North Korea Has Apparently Launched A Missile Over Japan

a reply to: khnum

You know, this situation is so bloody complicated, that sometimes I'm glad I'm not in the skin of a world leader.

If you push a guy like Kim Jong Un just a little bit too much, he will snap. We pressure him just a bit too hard, he will go nuclear. And don't you think for one second that he's not going to fire back. And if we put him in that situation, a lot of innocent people are going to die, on both sides.

So, what's the right thing to do? How do you deal with someone who's intentionally provoking you, but at the same time, can hurt you? Don't know.

That's why we have to proceed with caution. I will go back to my beer, and let Trump and others deal with this

originally posted by: introvert
a reply to: theantediluvian

What an idiot. At least it went over Japan and did not strike there.

Lil Kim may have just poked the bear a bit too much this time.

Can't recall any missile test from NK going over Japan. Perhaps I am wrong.

Just seen on the news that NK has fired 3 missiles over Japan. Last time was 2009.

a reply to: khnum

Japan has Patriot, THAAD, and Aegis BMD. They're far from sitting ducks.

I wonder why it wasn't shot down? We just let a missile fly over Japan? Seems fishy.

a reply to: Nikola014

You are correct there are 10 million South Koreans within the Norths artillery range this is a bit more technical than shooting tomahawks into the middle of nowhere.

a reply to: Wookiep

It's up to Japan, not us, if they want it shot down. They may have analyzed the trajectory and decided to let it go unless something happened.

a reply to: Zaphod58

So their policy is to take the hit???????????
Why didnt they blow it out of the sky before it flew over Hokkaido???????

originally posted by: khnum
a reply to: Zaphod58

So their policy is to take the hit???????????
Why didnt they blow it out of the sky before it flew over Hokkaido???????

They didn't take a hit, it landed in the sea. Maybe the could see where it was going and decided it was safer to let it land in the sea rather than shooting it down over land possibly raining debris down in the Japanese people.....maybe..

Interesting times? Yeah, well, I think the world could do with a little boredom about now.

I hope TPTB keep clear heads about this - on the other hand I want that nutball in NK taken OUT!

Prayers for Japan, and the rest...

peace

a reply to: khnum

You think they weren't tracking it from launch and can't tell if it's going over them? There are no indications that it was targeted at Japan and the flight path obviously took it clear of them. Pretty much everyone with s radar, including NORAD and the Japanese equivalent had this thing tracked to within a few inches and were keeping a damn close eye on it. If it had lookedlike it would have even gotten close, they probably would have launched on it. It didn't, so they didn't.

Say goodnight, Kim. It's time.

originally posted by: khnum
a reply to: Zaphod58

So their policy is to take the hit???????????
Why didnt they blow it out of the sky before it flew over Hokkaido???????

Because in the most simplistic terms possible -- thanks to this neat thingy called mathematics, they managed to calculate the trajectory was going to be a splash, not a crater. It's up to them, not us, to waste or not waste resources on taking down something that's not going to hit anything.

a reply to: Zaphod58

I'm assuming they had reason to believe the altitude / trajectory also wouldn't have posed an emp or air burst risk either...

Still pretty provocative given recent rhetoric from our leadership if you ask me...

a reply to: Zaphod58

If they are so confident in their capabilities why was NHK broadcasting an emergency seek shelter broadcast for specific areas.Just an observation.
Mum was in ww2 and can attest to the fact primitive rocketry can land anywhere

a reply to: SonOfThor

It's ridiculously provocative, and downright stupid. If the missile had failed, it would have almost certainly started something.

a reply to: Nyiah

see my above post please

originally posted by: khnum
a reply to: Nyiah

see my above post please

Obvious answer: failure & ensuing debris from shoddy construction was a worry.

a reply to: kamatty

They didn't take a hit, it landed in the sea. Maybe the could see where it was going and decided it was safer to let it land in the sea rather than shooting it down over land possibly raining debris down in the Japanese people.....maybe..

Here's the thing about that gamble: If the missile is a nuke and it airbursts, that is a problem.

If there were no reaction I am guessing it is because there wasn't time. Some reports the missiles were sub-launched, anyone know?

a reply to: khnum

Because sometimes accidents happen. Missiles blow up, or things fall off them, or if they did have to shoot, where do you think that debris is going? It doesn't just disappear. If that happened over Japan, out would make a mess. It's far better to prepare for the worst, than not to and something happen.

Would you rather they DIDN'T prepare and the missile fail right over their heads and kill a bunch of people? Or is it better to order people into cover and nothing happen?

a reply to: Jonjonj

An airburst would occur much lower or it would have little to no effect. If they were going for an EMP, it wouldn't affect most, if not all of the Japanese military equipment. Most of it is license built or based on our equipment, including hardening against EMP.