U.S. 'ready' for N. Korean missile

U.S. 'ready' for N. Korean missile - Washington Times

COLORADO SPRINGS | U.S. missile defenses are prepared to try to knock down the last stage of a Taepodong-2 missile that North Korea is expected soon to launch if sensors detect the weapon threatens U.S. territory, the commander of the U.S. Northern Command told The Washington Times.

"The nation has a very, very credible ballistic-missile defense capability. Our ground-based interceptors in Alaska and California, I'm very comfortable, give me a capability that if we really are threatened by a long-range ICBM that I've got high confidence that I could interdict that flight before it caused huge damage to any U.S. territory," said Air Force Gen. Victor E. "Gene" Renuart, Northcom commander.

========================================================

I see this as a mistake. Not the shooting down of a missile but the announcing of it ahead of time. If this shoot down fails it will encourage more of the same and possibly make us look foolish.
Announcing that we did it after that fact makes more sense to me.

By the way Taepodong-2 Missile in English would be something like Focused Beam Missile.

First stage would be better.

Councilman,

The U.S. may never try to shoot down the North Korean missile. The article quotes General Renuart as follows, "The nation has a very, very credible ballistic-missile defense capability. Our ground-based interceptors in Alaska and California, I'm very comfortable, give me a capability that if we really are threatened by a long-range ICBM..."

If the U.S. does not perceive the missile test as posing a threat to its territory, it may not attempt to shoot it down.

akyron said:

First stage would be better.

Click to expand...

Not really, by doing that it would be showing that the U.S. acknowledges their two-stage missle works. They have yet to get their two-stage working right.

Better to let them launch and have the world see it as a failure and if need be and it doesn't fail, then shoot it down.

I agree with you!!


It is a way to make NKorea rethink shooting us with missiles. With the idea that we can easily shoot them down in their heads, merging with the idea that once they shoot at America, fail, then have to face the entire Nato Alliance may make them not want to start a war afterall. Even though that probability is small, America is taking it. We KNOW that the pen is mightier then the sword!! =)

donsutherland1
I may have been unclear and left a word out. But my opinion remains that I believe quiet action before hand is important.
I also know from experience that if there is a bully or would be tough guy who continually boasts about what he is going to do to you, and toy response is to ignore or him, just walk away, or come up with something you believe is a clever way to handle the situation the problem rather than go away grows in intensity and will eventually result in some sort of violence.
If when you are in fact attacked don't talk about what you're going to do. Just do it. And always remember that in a fight of any kind you can die, so it is better to give it your all until such time as your adversary is down for the count and has lost the will and ability to fight back. There is no second prize only a winner and a loser once the fight begins, and there is no such thing as an equitable long lasting solution until the goal of victory is reached. If there was such an out come N. Korea would not be sooting off missiles and kim Jung Il would not be shooting his mouth off. Our fear of a wider war with the Soviet Union and China in the early 50s is what has led us to this juncture along with Obama's perceived weaknesses that has followed Bush not doing any better on this front.

As was said it might be being done as a way to make N. Korea rethink what it plans to do. But to assume that is to assume we are dealing with a normal logical person or country neither of which is true. And one other thing. If it is indeed a test on there part and not just a demonstration of strength all of the information sought will be gained before the missile is intercepted will it not.

If they fire a missile, regardless of where it's headed I think we should swat that **** out of here. They want to show a message, ithink it's time we reply.

Arch Enemy said:

If they fire a missile, regardless of where it's headed I think we should swat that **** out of here. They want to show a message, ithink it's time we reply.

Click to expand...

I have no problem with our country being ready to shoot down a N Korea missile. They should not be allowed to have long range weaponry until they can be trusted act with restraint. You do not give a 2 year old a gun, and you do not give a bunch of crazies missiles. :doh

Even if it is not headed towards us we should shoot it down just to prove we can. We can do this without starting a war simply by saying, "Hey you were testing out your missiles, and so we took the opportunity to test out our defenses." Everybody learns something.

TheNextEra said:

Not really, by doing that it would be showing that the U.S. acknowledges their two-stage missle works. They have yet to get their two-stage working right.

Better to let them launch and have the world see it as a failure and if need be and it doesn't fail, then shoot it down.

Click to expand...

So the extra risk with worth proving something?

American said:

So the extra risk with worth proving something?

Click to expand...

Extra risk? You know nothing then of our capability or NK capability then. Educate yourself on the subject please before making a comment like that.

It's ONE missile that we can easily shoot, yes, it is worth it to let NK fail because they have yet to get a second stage missile working right.

TheNextEra said:

Extra risk? You know nothing then of our capability or NK capability then. Educate yourself on the subject please before making a comment like that.

It's ONE missile that we can easily shoot, yes, it is worth it to let NK fail because they have yet to get a second stage missile working right.

Click to expand...

For that matter, we probably have enough missile counter-weapons to take several shots at a single missile, or even a few The only way to get through would be a medium-large scale attack, such as only a few countries are capable of.

The Mark said:

For that matter, we probably have enough missile counter-weapons to take several shots at a single missile, or even a few The only way to get through would be a medium-large scale attack, such as only a few countries are capable of.

Click to expand...

Yep that is exactly right. Which is why I would be willing to have an arsenal at hand to shoot down the missile should it be successful, but let them try and most likely fail so they look incompetent.

Either way it is a win/win situation for America.

If they fail, their Ballistic Missile program looks incompetent. If they succeed and we shoot down their missile, it proves America can defend itself successfully.

The Mark said:

For that matter, we probably have enough missile counter-weapons to take several shots at a single missile, or even a few The only way to get through would be a medium-large scale attack, such as only a few countries are capable of.

Click to expand...

We have the capabilities to defend ourselves. But we could benefit from proving to N Korea that we can take out their missiles with no effort at all. This might discourage future controversies. By preventing tests we slow their progress.

Polimaster said:

We have the capabilities to defend ourselves. But we could benefit from proving to N Korea that we can take out their missiles with no effort at all. This might discourage future controversies. By preventing tests we slow their progress.

Click to expand...

Since their two-stage missile program has always failed, it is better to let them fail. We benefit better having them fail IMO.

TheNextEra said:

Since their two-stage missile program has always failed, it is better to let them fail. We benefit better having them fail IMO.

Click to expand...

True. If we go attempt to sabotage them, or attempt to use diplomacy to convince them to not fire one, it would look like we were afraid they would actually work.

If we just let them keep crashing into the sea, all to the good.

Although a few sabotage mission which they are not aware of to keep them blowing up the ocean would be good.

If this really is news, perhaps you can find it in something other than Sun Myung Moon's newspaper?