries legally/morally allowed to shoot down anything that violates it's air-space? 

You can't knock a missile out  at 700 km's altitude. You have to hit it when it is on the way down and if it isn't headed for you or at least close, you aren't going to hit it at all.

Edited September 15, 2017 by canuckamuck

[BuaBS]

7 hours ago, davemos said:

The range of the rocket fired today can hit most of Thailand.Time for a submarine?

Prayut should send Kim some rice , just to be on the safe side .

[baboon]

51 minutes ago, craigt3365 said:

You're trolling.  I've yet to see a report that says THAAD works perfectly.  All say it's brand new technology.

Call a man a troll then go on to make the same point. What does that make such a person?

[tonbridgebrit]

6 hours ago, ezzra said:

The real big question here is whether the boy in the pinstripe suite will be crazy enough to go all in against the US thinking that Russia and China will not allow a  total  annihilation  of his country, and that assumptions gives him the courage to play with fire, but than again, Trump is and can be mad as a hatter and unpredictable and thus the same question is also on fat boy minds... will he or won't he?....

The real big question is, is Washington going to launch a pre-emptive strike. North Korea are not going to launch the first military strike. Kim is doing all this to show that he can defend himself, he's doing this to make sure everyody knows that he can't be removed.
Now, how long is Washington going to accept and tolerate Kim detonating nukes in North Korea and firing missiles above Japan's sky. Is Washington going to panic and attack Kim at some point in time ?

[tonbridgebrit]

1 hour ago, tonray said:

The technology does not exist that can reliably do so despite the hundreds of billions that has been spent convincing you otherwise. 

Correct. There's no such thing as a report that says THAAD works perfectly.

If THAAD is actually able to shoot missiles down, then none of this 'firing missiles crisis' would be happening. THAAD would have shot down the previous missiles launched by North Korea.

[tonbridgebrit]

3 hours ago, White Christmas13 said:

Here is your answer

 

http://www.news.com.au/technology/innovation/the-scary-reason-why-nobody-has-attempted-to-shootdown-one-of-north-koreas-missiles/news-story/66b2a67ef21952e3d4af0381d74de0e0

Yes, the scary reason why nobody has attempted to shoot down one of North Korea's missiles. Basically, THAAD and the other missile defence systems are pretty unlikely to work. THAAD is mainly about giving people a sense of safety, and about making money by selling the stuff at huge cost.

Whenever North Korea fires anything, they dare not attempt to shoot it down. An attempt to shoot it down, and if the attempt is a failure, well, that would destroy the credibility of THAAD. That would blatantly reveal how non-effective the defence actually is.

Edited September 15, 2017 by tonbridgebrit

[tonbridgebrit]

4 hours ago, craigt3365 said:

He does not have a nuclear weapon that will fit on a missile.  Not yet.  But the more he tests, the closer he gets.

So what do you suggest ?  Attack North Korea before Kim is able to get a nuke onto a missile ?

We, including you, have already declared that any pre-emptive strike on North Korea would be a very bad idea. How about let Kim attach a nuke onto a missile, and carry on not launching any pre-emptive strikes ?

[how241]

In the old days,  the CIA   would offer money + power to whoever got rid of Kim ...

[tonbridgebrit]

3 hours ago, canuckamuck said:

For those who say, just accept that he has nukes. I can see that you are not afraid of one or two ICBMs. But what about when Kim has 10 and he goes: Tokyo, Osaka, Guam, Washington, LA, Chicago, Seattle, Houston, San Francisco, Atlanta, and one more again for Washington, and artillery for Seoul. Sure America would retaliate, North Korea would be annihilated and the US might knock out one or two of those missiles. But the economy is finished regardless.

Why on earth would Kim fire a missile at anybody when he knows that America will nuke him if he does ?

Kim is doing all this, to demonstrate that he can destroy Washington and it's allies (Japan and South Korea) in the same way that Washington can destroy him. Kim is showing that he can take part in so-called 'mutually assured destruction'. Kim is trying to guarantee his own survival. That's what we're seeing. He's a bad man, yes, but his goal and aim is to simply survive.

Edited September 15, 2017 by tonbridgebrit

[tonbridgebrit]

7 minutes ago, how241 said:

In the old days,  the CIA   would offer money + power to whoever got rid of Kim ...

We have to bear in mind that this can only be done if large numbers of local people really do hate the regime.

Kim is surrounded by people who actually want him. We can claim that they've been brain-washed by Kim, that might be so. It doesn't change the issue of how Kim's regime is too strong to be removed by 'the CIA going in there, and carrying out action that will cause Kim to be removed'.

[craigt3365]

1 hour ago, tonbridgebrit said:

The real big question is, is Washington going to launch a pre-emptive strike. North Korea are not going to launch the first military strike. Kim is doing all this to show that he can defend himself, he's doing this to make sure everyody knows that he can't be removed.
Now, how long is Washington going to accept and tolerate Kim detonating nukes in North Korea and firing missiles above Japan's sky. Is Washington going to panic and attack Kim at some point in time ?

It's highly doubtful South Korea, Japan and the US will launch a pre-emptive strike.  Kim is unstable, impossible to say he won't launch the first strike.  As a dictator, he can do what he wants.

[craigt3365]

56 minutes ago, tonbridgebrit said:

So what do you suggest ?  Attack North Korea before Kim is able to get a nuke onto a missile ?

We, including you, have already declared that any pre-emptive strike on North Korea would be a very bad idea. How about let Kim attach a nuke onto a missile, and carry on not launching any pre-emptive strikes ?

Kinda like letting a drunk drive a car hoping an accident will never happen.  Odds are, one will happen eventually.

[how241]

1 hour ago, tonbridgebrit said:

We have to bear in mind that this can only be done if large numbers of local people really do hate the regime.

Kim is surrounded by people who actually want him. We can claim that they've been brain-washed by Kim, that might be so. It doesn't change the issue of how Kim's regime is too strong to be removed by 'the CIA going in there, and carrying out action that will cause Kim to be removed'.

100%  agree...

[Justgrazing]

7 hours ago, BuaBS said:

Well we know Trump likes a golden shower . With this missile test he just got another one.

Does he .! Blimey you learn something every day .. 

[baboon]

1 hour ago, tonbridgebrit said:

So what do you suggest ?  Attack North Korea before Kim is able to get a nuke onto a missile ?

Yes, I am still awaiting his answer to thar one...

[rijb]

5 hours ago, canuckamuck said:

For those who say, just accept that he has nukes. I can see that you are not afraid of one or two ICBMs. But what about when Kim has 10 and he goes: Tokyo, Osaka, Guam, Washington, LA, Chicago, Seattle, Houston, San Francisco, Atlanta, and one more again for Washington, and artillery for Seoul. Sure America would retaliate, North Korea would be annihilated and the US might knock out one or two of those missiles. But the economy is finished regardless.

He'll keep 5 and sell the rest.

[craigt3365]

26 minutes ago, baboon said:

Yes, I am still awaiting his answer to thar one...

He's asked that same question many times in many different threads.  All have had replies.

[baboon]

6 minutes ago, craigt3365 said:

He's asked that same question many times in many different threads.  All have had replies.

Replied to but never answered. There goes your credibility until you do.

[craigt3365]

24 minutes ago, baboon said:

Not answered once.

You can apologize when ready: