N. Korea missile aimed at area off Hawaii - report

[Cowperson]

[quote=Lanny_MacDonald]Really Cow? First you are making some pretty big assumptions. You would be saying that you know how all the stages were configured and what their burn times would be. This was supposed to be a missile the United States knew little about, but all of a sudden they are able to say, with very little confirmable data, that they were 100% correct in their assumptions. Seems like bull**** to me.

Well, I see you've abandoned your notion that the direction of the missile couldn't be determined from 40 seconds of data and also your hope that the course could be altered in mid-flight, apparently engaging in a dance across the Pacific.

I don't see a stretch for engineers viewing satellite imagery - capable of seeing the detail of even smaller objects from orbit in real time - determining the dimensions of the missile as it was being readied for launch. . . . . and the probable propellant - liquid or solid - should be obvious from the vehicles surrounding it.

Your predilection for extreme statements is showing again . . . .you're the one who said "100% accurate" . . . . . I said they'd have a pretty good idea . . . . good enough to know the direction and potential range.

Really? Since the rocket never left North Korean airspace I don't think they have the burden of anything, except embarassment that their "hugely dangerous" rocket blew up in their own faces

I said "IF" they overfly Hawaii, it could definitely be construed as an act of war, just as we might have seen of an overflight by a Soviet ICBM of New York.

Its just a stupid thing to do . . . . and we should all agree on that given the lessons of the Cold War.

The North Koreans have executed an unannounced overflight of Japan with a rocket in the past . . . . the lessons of the Cold War apparently lost on them.

It's quite obvious they are the party that shouldn't be trusted in this matter and if they don't like the reputation they have to defend, then maybe they shouldn't have overflown Japan.

In fact, China, the real power broker here, should think about how badly it wants a nuclear-armed Japan in its backyard.

Cowperson

[calculoso]

Originally Posted by Lanny_MacDonald

Really? Since the rocket never left North Korean airspace I don't think they have the burden of anything, except embarassment that their "hugely dangerous" rocket blew up in their own faces.

If you shoot at somebody but your gun jams, isn't there a huge suspicion of what intentions were?

Granted, a rocket with a longer distance, and abilities to divert (whether used or not) is a different kettle of fish, but shouldn't the same questions be asked? What exactly were they trying to do? You can guess, you can assume, but the burden of proof is on North Korea to provide that.

[Lanny_MacDonald]

Originally Posted by Cowperson

Well, I see you've abandoned your notion that the direction of the missile couldn't be determined from 40 seconds of data and also your hope that the course could be altered in mid-flight, apparently engaging in a dance across the Pacific.

No, and that would be you doing your best to take someone's words and twisting them to your story.

Fact of the matter is that you can't tell much from the first 40 seconds of flight, as I pointed out, because you have NO idea what the burn time would be, what the configuration of the secondary stages was, their burn times, etc. You can't even tell if the missile was indeed on it's intended course in the first place. It's all wild ass speculation. I would think that the fact it was destroyed 40 seconds into flight indicates the North Koreans thought it was off course and not flying at it should have been, and destroyed it. At least that's what other nations have done when testing weapons. Oh, but I forget, this is the dreaded North Koreans, who are enemies of freedom and democracy and have al alterior motive that only the United States is 100% sure of.

I don't see a stretch for engineers viewing satellite imagery - capable of seeing the detail of even smaller objects from orbit in real time - determining the dimensions of the missile as it was being readied for launch. . . . . and the probable propellant - liquid or solid - should be obvious from the vehicles surrounding it.

Well, I guess my secret chili recipe isn't quite so secret then. These guys can see everything from space and tell exactly what is going on. Was that too much paprika last time fellas?

Your predilection for extreme statements is showing again . . . .you're the one who said "100% accurate" . . . . . I said they'd have a pretty good idea . . . . good enough to know the direction and potential range.

Your predilection for believing anything the media tells you is showing again. You don't know anything as the story doesn't give any particulars. It's all sensationalistic crap meant to inflame the masses and have them rally around the flag.

I said "IF" they overfly Hawaii, it could definitely be construed as an act of war, just as we might have seen of an overflight by a Soviet ICBM of New York.

No, you said burden of proof is on the Koreans. "North Korea has also shot rockets over Japan so the burden of proof is on North Korea to demonstrate the intent was not to overfly Hawaii." Those are your exact words. The vehicle never left North Korean airspace, so how was it a threat to anything but North Korean pride?

