Why bother with food production when you can redesign Russian SLBMs? YTN cites a Jane’s Defense Weekly report claiming that North Korea is developing two new missile systems designed to hit targets on the U.S. mainland. According to Jane’s, North Korea is developing both a ground-launched and sub-launched version of the Russian R-27, known to NATO planners as the friendly Mr. SSN-6 Serb. The ground-launched version would have a range from 2,500km to 4,000km, which would bring into range major U.S. bases in Guam and Hawaii, while the sub-launched version would have a range of over 2,500km. The missile is a completely different design from the Daepodong-1 and Daepodong 2, and may represent an attempt by the North Korean leadership to obtain missiles capable of hitting the U.S. mainland. Jane’s added that North Korea may have gained important insight into this development from the R-21 missile launch systems that were on 12 mothballed Russian submarines purchased through a Japanese scrap dealer in 1993.
Assuming that the sub-launched version is the more dangerous of the two, this would require that the North Koreans to get their hands on a boat that’ll fire them off. Yankee-class subs were designed for the R-27, although the R-21 could be launched from piece of shit Hotel and Golf-class boats.
Global Security reprints a VOA piece (in English) on this troubling news:
“This would be the first time the North Koreans have had a submarine-launched ballistic missile. And of course the great advantage of a submarine-launched weapon is that you are not dependent upon the range of the weapon. The submarine itself can deploy a considerable distance and could thus threaten a large area of the continental United States, for instance.”
UPDATE: One wonders whether the missiles to which Jane’s refers might not be the Nodong-B, which we’ve been hearing things about since last year. The Nodong-B, like the missile described above, is based on the Soviet R-27 SLBM design. Global Security.org puts forth some rather frightening scenarios involving the missile:
The intended role of the Nodong-B is unclear. While the Nodong-1/2 could target American facilities on Okinawa, these facilities are on Japanese territory. If the reported range of up to 4,000 kilometers is correct, the system could be used to target American facilties in Guam. Guam is an American posession, and thus the Nodong-B would give the North the potential to directly target American territory. Over-eager headline writers searching for a local angle notwithstanding, there seems little prospect that a single-stage Nodong-B could reach Hawaii, much less Los Angeles. Alternately, the Nodong-B might be intended for use with a [presumably] heavier uranium bomb design, maintaining the range coverage of the Nodong-1/2 which was presumably designed with a lighter plutonium bomb design.
The Soviet SS-N-6 was originally designed to be fired from a submarine. The Soviets also evaluated firing missiles of this class from surface ships that would be designed to blend in with normal commercial shipping. The US Government is evidently concerned that the North Koreans may intend to launch this missile from small commercial vessels that have approached the coastlines of the United States.
Such a basing mode could be attractive to North Korea because under many scenarios it would under-fly the missile defense system currently being deployed by the United States. It would also require less complex technology than the unflown Taepodong-2 ICBM.
In 1998 the Rumsfeld Commission argued that the community needs to look at alternative deployment schemes. “Sea launch of shorter range ballistic missiles is another possibility. This could enable a country to pose a direct territorial threat to the U.S. sooner than it could by waiting to develop an ICBM for launch from its own territory. Sea launching could also permit it to target a larger area of the U.S. than would a missile fired from its home territory.”
UPDATE II: It seems Russian missile experts need to eat, too (will link the Chosun piece when its posted):
[Jane's Defense Weekly] also said specialists from Russia’s VP Makeyev Design Bureau in Miass, Chelyabinsk were arrested in 1992 as they were heading to North Korea. Makeyev Design Bureau developed the R-27. It added that other groups of missile experts had successfully made it to the North.
34 Comments
This assumes, of course, that the US Navy does not arrange for said North Korean sub to have an accident the first time it leaves the pen.
But The Good News, We’ve Pacified Iraq
The Marmot has a scary story : YTN cites a Jane’s Defense Weekly report claiming that North Korea is developing two new missile systems designed to hit targets on the U.S.
A Kerry or Bush administration, there are ‘red lines’ past which any American government will lash out…. I just hope these blustering brainless northern ajosshi’s realize that
Sometimes a peaceful solution might not be the best solution. North Korea is going to end up a radioactive parking lot if they think the United States will play a game of nuclear brinksmanship with a lunatic regime.
