Ball is in Whose Court?

If KJU tests another missle, is that a threat? If they bracket Guam, in international waters, is that a threat or an attack? The Administration seems to have drawn the dreaded "red line." NK seemed to issue another threat with relation to Guam after DJT's "fire and fury" statement. Is that a threat ignored? I hope the US doesn't strike first, but what does the PRNK need to do to get the US to retaliate?

Rexedgar said:

If KJU tests another missle, is that a threat? If they bracket Guam, in international waters, is that a threat or an attack? The Administration seems to have drawn the dreaded "red line." NK seemed to issue another threat with relation to Guam after DJT's "fire and fury" statement. Is that a threat ignored? I hope the US doesn't strike first, but what does the PRNK need to do to get the US to retaliate?

Click to expand...

Ask Trump, AKA The Decider.

Rexedgar said:

If KJU tests another missle, is that a threat? If they bracket Guam, in international waters, is that a threat or an attack? The Administration seems to have drawn the dreaded "red line." NK seemed to issue another threat with relation to Guam after DJT's "fire and fury" statement. Is that a threat ignored? I hope the US doesn't strike first, but what does the PRNK need to do to get the US to retaliate?

Click to expand...

I am not sure. It depends on what the circumstances are and what we want to achieve.

Hawkeye10 said:

Ask Trump, AKA The Decider.

Click to expand...

That is exactly the point! When the people are left to "translate" what the Administration says, what do the allies and enemies take away from gobbledygook? Sure sounded like a red line, " best not threaten."


BTW thought GWB was "the Decider."

Rexedgar said:

If KJU tests another missle, is that a threat? If they bracket Guam, in international waters, is that a threat or an attack? The Administration seems to have drawn the dreaded "red line." NK seemed to issue another threat with relation to Guam after DJT's "fire and fury" statement. Is that a threat ignored? I hope the US doesn't strike first, but what does the PRNK need to do to get the US to retaliate?

Click to expand...

Actually, "bracketing" any area is in fact not only a threat but a direct attack.

When any long range ballistic missile is launched, you really have no idea where it is going to impact. None. What you get is a huge "cone" showing possible impact areas, which narrows down as time passes.

That is because when you are talking about this type of missile, it is not just a dumb ballistic arch like the SCUD and others. These actually enter an orbital or suborbital path, so can travel either for a very long time, or for a very short time before they re-enter the atmosphere and aim for their target.

Generally the target is presumed by drawing a straight line from the launch point in the direction the missile is heading, and looking at the most likely target along that route within the range of the missile. These things really have no ability to change direction once in flight, only when they come down. So if the first thing along that path is say Guam, that is the target.

And how long after launch will we know it is being "bracketed"?

Here is the point, not until after the missiles impact.

If NK fired a missile right now and aimed it at Los Angeles, we would have no idea if the impact point is the Queen Mary, Disney Land, Knott's Berry Farm, or Magic Mountain. They are all so close and the distance from the launch point it simply makes it to hard to tell them apart from the small amount of data.

So now let me ask some people a question of my own.

Suppose we get word that 10 ICBMs are on their way from North Korea to Guam. What do we do? You have about 10 minutes to make a decision. Launch all the aircraft that you have at Anderson Air Force Base and put them on their course to respond, or simply sit back and do nothing.

And remember, we are also talking about the lives of over 170,000 civilians who live there.

Rexedgar said:

That is exactly the point! When the people are left to "translate" what the Administration says, what do the allies and enemies take away from gobbledygook? Sure sounded like a red line, " best not threaten."


BTW thought GWB was "the Decider."

Click to expand...

I never heard any Red Line, because what would draw a response was never defined. Does a missile need to land on Guam or just be shot in that general direction? Does it matter if it has a warhead on it? IDK.

Rexedgar said:

If KJU tests another missle, is that a threat? If they bracket Guam, in international waters, is that a threat or an attack? The Administration seems to have drawn the dreaded "red line." NK seemed to issue another threat with relation to Guam after DJT's "fire and fury" statement. Is that a threat ignored? I hope the US doesn't strike first, but what does the PRNK need to do to get the US to retaliate?

Click to expand...

Personally, I think if they fire at Guam waters or any other, we should try to surgically destroy his military capacity. And I think we should make that threat a promise. Barring that, I still think there are saner minds in his inner circle. Our intelligence would know that. If that is the case, then I think we should task our operatives with taking him out.

We cannot ignore this.

Hawkeye10 said:

I never heard any Red Line, because what would draw a response was never defined. Does a missile need to land on Guam or just be shot in that general direction? Does it matter if it has a warhead on it? IDK.

Click to expand...

You are reinforcing my question!

Rexedgar said:

That is exactly the point! When the people are left to "translate" what the Administration says, what do the allies and enemies take away from gobbledygook? Sure sounded like a red line, " best not threaten."

Click to expand...

BTW, have you looked at how things have been shaking out Internationally since that exchange?