Its just a stupid thing to do . . . . and we should all agree on that given the lessons of the Cold War.

Why? Because the Americans say it was stupid? The North Koreans have the right to test what ever weapons systems they like, as long as they do not enter the airspace of another nation. If they land their missiles in the international waters of the ocean, they are within their rights. The United States does it all the time. Why are other nations subject to different rules that those followed by America?

The North Koreans have executed an unannounced overflight of Japan with a rocket in the past . . . . the lessons of the Cold War apparently lost on them.

Yup, pretty stupid. No defense of that.

It's quite obvious they are the party that shouldn't be trusted in this matter and if they don't like the reputation they have to defend, then maybe they shouldn't have overflown Japan.

Ah yes, but we should just believe everything that comes out of the American press and swallow it like it is indeed 100% factual. Yeah, there's been no indication of the last five years of the press being feed a line of B.S. by the administration and then passing it along as facts? Now where are those pesky WMD's again?

In fact, China, the real power broker here, should think about how badly it wants a nuclear-armed Japan in its backyard.

Cowperson

Hell, how badly do you think China wants a nuclear North Korea in its backyard. Probably as much. And I seriously doubt China would give a rats about Japan having nukes. I'm pretty sure they know that Russia and America have more than enough stationed within minutes of wiping them off the map.

[Lanny_MacDonald]

Originally Posted by calculoso

If you shoot at somebody but your gun jams, isn't there a huge suspicion of what intentions were?

Damn spud guns ain't what they used to be.

Granted, a rocket with a longer distance, and abilities to divert (whether used or not) is a different kettle of fish, but shouldn't the same questions be asked? What exactly were they trying to do? You can guess, you can assume, but the burden of proof is on North Korea to provide that.

No, the burden of proof is on the accuser, not the accused. The accuser must make its case and prsent proof of intent. Only at that point does the accused have to defend themselves. Its called building a case, and the United States has nothing but circumstantial evidence that isn't enough to garner a warrant or changes. North Korea broke no laws. This time around they were very careful to play within the rules. Maybe next time they won't be so smart and can hammered then, but at this point, they didn't do anything wrong that I can see.

[Cowperson]

Originally Posted by Lanny_MacDonald

No, and that would be you doing your best to take someone's words and twisting them to your story.

Fact of the matter is that you can't tell much from the first 40 seconds of flight, as I pointed out, because you have NO idea what the burn time would be, what the configuration of the secondary stages was, their burn times, etc. You can't even tell if the missile was indeed on it's intended course in the first place. It's all wild ass speculation. I would think that the fact it was destroyed 40 seconds into flight indicates the North Koreans thought it was off course and not flying at it should have been, and destroyed it. At least that's what other nations have done when testing weapons. Oh, but I forget, this is the dreaded North Koreans, who are enemies of freedom and democracy and have al alterior motive that only the United States is 100% sure of.



Well, I guess my secret chili recipe isn't quite so secret then. These guys can see everything from space and tell exactly what is going on. Was that too much paprika last time fellas?





Your predilection for believing anything the media tells you is showing again. You don't know anything as the story doesn't give any particulars. It's all sensationalistic crap meant to inflame the masses and have them rally around the flag.

[i][b]

No, you said burden of proof is on the Koreans. "North Korea has also shot rockets over Japan so the burden of proof is on North Korea to demonstrate the intent was not to overfly Hawaii." Those are your exact words. The vehicle never left North Korean airspace, so how was it a threat to anything but North Korean pride?



Why? Because the Americans say it was stupid? The North Koreans have the right to test what ever weapons systems they like, as long as they do not enter the airspace of another nation. If they land their missiles in the international waters of the ocean, they are within their rights. The United States does it all the time. Why are other nations subject to different rules that those followed by America?



Yup, pretty stupid. No defense of that.



Ah yes, but we should just believe everything that comes out of the American press and swallow it like it is indeed 100% factual. Yeah, there's been no indication of the last five years of the press being feed a line of B.S. by the administration and then passing it along as facts? Now where are those pesky WMD's again?



Hell, how badly do you think China wants a nuclear North Korea in its backyard. Probably as much. And I seriously doubt China would give a rats about Japan having nukes. I'm pretty sure they know that Russia and America have more than enough stationed within minutes of wiping them off the map.

