North Korea 'fires short-range test missile'

North Korea 'fires short-range test missile'

www.news.com.au

NORTH Korea appears to have test-fired a short-range missile, the same day it conducted an underground nuclear test, South Korea's Yonhap news agency reported.

Yonhap said North Korea fired a ground-to-air missile with a range of 130km from its northeastern Musudan-ri launch site.

The regime also launched a long-range rocket from that site on April 5.

The incident came just hours after North Korea said its second successful underground nuclear test was more powerful than its previous test in 2006.

(visit the link for the full news article)



[edit on 25-5-2009 by LenGXV6]

Looks like no one is paying any attention to North Korea.

South Korean government calling emergency meetings.
Obama and Rudd both condemning North Korea for its nuclear test, and Japan stating they will take stern action!!

I hope this is not the prelude to a shooting match, I guess only time will tell



www.news.com.au
(visit the link for the full news article)

I think this is getting a little out of hand. NKorea is obviously planning for something and something big. I hope nothing happens too soon, I am yet to see Cav's get to the finals.

Whoa! Testing a nuke - AND - testing a short range missile.

This is not looking good at all.

I hope it's just he's acting out in order to get a payoff to feed his people.

It sounds like inner fighting between the PTB are heating up too - so - it might be more than just N.Korea posturing this time.



S&F

[edit on 25-5-2009 by silo13]

Is this NK flaunting their supposed capabilities to the world? The only thing I could see them even having any success in with these demonstrations is instilling some fear in very close neighbors and South Korea.

I would be most interested to see what was meant by Japans "taking stern action" statement.

That will not go down well in that area. Will have to wait and see what China's response will be........

IMO, this is to show the world that North Korea has the capability to strike when it has to defend itself. This is not the first missile test or nuclear test that it has done.

If the US refuses to act, Japan will have no alternative than to rearm as it will no longer be able to rely on the US.

Japan rearming would be more frightening than anything Kim could conjure up. With their industry and economic power they could build a military that would rival the US in terms of projection, strategic power, and technology.

I would be willing to bet they could do it in ten years or less. If they wanted nukes they could have them before the end of the year.

Just got an MSN alert that North Korea has just fired "Two more Missiles".

This is beyond silly.

Report: NKorea test-fires 2 more missiles

SEOUL, South Korea – A South Korean news agency says North Korea has test-fired two more short-range missiles.

The Yonhap news agency says North Korea test-fired a total of three short-range missiles Monday after declaring that it successfully conducted a nuclear test.

news.yahoo.com...



[edit on 25/5/09 by MikeboydUS]

reply to post by MikeboydUS


If the US forces didn't get involved and they allowed the Japanese to do it and become an armed powerhouse again then I wonder what their view on it would be considering the US government and armed forces made a clause in the Japanese constitution that makes the whole re-arming of Japan very hard to do/ allow unless they allow it to be altered/ butchered or retracted which in itself raises concerns (much like any attempt to infringe or modify the US one does).

CHAPTER II: RENUNCIATION OF WAR
Article 9:
Aspiring sincerely to an international peace based on justice and order, the Japanese people forever renounce war as a sovereign right of the nation and the threat or use of force as means of settling international disputes.

2) In order to accomplish the aim of the preceding paragraph, land, sea, and air forces, as well as other war potential, will never be maintained. The right of belligerency of the state will not be recognized.

reply to post by Marshall Ormus


There is already a movement to reinterpret or change that. I personally think they will end up changing it.

On the other hand they could do what we do here in the US and just ignore it, after all "its just a piece of paper". I don't feel that way, but many of our politicians do.