And South Koreans: Those of us in the know are aware that it is your fondest wish that the US pay North Korea a bribe on the order of tens of billions of dollars to jumpstart their collapsed economy and ease reunification. You’re INSANE if you think thats a realistic possibility. WAKE UP.
The USA will not and should not ever allow this.
A SLBM design does not require a submarine, necessarily. It could be useful (as such things go) to reach intermediate targets such as Japan, Okinawa, or Guam.
luisalegria — true enough, but some of other designs North Korea has been working on could do the same — see the Nodong-B and the Taepodong’s. Interestingly enough, the Nodong-B is based on the same Soviet SLBM design, and one wonders if Jane’s mystery missile is really this.
Its pretty funny that USA haters like Kimchipig bitch and moan about the “illegal” war in iraq and go around telling the usa to police the world. I am sure if the USA stops NK, Kimchipig will be howling about it being illegal and BU$H is a terrorist.etc
[...] sile launch systems may have given the North Koreans useful technical information they are putting to good use i [...]
kimchi pig, “The USA will not and should not ever allow this.”
It’s funny to see that you encourage US action against North Korea, but oppose US action against Iraq.
It’s funny to see that you condemn North Korean genocide, but condone Iraqi genocide.
It’s funny to see that you condemn a dictator like Kim Jong Il who is a threat to the free world and kills his own people, but you condone a dictator like Saddam who is a threat to the free world and kills his own people.
It’s funny to see that Canadians opposed the liberation of Iraqis 66% to 26%, while Iraqis favored the liberation of themselves 61% to 26%.
It’s frustrating to see that Canadians, and many others in the free world, codemn the US as “evil,” “imperialistic,” and “unilateral,” when they know damn well we’re the only ones capable of fixing all the problems on this stupid planet.
Believe me, Americans would love to stick their heads in the sand and pretend there is nothing bad going on in the world. We tried that in 1938-9 and the result was Panzer divisions running around all over Europe and the Kwangtung Army raping and pillaging Asia.
We’ve save civilization. If you want to help us, great. If you don’t want to help us, just shut up then.
USFK Commander and the Washington Times
The USFK Commander, GEN Leon LaPort granted an interview with the Washington Times on Tuesday: (Photo from the USFK website) The four-star general said North Korea, despite its poor economy, continues to invest between 35 percent and 40 percent of
Raging Paul Webb! Did some Canadian give you a poke in the nose after you’d ran your mouth off too much in Itaewon one night? This foaming anger certainly sounds like there’s something more personal behind it…
Canadians live in a democratic society. They have the freedom to speak their mind. And they do, to your ‘frustration’. Your suggestion to shut up? How about we refuse it, and say anything we feel like saying? And help you or not whether we feel like it? Yeah, that’s what we’ll do! Cause it’s our right, whether you like it or not!
Let’s see… a whole bunch of false opposites on Mr. Webb’s part… hard to know where to begin. North Korea trying to develop nuclear missles that can reach the USA. Iraq full of bluster, but did not threaten the United States. Did anyone around here condone Saddam? Anyone? Just because one does not approve of how Bush & Co. handled Iraq hardly means one condones Saddam’s actions.
And look up the definition of “genocide” before you start throwing it around. Dictators can be bad people who kill thousands of their own without committing genocide. It takes the edge of the righteous indignation if your words are not remotely accurate.
Paul, why don’t you make a positive effort for the Iraq war..go an enlist. What is wrong? Are you a chickenhawk too?
>I don?€™t think Canada is evil, hateful, or a dictatorship, but I do think that it?€™s dangerously misguided. >
Priceless! A classic example of “America’s way is the only way.” That worked really well in Iraq, didn’t it? Do chickenhawks know anything of Iraq’s history. Tell me what happened in Iraq in 1919? We did get involved in Vietnam either and various right wing nut-jobs blathered the same bilge at the time, and who was right then?. The “deposing dictators” line is pure brainwashing. How about Assad? He has more links to terrorism than a bicycle chain but there is no oil in Syria. What about Iran? Man, there are 70m people there, 70% under the age of 15. Have a little look at the Iran-Iraq war (and its causes) and you’ll see why Bush will not attack a state that has sponsored terrorism for years. Chickenhawk autobots make me laugh my ass off! All rant but they let 920 American kids die for them and Bush’s imperialistic war.
And finally, not agreeing with US policy does not mean I hate it. Seeing American kids getting killed in an unwinnable war pains me a lot.
