Questions: The 4 missiles NK is threatening to launch towards Guam (on the 15th?) are they...

[PearliePoo2]

test flights or did Kim say they would be armed? If the intended target is just outside of Guam's waters and in International waters, does that still constitute an attack?
Will the U.S. assume at launch that they are armed and try to destroy them? Some decisions will have to be made quickly since I think it's less than a 15 minute flight.

[Not Ruth]

1. I may be off slightly

NK said that the missiles will hit 30-40km off Guam. That is 18.641-24.855 miles. International waters start at 24 miles. So NK has chosen 0.855 mile of wiggle room where they could be in international waters. The missiles fly 2128 miles. So NK has a possible error of .04% to work within.

It is definitely tight.

[PearliePoo2]

4. Yes, that's tight! Too tight. Some of their test birds never made it much past launch

before they failed. Could be that some cyber shit was done to them too.

[Lurks Often]

2. Some answers

1. Regardless of what Fat Boy says, the missiles will be treated as if they had a warhead attached, I don't believe there is a way for us to tell if the missile is armed or not.

2. As for whether the US will fire on the missiles will depend on how close they think the missiles will come to Guam, something NORAD will know within a few minutes. While anything outside of 12 miles is considered international water, I expect that the military will fire on the missiles if they think the missiles will land with 25 miles of Guam, partly because NK missiles aren't that accurate and IF (and I doubt it) a missile is armed with a nuclear warhead, we would want to intercept far enough out that if it goes off* so Guam is unaffected or if it is intercepted and doesn't go off any radioactive material falls into the ocean.

Hopefully China's rather blunt warning that Fat Boy is on his own if he makes the first move will mean things will start to settle down.


*I know most if not all "modern" nuclear weapons will not go off if intercepted, but I doubt NK is that advanced yet, I suspect the design is far closer to a Hiroshima or Nagasaki type warhead rather then the far more sophisticated warheads of the other nuclear armed countries.

[B2G]

3. Why wouldn't we shoot them down regardless?

If they're headed towards Guam, why the hell wouldn't we shoot them down?

That's an defensive move to counter their offensive one.

[Not Ruth]

6. Because they are going through Japan on their way to Guam

So Japan gets first crack, assume Japan wants 4 warheads exploding in Hiroshima.


http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/2017/08/11/japans-missile-defences-not-able-intercept-north-korean-icbms/

[B2G]

7. So I repeat, why wouldn't we shoot them down

if they're shown to be headed towards Guam?

Japan gets 'first crack'? WTF is that? The article you linked clearly states that Japan isn't capable of doing so.

[Lurks Often]

8. Why waste the missiles?

If the NK missiles are going to land in the middle of the ocean 50 miles from any inhabited island, why waste the money?

Besides I question the legality of shooting down a missile that is going to land in international waters nowhere near Guam or other US islands in the area.

[B2G]

9. You question the 'legality' of shooting them down?

A country that isn't even supposed to have an ICBM in the first place? That fires them off willy nilly with no warning or stated path? Really??

[Lurks Often]

10. If they are no threat to US territory why should we fire on them?

And North Korea withdrew from the nuclear non-proliferation treaty in 2003

Link: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Treaty_on_the_Non-Proliferation_of_Nuclear_Weapons#North_Korea

Do you really want to escalate things by firing on NK's missiles if they aren't go to land anywhere US territory?

[B2G]

12. If they are headed towards Guam,

how do we know with any degree of confidence where they will actually land? Is NK so advance now they can pinpoint the trajectory and distance and entry point and know for certain what the end result will be? Should be rely on the notice they provide and the filed plan so no one freaks out when they are launched (yes that was sarcasm)?

Lololol. Shoot them down.

[Lurks Often]

14. You sound awfully eager for things to escalate

and shooting down NK missiles that aren't going to land anywhere near US territory would escalate things.

NORAD should have a pretty good idea where the missiles will land based on the initial trajectory. Previous NK launches have been tracked, that's where they've gathered the current information on North Korean missiles from.

