Article

2005-01-23 China-Japan-Koreas

Pentagon report: 'Limited capability' to thwart N. Korean missile

Archived material is restricted to Rantburg regulars and members. If you need access email fred.pruitt=at=gmail.com with your nick to be added to the members list. There is no charge to join Rantburg as a member.

Posted by tipper 2005-01-23 10:27:57 AM|| || Front Page|| [1 views since 2007-05-07] Top

#1 The strategy here is an interesting one. While the Norks may want to have a missile that can hit the US, that is no end in itself. They would want a missile that can attack Skor and US forces in the South, a US fleet, or Japan. But this requires a scenario for their almost singular interest: the conquest of the South. So such a weapon could only be useable in one of two situations: either as part of a complex and integrated invasion; or, as a complete wild hare of a madman.

The third possibility, and one hardly considered, is if the Norks launch against China. This could accomplish several things, from the Nork point of view. First of all, they might think it would free them from Chinese domination, much like the Vietnamese fought a war (and did rather well) to send China a message. It could also severely cripple the Chinese military, if used during a multi-Corps concentration of a military exercise. Or they could launch against Beijing, decapitating China and perhaps reducing it to a military junta of competing warlords.

Posted by Anonymoose 2005-01-23 10:48:06 AM|| 2005-01-23 10:48:06 AM|| Front Page Top

#2 It's way too late to undo a lot of the damage Bubba did to the strategic defense program, especially after wrecking DoD's RLV projects.

The only choice we have left to us is a bad system or no system at all.

Posted by Phil Fraering 2005-01-23 10:48:56 AM|| [http://newsfromthefridge.typepad.com] 2005-01-23 10:48:56 AM|| Front Page Top

#3 So, how's the Airborne Laser project coming along?

Posted by Bomb-a-rama 2005-01-23 3:20:11 PM|| 2005-01-23 3:20:11 PM|| Front Page Top

#4 This vehicle would go from marginal to nearly complete effectiveness with one small change: a proximity-fused nuclear warhead.
Both advocates and opponents commonly don't realize that ICBM defense was extensively researched in the 50s and 60s, leading to the briefly operational Safeguard system in 1974. It had been taken for granted from the beginning that exploding a nuke in space or the high atmosphere was justified to keep one from exploding in a city or a vital military installation.
The long technical and political struggle to develop a new ABM system is based entirely on the difficulties of doing it without resort to nuclear explosives. Safeguard used stone-age electronics, but there was little doubt of its effectiveness.

Posted by Atomic Conspiracy 2005-01-23 5:28:39 PM|| 2005-01-23 5:28:39 PM|| Front Page Top

#5 Early missile defense:

Nike Zeus (1958-1961)
Nike X (1961-1967)
Sentinal (1967-1969)
Safeguard (1969-1976)

Additionally, the nuclear warhead version of the Nike Hercules was operational at the time of the Cuban Missile Crisis in 1962. Though intended for use against nuclear-armed bombers, it had higher flight performance than the current Patriot and was believed to have a capability against IRBMs (like those deployed in Cuba) and first-generation SLBMs.

In recent years, there have been several Michael Moore style pop-culture "exposes" on the nuclear Nike program, all of which tacitly assume every LLL myth about nuclear weapons and then some. For example, they go out of their way to pretend that the weapons were absurd, as dangerous as the ones they were meant to stop, and even (in the case of a documentary about Nike sites in Chicago) to pretend that there was a substantial contamination danger from the sites themselves.

It appears that hostile media-cult propagandists want to pre-empt any revival of the idea, lest it prove wholly workable and their allies' ability to hold the American people hostage be mitigated.

Posted by Atomic Conspiracy 2005-01-23 5:56:54 PM|| 2005-01-23 5:56:54 PM|| Front Page Top

#6 NK has to only *believe* their strike might not make it through, then armageddon reigns down on them. I wouldn't like their odds

Posted by Frank G 2005-01-23 6:00:39 PM|| 2005-01-23 6:00:39 PM|| Front Page Top

#7 Incidentally, I strongly suspect that some of Israel's Arrow interceptors have nuclear warheads, making them effective against a much larger range of enemy missiles, including any that Iran is likely to have in the foreseeable future.

Posted by Atomic Conspiracy 2005-01-23 6:17:38 PM|| 2005-01-23 6:17:38 PM|| Front Page Top

#8 The Claremont Institute's MissileThreat.com provides an excellent overview of the subject, with regular updates.

Posted by Atomic Conspiracy 2005-01-23 6:25:01 PM|| 2005-01-23 6:25:01 PM|| Front Page Top

21:03 2xstandard
21:03 2xstandard
11:27 Half
11:27 Half
00:02 trailing wife
00:01 Bomb-a-rama
23:54 lex
23:49 trailing wife
23:49 trailing wife
23:31 nada
23:30 trailing wife
23:18 lex
23:16 lex
23:15 Barbara Skolaut
23:13 Barbara Skolaut
23:12 Sherry
23:12 Silentbrick
22:21 Wuzzalib
22:16 Mike Sylwester
22:15 Alaska Paul
22:09 Phil Fraering
22:06 Mark Espinola
22:05 Valentine
22:02 trailing wife