Most of Europe has fallen as expected. Shock and displeasure at President Trump's actions.

Both Japan and Australia have both stood firm, not only sending ships to help assist in protecting Guam, but stating they will both participate militarily if North Korea attacks any other country.

Let that sink in good and deep. Japan has not threatened to take military action since the end of WWII. Yet they have said they will do so if this happens. That is like seeing Gandhi slip out of his robes and don military fatigues and puck up 2 UZI machine pistols.

In the UN resolution that set off this latest round, both China and Russia outright supported sanctions against North Korea. At best one or the other would abstain in the pass (if not outright veto), but this time both are in agreement with the UN and the rest of the world.

And finally, China. While not "officially-official", their most common non-official news leak publisher just released the most amazing "anonymous" posting.

And that is partially the expected. That if the US or anybody else attacks North Korea, they will step in and resist "regime change" and defend their ally in accordance with their mutual defense treaty.

But then it says something completely different. That if North Korea starts hostilities, they will sit back and do nothing. And that they would likely remain neutral even if the ultimate outcome was reunification.

That is a pretty clear response. If NK starts an attack, China will do nothing even if they are eliminated as a nation.

So it is pretty clear how our allies and even enemies are taking his statements.

Oozlefinch said:

BTW, have you looked at how things have been shaking out Internationally since that exchange?

Most of Europe has fallen as expected. Shock and displeasure at President Trump's actions.

Both Japan and Australia have both stood firm, not only sending ships to help assist in protecting Guam, but stating they will both participate militarily if North Korea attacks any other country.

Let that sink in good and deep. Japan has not threatened to take military action since the end of WWII. Yet they have said they will do so if this happens. That is like seeing Gandhi slip out of his robes and don military fatigues and puck up 2 UZI machine pistols.

In the UN resolution that set off this latest round, both China and Russia outright supported sanctions against North Korea. At best one or the other would abstain in the pass (if not outright veto), but this time both are in agreement with the UN and the rest of the world.

And finally, China. While not "officially-official", their most common non-official news leak publisher just released the most amazing "anonymous" posting.

And that is partially the expected. That if the US or anybody else attacks North Korea, they will step in and resist "regime change" and defend their ally in accordance with their mutual defense treaty.

But then it says something completely different. That if North Korea starts hostilities, they will sit back and do nothing. And that they would likely remain neutral even if the ultimate outcome was reunification.

That is a pretty clear response. If NK starts an attack, China will do nothing even if they are eliminated as a nation.

So it is pretty clear how our allies and even enemies are taking his statements.

Click to expand...

I submit that were Japan and Australia situated somewhere else in the world, geographically, they would be singing a different tune. I wish I could share your optimism.

MaggieD said:

Personally, I think if they fire at Guam waters or any other, we should try to surgically destroy his military capacity. And I think we should make that threat a promise. Barring that, I still think there are saner minds in his inner circle. Our intelligence would know that. If that is the case, then I think we should task our operatives with taking him out.

We cannot ignore this.

Click to expand...

It will not matter. If he fires a series of missiles at Guam, odds are at least some will hit, they are not that good at making and launching missiles.

And with a single hit, that is more than enough justification to respond militarily to eliminate his missile capabilities.

Hell, even if not a single missile hits Guam, if he fires even a single nuclear missile, that also becomes justification. Because the purposeful attack would involve a radiological weapon at that point.

And "saner minds in his inner circle" does not matter. This is a Dynasty with a 70+ year lock on the population. Nobody has risen to high rank within that regime without total devotion to the Kim family.

And sorry, "take him out"? Sorry, we have no 007 to send in there and do that, this is real life not a movie. No Rainbow 6 in the shadows here.

And BTW, we can not do it. Executive Order 11905 by President Ford banned such actions way back in 1976. Then you have Executive Order 12036 by President Carter. But finally you have Executive Order 12333 by President Reagan.

No person employed by or acting on behalf of the United States Government shall engage in, or conspire to engage in, assassination.

Click to expand...

Rexedgar said:

I submit that were Japan and Australia situated somewhere else in the world, geographically, they would be singing a different tune. I wish I could share your optimism.

Click to expand...

Australia? Australia???????

"Another part of the world"?

Are you even aware that Moscow is closer to North Korea than Australia is? Iran is closer to North Korea than Australia is. Everything east of Israel and west of the United States is closer to North Korea than Australia is.

Australia is not in any danger. They are not in the path of any radioactive debris paths if Guam or the US is nuked. They have nothing directly involved here at all. No land territory, no bases, nothing.

Well, other than their sense of honor, and standing up for their allies. Australia could have sat this out and nobody would have thought otherwise (nobody is condemning Wellington of not getting involved after all).

No, no, no, no, no. The Aussies are sending a message, and sending it quite clearly to North Korea. Because if for some reason the US backs down, they are likely the next target of bullying tactics.

Your last quote, really? You don't seem that ill informed.


"No person by or acting.........."