NORAD tracks missiles American and otherwise on a regular basis, so they'll know if the missiles will present a potential threat to Guam and if they do, then of course they should be shot down.

[B2G]

15. Eager? Fuck that to hell and back.

Why in the FUCK would you accuse me of hoping things escalate? I am being realistic.

If NK is STUPID enough to launch anything towards Guam or any US territory, we had better be prepared for it to be shot down. That is a purely defensive move, not an offensive one.

What would come next is another story altogether.

[Not Ruth]

16. You are dealing with logistics/tactics/capability

Let's say that missile defense is defense. You are trying to shoot down a long range missile by hitting it with your short range missile. As it approaches Guam.

Let's say that your defense can shoot down 1 inbound with certainty, 2 simultaneously with near certainty, 3 maybe. Then NK sends 4 at once.

Or even better, 3 at once, that manage to destroy the defense through a bit of NK magic and 1 nuke that just coasts in 20 minutes later.

Ideally NK sends 1 at a time, a few hours apart. Makes it real easy for us to shoot them down. All that assumes that they fire 4 missiles, not 40.

[B2G]

18. Some info

http://www.cnn.com/2017/08/10/asia/north-korea-missile-defense-guam/

[Not Ruth]

11. Imagine substituting Manhattan for Guam

And North Korea sends missiles into the sea 24.1 miles off of it. How would we respond? That is how the people on Guam feel now.

[B2G]

13. I honestly have no idea what point you're trying to make.

First you say don't shoot them down, let Japan do it. Then you post a link that explicitly states that they can't.

Now you're imagining now New Yorkers would feel if the missiles were coming towards them. I KNOW how the people of GUAM feel, and if there are missiles incoming, I would think they want some sort of protection from our government and military.

[Not Ruth]

17. I am certain that our military on Guam has some sort of short range missile defense

Just as I am sure that there is little in the way of missile defense scattered in the water between Japan and Guam. But can our Guam defense handle 4 ICBMs at once?

[PearliePoo2]

5. Thanks for the answers!

I would imagine that right now we have every surveillance available peering down to see if there's any movement to the pads or fueling. Lots of people not getting sleep right now, probably on high alert doing their jobs the very best they can.

[Not Ruth]

19. 2 more days......

[PearliePoo2]

20. I wonder if Fat Kim will actually be foolish enough to do it?

If he does and it all goes horribly wrong (escalates out of control) and he can actually target mainland U.S., my location in WA. State is rather strategic and target rich, I would think.

As the crow flies I live 23 miles NW of Naval Air Station Whidbey: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Naval_Air_Station_Whidbey_Island#Tenant_squadrons

And 58 miles NW of Naval Base Kitsap: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Naval_Base_Kitsap

Naval Base Kitsap also has this: Strategic Weapons Facility Pacific (SWFPAC), a high-security base in Washington that stores and maintains the Trident II ballistic missiles and their nuclear warheads for the strategic submarine fleet operating in the Pacific Ocean. The SWFPAC and submarines are thought to store more than 1,300 nuclear warheads with a combined explosive power equivalent to more than 14,000 Hiroshima bombs. This is the largest concentration of nuclear weapons in the U.S. https://fas.org/blogs/security/2016/06/pacific-ssbn-base/

It just so happens that on Tuesday, my family is gathering for a mini-reunion. I'm hoping no one messes with it.

[Not Ruth]

21. It is 8/15/17 where I am......

[greytdemocrat]

22. Heard that Kimmy

is NOT going to launch and "watch"
Trump's reactions.

Sounds like he is backing down. Now hopefully
Trump will not tweet something stupid...

[Xolodno]

23. Doubt he lets his birds fly.

One, we have to assume they are armed, so we have to down them. Two, China has already stated if Fat Boy starts shit, he's on his own, which means certain death for him, either a war with us or...uh...uhm...sudden complication from a sudden need for surgery via a Chinese doctor...and given he probably couldn't hit Nevada on a clear day..... Three, it would be a major embarrassment if the were downed just as soon they hit international waters, which would probably happen.