North Korea to Move Intercontinental Missile

[tekisui]

Source: Reuters

SEOUL (Reuters) - North Korea is preparing to move an intercontinental ballistic missile from a factory near Pyongyang to a launch site on the east coast, a South Korean newspaper quoted a source in Washington as saying on Saturday.

The factory north of Pyongyang is the same place where the North manufactured the long-range rocket it fired on April 5 before moving it to the east-coast Musudan-ri missile range for assembly and launch, the Dong-a Ilbo newspaper said.

Regional powers are waiting to see what the North might do next after it conducted a nuclear test on Monday. South Korea is on alert on the assessment Pyongyang may make provocative moves using conventional weapons at their heavily armed border.

North Korea has warned of an intercontinental ballistic missile test in anger over U.N. Security Council punishment of what Pyongyang said was a satellite launch on April 5.

"Preparations to move an ICBM from the Saneum Weapons Research Center near Pyongyang by train have been captured by U.S. spy satellites," Dong-a Ilbo quoted a source in Washington knowledgeable about the issue as saying.

http://www.reuters.com/article/newsOne/idUSSEO14165620090530

[Deja Q]

1. Will Lil' Dong or whatever his name is be held for his actions?

Senile or not, the international community won't be tolerating much more of that thug.

[nadinbrzezinski]

2. We are getting closer to resumption of hostilities

remember the korean war is not over... and one principal partner backed out of the ceasefire resolution.

What I find incredible is that this must NOT be a cool story. The media is going out of its way to tamp it down. Perhaps it is way too complex for the kids in the media, I don't know...

[DonCoquixote]

3. Here lies the problem

The world already tried to deal with his father, only to have the Chinese step in.

Just like no one messes with Serbia without angering Moscow, just like israel runs around making a mess, NK is China's pet state, and of these three states, China is on the ascent, as opposed to the US or Russians.

[Deja Q]

4. *cough*

http://www.latimes.com/news/nationworld/nation/la-fg-china-korea27-2009may27,0,4005894.story

[davidpdx]

39. Hey DQ, that's a great article, you should have posted part of it.

Here, I'll do it for you:

China debates its bond with North Korea
The longtime ties between the communist regimes are enduring some questioning among Chinese, who were rattled by the nuclear test near their border.
By Barbara Demick
May 27, 2009

Reporting from Beijing -- When is it time to dump an old friend who insists on behaving badly? The debate is raging in China.

North Korea's latest nuclear test raises the question of just how long the bonds forged between old communist allies will endure.

The test was conducted barely 50 miles from the Chinese border. The ground rumbled in northeast China, and some schools were evacuated because of fears of an earthquake.

"It was quite shocking. The location where they did this test was a lot closer to China than to where Kim Jong Il is living in Pyongyang," said Zhang Liangui, a Korea expert with Beijing's Central Party School, where Communist Party officials are trained.

Mao Tse-tung once famously said that the relationship between China and North Korea was as close as "lips and teeth." Throughout the decades, China has remained the truest friend of its isolated neighbor -- at times the only friend.

Successive U.S. presidents have tried to take advantage of that relationship, turning to Beijing in the hope that it can pressure Pyongyang to give up its nuclear program. Increasingly, China itself is questioning whether the relationship is worth the effort.

Within the Chinese intelligentsia there is a deep divide over how to handle North Korea. The Global Times, a newspaper with close party ties, Tuesday published a survey of 20 of the country's top foreign policy experts. It found them split down the middle -- 10 arguing for tough sanctions against North Korea, 10 opposed.

"Traditionally, China has been very friendly to North Korea, but now there is a feeling that the North Koreans are causing us too much trouble," Zhang said

[Hawkowl]

32. But we have all their money!

I think at this point, China is beginning to realize that the borrower may own the lender at this point.

[cali]

34. China is calling for denuclearization of N. Korea and doing so loudly

they are every bit as peturbed by Kim's actions as any other actor in this mess.

[AllentownJake]

42. Iraq was our Pet State and Sadam our guy in the Middle East till 1990

Things change.

[armyowalgreens]

5. One properly placed missile could take care of that...

I'm not saying anything. I'm just sayin...:shrug:

[Deja Q]

6. And if it misfires too early, so much the better.

NK can blow itself up, but why they want to instigate a full scale war... The word "insane" is quite valid.

[nadinbrzezinski]

11. Correction, stickler for the facts, but this is just a resumption of hostilities

the Korean war NEVER ended.

This is also part of the N Korean pattern, problem is that the kitty it is shaking, every change of administration, will byte back one of these days.

By the way very technically we could shoot that thing down before it launches. Not an act of war, the war never ended.