Well, I'm sure that's all very nice in Fanaticaland. . . . . . you deserve a pat on the head for the effort at least.

It's boiling, its Stampede, there are parties to attend and I'm gonzo. I'll pick things up on Monday or so.

Cowperson

[greasesuck]

Originally Posted by Muta

Defending themselves by firing the first missle?

I feel extremely sad for the people of North Korea, in that they have to put up with a maniacal halfwit in Kim Jong Il...

I wonder if Kim Jong Il is just mad after seeing Team America: World Police.

He's just a lonley guy and wants attention lol
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=YDuyJ...team%20america

[calculoso]

Originally Posted by Lanny_MacDonald

No, the burden of proof is on the accuser, not the accused. The accuser must make its case and prsent proof of intent. Only at that point does the accused have to defend themselves. Its called building a case, and the United States has nothing but circumstantial evidence that isn't enough to garner a warrant or changes. North Korea broke no laws. This time around they were very careful to play within the rules. Maybe next time they won't be so smart and can hammered then, but at this point, they didn't do anything wrong that I can see.

Seems pretty black and white in this case:

Rocket is launched
First 40 seconds, tragectory (angle into air, direction of travel, etc) is towards Hawaii, to land in its vicinity.

We're not talking about taking them into a court of law, where you have to prove beyond a shadow of a doubt. We're talking about the court of public opinion... of government opinion... of UN opinion.

The amount that has transpired is definitely enough for questions to be asked and answers demanded.

[Lanny_MacDonald]

Originally Posted by calculoso

Seems pretty black and white in this case:

Rocket is launched
First 40 seconds, tragectory (angle into air, direction of travel, etc) is towards Hawaii, to land in its vicinity.

Says who? According to the Japanese the other missiles landed close to them. In reality, the fact is that they landed closer to Russia than they did to Japan. How come Russia is not up in arms over this? How come South Korea is not up in arms over this??? Because its all sensationalistic B.S. Welcome to the circus that is the conservative media.

We're not talking about taking them into a court of law, where you have to prove beyond a shadow of a doubt. We're talking about the court of public opinion... of government opinion... of UN opinion.

Yup, and we'll see what the world opinion is. Again, how come Russia is not up in arms over this? How come South Korea is not up in arms over this??? These are the two countries that are the closest and at greatest risk by the North Korean actions.

The amount that has transpired is definitely enough for questions to be asked and answers demanded.

On both sides. I don't trust either as far as I could throw them.

[calculoso]

Originally Posted by Lanny_MacDonald

Says who? According to the Japanese the other missiles landed close to them. In reality, the fact is that they landed closer to Russia than they did to Japan. How come Russia is not up in arms over this? How come South Korea is not up in arms over this??? Because its all sensationalistic B.S. Welcome to the circus that is the conservative media.

South Korea is probably already under the range of their current missiles, not the ones being tested.

Originally Posted by Lanny_MacDonald

On both sides. I don't trust either as far as I could throw them.

I'll definitely agree with you... and yet, it sure appears that you're more willing to give North Korea the benefit of the doubt than the US while ignoring any evidence that there is. Why is that?

[peter12]

Originally Posted by Lanny_MacDonald

Earth, where the United States does not run the show. I'm so sick and tired of the garbage that passes as "news" and people swallow it. When does critical thought come into play? Obviously, in your case Peter, not very often. What ever the United States, and its puppet allies, says is good enough for you.

What part of "mutual assured destruction" do you NOT understand? America does NOT want nukes in the hands of every nation because THEY lose the leverage and threat factor that they can hold over every nation's head. America plays nice with countries that can fight back. America likes weak nations that it can manipulate. North Korea is trying to prove it is not a weak nation.

You're a funny guy. Still watching Loose Change, Lanny?

[Red Mile Style]

Originally Posted by Azure

According to Red Mile Style, all NK is doing is defending themselves.

I don't agree with him.

You're baiting me, aren't you? It's hard to keep up with all these threads!

At this point, N.Korea would be completely stupid to do anything offensively. They do not have the capability, although with China, they do have some clout. Do you honestly think that if N.Korea was trying to do some damage, they would have employed just one rocket that would hit Hawaii?!?!?! Give me a break! Before it came even close to Maui, N.Korea would probably have been nuked into the Stone Age.