[edit on 25/5/09 by MikeboydUS]

reply to post by MikeboydUS


True, but I would still be interested to see what the US, South Korea and China would have to say about either it being altered or ignored in such as way as to re-militarise Japan. Especially if they would allow Japan to remain a military power when and if it's conflict with North Korea was ended relatively quickly in this hypothetical situation, considering how much this would freak out SK (US's biggest ally in that whole area), annoy China and strip US's power in the region by making them loose quite a number of bases in East Asia and north Pacific.

i'd put money down NK isn't developing weapons for themselves.
ever heard they saying, "money is good"?

sale of these weapons to countries with bad reputations is more concerning then NK having them.

china won't say anything. they are russian allies and so is NK.
friends look out for each other.

as for Japan re-arming, not likely. they'll just freeze stock assets, withdraw all investments and aid. they are now a financial combatant.



[edit on 25/5/09 by spearhead]

Japan Re-Arm???????

Japan has an airforce, an army and a navy, its call a self defence force. I have operated with all three.

Their navy is on par with the US, hell most of the equipment is built under license from the US.

If push comes to shove, Japan can hold its own.

reply to post by Marshall Ormus


If the US wouldn't react to North Korean nuclear tests, they arn't going to react to Japan building an offensive military.

South Korea too may have to come to terms with the idea of an unreliable US. If anything it may push them to look for other help, like Japan.

China would be extremely angered over Japan building an offensive military, but there isn't much they could do about it without starting a war over it. At this point I don't think China would go to war over it.

I don't think Japan rearming would lead to conflict with North Korea, Japan would simply be making up for the lack of US firepower.

If the US is refusing to act, it would be stripping itself of power. As long as the US maintains a strong Pacific presence and isn't a paper tiger, Japan won't build up an offensive military.

Whats the difference between an offensive and a defensive military......
absolutely nothing - if you are referring to equipment. any equipment can be used in both offensive and defensive situations.

Japan has Harpoons - first strike weapon against shipping/military targets
SM2 - offensive to take air coverage, defensive to support air coverage

you get the idea.

It is the stance taken that determines offensive or defensive, so the question should be

Will Japan take an Offensive stand or a Defensive stand on this issue.

Personal view - Japan will play the defensive card, but increase surveillance/patrols on the western seaboard

reply to post by LenGXV6


Offensive militaries have the ability to project force strategically.

At the moment Japan has no long range bombers, ballistic missiles, aircraft carriers, cruise missiles, or weapons of mass destruction.

That could change here real quick, if the US doesn't step up to the plate.

It will be a few years but Japan would quickly fill any vacuum left by the US.

............and all the while, Iran might well view North Korea's actions as a blueprint on how to develop what they want, seeing that a threat of "further isolation" is the extent of the wrist-slap they receive.

I believe both nations will continue developing nuclear weapons and long-range delivery systems, and nothing will be done to stop them. I also believe the neither nation's leaders have much compunction regarding using or selling nuclear weapons.

So what is the appropriate course of action for the world? We will watch and curse and threaten and they will do as they wish, because we cannot hurt the leaders of these countries with economic sanctions.

............ and when one of them uses nuclear weapons, we will scramble to find someone to blame.

The Japanese Government's classification of the Hyūga class as destroyers has been met with some criticism. As the ships are larger than any previous destroyers and have a full-length flight deck and relatively large air wing, they have been compared to light aircraft carriers

Similar to what Australia will be building, although Australia's will have a "Bolt on Ski Ramp" to facilitate F-35.

In Littoral warfare, The Offensive side does not need WMD, Ballistics, AC carriers, Cruise missiles - although those elements would be nice for force projection, they are not necessary.

Helo carriers/Helo destroyers (got to love wording to get around the use of carriers) with Apache/cobras on board, would allow a first strike/amphib op to be able to be preformed.

F15's would complement long range attack, E2C gives you your radar coverage.

P3c would also be able to carry the AGM-84D Harpoon with SLAM/ALAM variation. approx range would be around 120nm.

reply to post by LenGXV6


I realize Japan is more than capable of launching an "air offensive" or "naval offensive" against North Korea, but Japan does not have the capability to sucessfully do so against China, Russia, or the US.

My point is that Japan will quickly fill any void left by inaction from the US.
In other words, Japan will build up a military capable of taking on Russia or China. If a vacuum emerges they will fill it.