Just that the speed bumps might have second thoughts about that

[armyowalgreens]

13. Technicalities aside, the war ended. We are not currently in active conflict with NK.

[nadinbrzezinski]

16. Point to me the peace treaty

And when they pulled out of the ceasefire less than 24 hours ago, we entered an active state of war. Only thing we need are some bullets, to make it very official.

By the way, over the decades there have been shootings at the DMZ and confrontations at the sea border.

[armyowalgreens]

19. Like I said, technicalities aside, the war is over.

I never said it was officially over. But as far as conflict goes, it is over. A few exchanges of small arms fire and alerts over boats that are "too close" isn't a war. Especially since it spans over decades.

The fact that the war isn't officially resolved has always been a technicality and nothing more.

[nadinbrzezinski]

22. Not to the speed bumps at the DMZ

and I will stick to the technical definition, RESUMPTION OF HOSTILITIES.

Not war.

[ConcernedCanuk]

7. As far as I can remember, North Korea has not attacked another country lately

.
.
.

I can't say the same about my southern neighbor

USA attacked many nations in my lifetime,

invaded and occupied

North Korea has done none of that

Remember, Korea was dominated by Japan for some time,

then the USA got into the mix

Japan attacked the USA, but now is it's "friend"

Korea never attacked the USA

something to ponder

:freak:

[armyowalgreens]

8. I'm more worried about the human rights violations.

North Korea makes the US look like an angel.

[New Dawn]

26. Bush just murdered 1.4 million Iraqis. You clearly are not very concerned about human rights.

Otherwise you'd be saying more about war criminal Bush and the Neocons.

[armyowalgreens]

30. Bush didn't systematically murder 1.4 million Iraqis.

They died because of his greed. There is a significant difference there. I'm not justifying what Bush and his asshole buddies did. But to suggest that Bush ordered the killing of 1.4 million people is ludicrous. They died as the result of a war. Even if that war was unjustified, that does not make the war any less like a war and that doesn't turn civilian casualties into murder victims.

N.Korea will drag you out of your home and either kill you or throw you into a jail cell for the rest of your life if you dissent against the government. They do that in mass. Bush and his administration did no such thing. Not even close.

[New Dawn]

31. Of course it was murder. Did Hitler not murder the British when he bombed their cities?

Bush's invasion of Iraq was illegal. His killings of Iraqi civilians were war crimes (i.e. unlawful killings, i.e. murder).

BTW, the government of South Korea has murdered lots of people too. In fact, it murdered peasants en-masse that it accused of being disloyal during the civil war. Their land is now controlled by wealthy South Koreans. South Korea was a right-wing military dictatorship for the majority of its existence, and brutally suppressed its population. It imprisoned people for life (or more usually executed) those it accused of being disloyal. Its founders collaborated with the Japanese in World War II. The dictatorship's political figures still rule South Korea via the right-wing "Grand National Party". The Grand National Party is part of the same international political grouping of political parties that is led by the US Republican Party (unsurprisingly).

[DrCory]

33. Debatable...

"North Korea has done none of that"

June 25th, 1950...and North Korea's "justification" has never been substantiated.

[DonCoquixote]

35. Point noted, but

Do you have to paint a halo around North Korea still? Unlike Iraq, they do threaten us, and despite all the talks of reunification, most South Koreans would NOT like it if Kim Il jung "renunified" the country. The only reason they have not "invaded" South korea is because they would have to plow through the DMZ to do it.

[SpartanDem]

9. This is getting really ugly

[ConcernedCanuk]

10. USA used Iraq as a target practice for their smart bombs in the "Shock and Awe" stage

.
.
.

I'm quite sure that the USA has a scenario like that for North Korea

BUT

The only way that the USA would have a chance in hell to destroy North Korea would to be to use nuclear weapons.

North Korea is much stronger militarily than Iraq was even at Iraq's peak strength.

ONE nuke - dropped anywhere . . .

It ain't just WW3 . . .

It's our last war

[SpartanDem]

12. I think could defeat them conventionally

There is always talk of their million person army, but they can't match us or our allies technologically, I imagine for them you're talking a lot of older Soviet era weapons equipment wise. It's not like we would be doing this one alone, I'd think if NK did anything worthy of going to war we'd see strong international backing.

But Kim is fucking nuts and would probably launch on the South when faced with losing since that about the only place their missiles can reach with any consistency. Of course, we'd turn the country into a parking lot once he did that, but it's not a pleasant scenario anyway you look at it.