I think N.Korea is just trying to make it clear that they will not sit back and watch their soveriegnty be taken away. Look at how the U.S. occupies countries. N.Korea now has some deterrance from letting that happen.

[Lanny_MacDonald]

Originally Posted by peter12

You're a funny guy. Still watching Loose Change, Lanny?

Heck no, that's old school. Moved on to Loose Change II.

I'd outline some books for you to read, to get up to speed on some information not widely available, but I think you're stuck on the critical content of "My Pet Goat".

[Azure]

Originally Posted by Lanny_MacDonald

Heck no, that's old school. Moved on to Loose Change II.

I'd outline some books for you to read, to get up to speed on some information not widely available, but I think you're stuck on the critical content of "My Pet Goat".

Let me guess, they would all be left wing biased.

[Lanny_MacDonald]

Originally Posted by Azure

Let me guess, they would all be left wing biased.

They probably are in YOUR political spectrum. Where you sit, EVERYTHING is left wing. If you Bushies were any further right, you'd pop up over on the extreme left. I guess that would make sense since your political movement (the neocons) was founded by a bunch of ex-Trotzkyites.

What's funny is that I am pro-business, pro-capitalism, and pro-small government, but with a humanistic approach. I believe people should be rewarded for their hard work, but not at the expense of their fellow man. That means that there should not be a massive (300 times) gap between C-level and line workers. I believe that business should be abe to turn unlimited profits, as long as they meet a social responsibility contract with their community. I believe that government should be small, non-obtrusive, and effective. That means they make the rules that support the needs of the whole, and then monitor them for compliance, penalizing those who do not comply. Now where do those values lay in the political spectrum?

[RougeUnderoos]

Originally Posted by calculoso

Seems pretty black and white in this case:

Rocket is launched
First 40 seconds, tragectory (angle into air, direction of travel, etc) is towards Hawaii, to land in its vicinity.

Good lord. You guys don't actually believe this stuff, do you? The article linked in the original post actually says "cited U.S. and Japanese government officials as saying a piece of the Taepodong-2 missile fell off immediately after take-off".

So does it really sound like they could figure out where this thing was headed, or maybe, just maybe, are they exaggerating the "threat" just a little bit?

I don't know, but I'm of the opinion that George and his pals would take a missile launched at Hawaii pretty effing seriously if they thought that's what happened.

Cowperson has compared it to "Moscow firing a missile over Manhattan" but I don't see how that can be considered a valid comparison. During the Cold War that kind of action would probably have started World War III so I'm positive it wouldn't have been buried behind a story about the President's 60th birthday, which is where the "Pyongyang to Honolulu Express" story sat on American (PBS) news tonight.

[Azure]

Originally Posted by RougeUnderoos

I don't know, but I'm of the opinion that George and his pals would take a missile launched at Hawaii pretty effing seriously if they thought that's what happened.

And since George and his pals are so "evil" surely they would use this situation as a excuse to nuke NK, right?

[tjinaz]

Now I don't work for NORAD or anything but since the 50s haven't the US, Russia, China and some of NATO been putting satellites into orbit whose sole purpose is to track and predict the probable trajectory of missles? Granted it is rocket science but I would think in the 50 years they have been doing this and the billions of dollars invested they have some pretty sophisticated resouces and methods available to them since that information would be pretty important to all of their national defense organizations.

I know all resources in that part of the world have been trained on that very spot since it became apparent NK was going to launch something and everyone is curious as to the NK rockets capabilities.

[CaptainCrunch]

Actually the U.S. facility in Norad can calculate within a 100 mile radius where a missile is going to land as soon as it rotates out of it silo or off of its launcher, the longer they can track it, the more accurate they can get.

[Azure]

Originally Posted by CaptainCrunch

Actually the U.S. facility in Norad can calculate within a 100 mile radius where a missile is going to land as soon as it rotates out of it silo or off of its launcher, the longer they can track it, the more accurate they can get.

Oh no, I thought Lanny said it was BS?

Surely Lanny cannot be wrong.

[jolinar of malkshor]

I do not support Lanny in most things that he says but I agree that one cannot tell where the rocket was heading with only 40 secs flight time.

If you use the average acceleration of the Saturn V rocket of 11.7 m/s squared 40 secs only gives it enough distance to really get it up and going. It would need to obtain a certain elevation before it can really start to make a horizontal trajectory.