5 ms·
A couple of interesting assumptions in that comment. First is an assumption that the capabilities of the missile being tested are "known" and a follow on assum
by ChuckMcM 5y ago
A couple of interesting assumptions in that comment.
First is an assumption that the capabilities of the missile being tested are "known" and a follow on assumption that the PRK does not have the capability of flying a missile as far west as Burbank, CA.
Neither of these are very good assumptions to make. To understand why, consider the following;
KP's collaborates with both the Russian Federation and China on weapons development (multiple open sources) and both of those nations have missile technology that can go from anywhere in North Korea to pretty much anywhere in the US.
KP has been telling people they have a working hypersonic ballistic missile (travel time Korea to the west coast at ~ 1hr without going sub-orbital.)
The US and KP are technically still at war (the Korean war stopped with a cease fire, not a treaty) and the US and its allies levy sanctions on them that hurt.
So while in previous tests it was both not widely believed that KP could reach the US and the KP had not said they could reach the US, both of those positions changed. That changed the threat posture from "zero" threat to "some" threat.
Fortunately physics is physics and it's pretty clear after 10 to 15 minutes what a missile is doing and what it might be able to do.
As a result I don't really think this was a "knee jerk" decision, I think it's likely policy going forward until better clarity is available on how rapidly KP's missile technology advances and an effective counter can be put into place.
- javajosh 5y agoI'm curious what you think would happen if KP nukes a city or two in the US. I presume we'd nuke them back, but then what? How does the rest of the world react? How would SK and China, in particular react? Surely this is a known plan?
- BeKindAndLearn 5y agoEveryone would look the other way and offer thoughts and prayers. North Korea would be largely vaporized and neither China nor South Korea would prolong the issue and risk total nuclear annihilation of humanity.
- javajosh 5y agoThere would be significant collateral damage to nuking the KP, including to a close ally. Plus, given the prevailing winds, fallout may even drift west all the way to the west coast of the USA. So perhaps we nuke one of their cities, and then begin a full scale conventional invasion? And of course during the chaos Russia takes Ukraine, NATO curses and gnashes teeth but the US has KW2 on its hands and does nothing.
- lobocinza 5y agoThat would be the rational choice. But what about the decisions made on that blink of a moment? If where to be an escalation to nuclear I'm afraid there might not be an opportunity for diplomacy.
- bluGill 5y agoThere are plans, but they are not always coordinated. I wouldn't be surprised if before the US could get troops in the area China invades, asking the US navy to provide cover fire (in large part this politics - China could do it themselves but knows that the US needs to be seen as responding so giving the US navy a target is good for both). China and the US are not on great terms, but China has a lot to lose in this scenario and is in geographical position to respond faster. (South Korea is closer, but North Korea is well set to defend against their invasion so China is my guess). I have no idea what Russia will do in this scenario. Anything seems possible.
- dirtyid 5y agoAny fallout tainting PRC / Russia is probably going to be used to extract concessions from US.
- ChuckMcM 5y agoI think it would be suicidal for KP to jump into a full scale "hot war" with the US. That said, I could easily see them shooting ballistic missiles into the ocean 100 miles off the west coast at random times to cause disruption and chaos in the state that provides the biggest chunk of the US GDP (California). The FAA and US would have no choice but to react as if it "might" be heading for landfall and unable to "launch on warn" because of the geopolitical consequences of obliterating a chunk of KP when their "harmless test" did no damage at all, would be high. So in the "perception is everything" game, KP's moves appear to me to been about making themselves look good and the US look bad. So my non-foreign policy analyst position is that this where I see this going over the next 5 - 10 yrs.
- deleted 5y ago[deleted]
- capableweb 5y ago> The US and KP are technically still at war (the Korean war stopped with a cease fire, not a treaty) and the US and its allies levy sanctions on them that hurt. Technically, I don't think the US and North Korea ever been at war. South Korea and North Korea are technically still at war though, as they signed the treaty with each other, not the US.