[nadinbrzezinski]

14. To play devil's advocate, having higher tech does not necessarily

win a war

See Vietnam... we lost... we had higher tech

See WW II... we had nuthing but numbers on the Germans. Their armor was far superior, their arty was far superior, and I could go on. We just used soviet tactics, overwhelm with numbers. Yes, the M-4 Sherman sucked compared to the Panthers and Tigers, but a fair match, on the sides against the Panzer MK IV and Panzer MK III...

After the war the ruskies went with those tactics and we went with higher tech

Just a thought... if they managed to get even half their arty on the line to go off on Seul, yes has reached for even five minutes, Seul will be severely damaged.

[Pavulon]

18. Entire system designed to kill millions of soviets

we killed millions in vietnam. BTW they make nice shirts for macy's and take amex at the hilton in hanoi (we won). No one wants a war with them, but there is a plan that ends up with them bleeding out the nose, mouth and ass. Really, they are not in a position to win a conventional war. China has no interest in a war , proxy or otherwise with the US.

I vote we do nothing ant let them starve, state collapses. Not our problem, china can figure it out..

And your assertion on german technology is over simplistic. Germany could not produce weapons and trained troops in sufficient numbers and its geography isolated it once it opened a eastern front to start. People write about ww2 strategy to this day.

See all the skeletons in the desert in gw1, large soviet like force. Did not work all that well.

[nadinbrzezinski]

21. No we didn't, just like the Germans didn't

and that is the point

[Pavulon]

24. Didn't what. Kill millions in vietnam?

kill a massive standing army in gw1 that was a soviet model using soviet shit and tactics (like NK)? Or we did not "win" vietnam? No we did not win, however they do make shirts, they are the source for cheap labor taking business from china. China ate all their turtles depletes their economy and they are a backwater third world communist shithole. Most would leave there for here on any given day. But hey ho chi mihn was right.. Their supplier of doctrine and weapons has folded up shop.

The "germans" in ww2 had a vastly different command and control structure, economy, production capability, and global presence. Comparing the US armed services to nazi germany is not only factually defunct but inflammatory.

Are you saying we can not turn the lights out in NK using conventional war? They are a starving disaster. Sure we can, but lets just watch them fold up like e germany. Seems easier.

[nadinbrzezinski]

38. I am not saying that at all

I am saying that being the biggest dog in the barn yard, with the highest tech does not guarantee victory

In fact, you could even argue that the NK (and Chinese) fought us to a stand still in Korea as well.

And that is the point.

Once again, having the highest tech in the battlefield and full battlespace dominance does not victory guarantee. History proves that full control of a battle space, any battlespace, is just part of the equation... but not a determinate one

And the propaganda machine has convinced americans that since we have high tech weapons we can defeat anybody. Well we haven't...

We didn't defeat the Vietnamese, and the Germans did not defeat us... and so it goes.

[caraher]

23. Quantity has a quality all its own

Regardless of who "wins" the losers in a resumed conflict would be everyone in Korea, even if China sits it out. I doubt their ICBM at this stage is any more effective militarily than Saddam's SCUDS in 1991.

But North Korea's large military, even if underequipped by 21st century standards, poses unique challenges. A friend of mine is an ex-Navy attack pilot who owns a few Soviet-built AN-2s, small biplane transports that he flies around Latin America. (He did some relief work after Hurricane Mitch flying them.) About 15 years ago he was contracted to do some tests with the Navy because North Korea has thousands of these planes, and it occurred to someone that it might be hard for fighters to pick up aircraft that fly so low and slow. (How low and slow? He had a buddy drive out along the route to California and when there were headwinds the guy driving the car would pull ahead sometimes...) Apparently there was also the thought that if there were renewed hostilities the North Koreans might use them to infiltrate thousands of soldiers and saboteurs across the border; sheer numbers would probably overwhelm any air defenses. So he got paid to fly around while F-14s tried to dig radar returns out of the ground clutter...



Apparently having an F-14 swoop past was quite an experience. He remarked that the Tomcats could probably knock the Antonovs out of the sky with jet exhaust alone.

But yeah, Seoul is too close to the border for comfort - North Korea could certainly wreck the South pretty badly in the course of committing suicide. And the suffering would be horrific north of the border too.

[krispos42]

40. We can win a conventional war fairly easily

This has been true for decades. This is why our enemies don't fight conventional wars with us. Vietnam, for example.

But we would win air superiority fairly quickly, and with that have a significant advantage both stragegically and tactically.

We would know where most of their military units are; they would only know what their soldiers could see.

We would bomb them relentlessly from the air. Any movement of military divisions would result in significant losses and ample warning before they could even engage our units. During that engagement air power would strike hard, and during the retreat (by either side) our air power would continue to blast them.

Superior communications would allow highly coordinated attacks against less-coordinated and more-cumbersome NK units.

And we would also be attacking their logistical base and supply lines.




So we can win the war. Can we win the peace? Probably not. The contractors and war profiteers would dominate the occupation and reconstruction, and we'd have another clusterfuck like Iraq.


Well, maybe this time the South Koreans would take over the duty for us. They would probably do a better job.

[ConcernedCanuk]

20. "we'd turn the country into a parking lot " - I think the "superpower" thing has gone to your head

.
.
.

"bully on the block" syndrome

alive and well in the US-American electorate

(sigh)

[Statistical]

36. Not that I am advocating use of nuclear weapons but....

a nuke on NK wouldn't be "our last war".

It would be stupid and reckless and piss of China & Japan.

Nobody would defend NK and they certainly wouldn't rise to a nuclear exchange.

A loss of world standing, maybe break up of some alliances, possibly sanctions but not the "last war".

[Statistical]

15. I love it when media uses big words they don't understand

North Korea has no functional ICBMs.

ICBM is a technical definition. It is a missile capable of >5,500km in range.

North Korea longest flight test was 2200km making it a MRBM (medium range ballistic missile).

Of course that would require educating the public which tends not to like being educated and they may tune out and thus not generate ad revenue.

Instead INTERCONTINENTAL as in SCARY CRAP MAY STRIKE THE WEST COAST OF UNITED STATES!!!!!! DOOOM.

BTW:
I have a intercontinental model rocket in my backyard. Granted it has a range in meters intead of 5,500km but hey everything is an ICBM now. Maybe the US can offer me a sweet deal to return to the 7 party talks!

[nadinbrzezinski]

17. Well yesterday they were confused over DEFCON

granted if they had an ICBM... that MIGHT move DEFCON.

:-)

[caraher]

27. It's certainly ballistic... can it reach another continent?

I suppose if Palin popped off some model rockets in the right direction she could hit Asia from North America - presto, intercontinental!

But seriously, if they really could hit the West Coast from Korea I wouldn't quibble about some range benchmark in a press report, especially when they use the words rather than an acronym.

But I'd also be very surprised if they could deliver anything much more potent than leaflets over that distance, with any more accuracy than hitting the targeted state. Certainly they couldn't lob a nuke, probably not even as far as Japan, given how much trouble they seem to have just setting them off underground. Integrating them with the missiles is not trivial.

And launching an effectual ICBM is just a high-tech national suicide note.

[Statistical]

29. They can't

It is 8000km from North Korea to the West Coast.

North Korea longest launch to date 2324km.

So it is not an ICBM. It is a MRBM.

They can't reach any other continent not that matter for the formal definition but their current ballistic missiles don't even meet the casual definition.

It would be like calling a 747 a space shuttle because they both fly and go "high".

[New Dawn]

28. Great point.

[New Dawn]

25. "a South Korean newspaper quoted a source in Washington"

And who was the source?

[FKA MNChimpH8R]

37. K-Shizzle might find a few battalions of Chinese tanks

and a few hundred thousand members of the Red Army knocking down his northern door in the near future.

The Chinese are not going to tolerate this shit much longer.

[AllentownJake]

41. Agreed

The guy is right in his assessment short of the United State launching a Nuclear Attack there is little we can do to him.

He is wrong in the assessment that the Chinese are going to tolerate him messing up their increased stature in the world.

[riderinthestorm]

43. Something has changed for NK to be this demonstrably aggressive.

Did China "say" something to the NK leadership that has enraged the crazy Kim Jong Il? Is Kim Jong Il so decrepit the military are basically saying "fuck you, you are powerless and we have the weapons under our control, how about we take you out on the grand scale"?

Honestly, until we understand WHY North Korea is ramping up it's nuclear program like this, we're all idiots, all speculating. It's pretty crazy that we have so few "spies" on the ground in NK, after all these years, that we know nothing about what's going on internally in NK. We have such high tech spyware but no lowtech spycraft. And the lowtech is what we need.

Of course, that would have been impermissible for the military industrial complex running things in our country. Gotta have the big guns, big tech, big bucks flowing their way.

[FKA MNChimpH8R]

44. Whatever is done about North Korea will be done by the Chinese.

They have billions in trade at stake with the South and absolutely zero interest in seeing Seoul levelled by artillery or a half-assed nuke. The Chinese are pragmatic and stability-seeking at this point in history. Economic expansion has been the watchword in Beijing since the days of Deng Xiaoping. A tin-pot, shit-heeled, table-banging dingbat like Kim Jong-Il is about as welcome in the current Chinese strategic world-view as a huge, floating turd in the Imperial Punchbowl. The west need do nothing. Kim, or whomever is pulling the strings in NK, will probably meet his end at the business end of a Chinese tank or rifle,