Ummm, Canada a free and democratic country? The Canadian government bans Fox news and speech opposing gay marriage:
http://www.keepmedia.com:/Register.do?oliID=225
http://www.nationalreview.com/.....020910.asp
Fox is banned; al-Jazeera is fine. Whaa?
Now, I happen to think gays should be able to get married, but when you tell me what I can’t say, I start adjusting the scopes on my deer rifles. That’s not freedom; it’s nanny-state sanctimony.
I’m all for free speech and hearing all points of view, but I don’t agree that Canada is a very good example of that view. More serious commentary about contemporary Canada here:
http://www.tvtome.com/tvtome/s.....id-291334/
I’m sure we could point out similar infringements of free speech in the States. Don’t get me wrong — I like to poke good natured fun at the People Republic of Canada as much as the next American. I’m not ready, however, to cancel Canuckistan’s membership in the Free World. The Canadians were sending their men off to battle the Germans and Japanese way before the Americans were, after all.
There is a big difference in security matters from a country that actually poses a threat to America, North Korea, to one that did not, Iraq. America is in Iraq for one reason: oil. And I do not buy the “Deposing Dictators” line at all. If that were true, the USA would be in Sudan today.
Further, Paul, if you believe in the cause so much, why not go enlist? You can get to Iraq faster than you think and make it just like America. What is holding you back?
If America wanted to own Middle East oil fields it would have intervened Iraq-style in the Sudan’s civil war long ago. Remember the south of the country thats trying to secede has too much oil for the Arab north to let it. And to top it off the south is Christian, so shouldn’t the American oil-hungry neo-crusaders be out there already? :-\
Mr. Webb, you have a few factual errors in your invective stream. The Kwangtung army operated only in NE China and not the entirety of Asia. Also it had already begun major military operations by 1931, much less 1938-39. As for America being the savior of civilization, I’ll chalk that up self-indulgent American hubris.
Marmot, I agree that Canada is not Stalinist Russia, but it’s certainly enforcing mandatory nanny-state “civility.” Follow the links. Its media and speech control laws make it significantly less free than the United States. Z?€™s swipe at the U.S. rings of hollow sanctimony in that light. I’d also be the first to agree that our own FCC ought to get out of the censorship business and let the marketplace take care of it.
Canada deserves much credit for its deployments to Afghanistan and its peacekeeping missions. In fact, Canada’s army is currently deployed to the max, which puts it in a whole different category from Francegermany. Canada was wrong on Iraq, however. The U.N. and its gatekeepers of legitimacy, as we now know, had been bought off by Saddam through oil-for-food, which explains how he broke 14 of its resolutions and got away with it. The French and Russians were breaking the sanctions and trying to lift them outright. When they did, Saddam would have rearmed in earnest. When war with him eventually came?€”-and it would have-?€”it would have been a lot bloodier. This war was a decision to fight in the Sudetenland instead of London, Paris, Tobruk, and Stalingrad.
Saddam had used WMD before and lied repeatedly about having them. Even most opponents (and fair-weather supporters) of the war thought he had them, and no one can deny that he would eventually have used them again. Without U.S. troops in Kuwait, there would have been no U.N. inspections, and even then, Saddam did not come clean (ie., the NK missile deal). Unf, intelligence is not an exact science. It would have been insane to give him the benefit of the doubt on either WMD or support for al-Qaeda, and there was evidence (not all of it correct, as we learned after the fact) to support both contentions. Hindsight won?€™t keep my family safe. I can live with erring on the side of caution, but I literally can?€™t live with the other alternative.
Canada wrongly took the position that the war was “illegal” because of France?€™s cynical veto. It could have simply said it didn’t have the forces. That would have been true, and no bitterness would have resulted. Instead, Jean Cretin pissed on us with U.N. holy water. Of course, the lack of U.N. approval never stopped NATO countries, including Canada, in Kosovo, it didn’t stop France in the Ivory Coast (no blood for chocolate!), and U.N. approval was worthless in Mogadishu and Srebrenica. I?€™d like to think Paul Martin would have done things differently. Now to clarify, I don?€™t think Canada is evil, hateful, or a dictatorship, but I do think that it’s dangerously misguided. Part of that may be the result of choking off open discussion in the name (ironically enough) of tolerance, and Fox News, amateurish as it may be, adds to that debate by supplying a side of the story you don’t see on other media.
. . . and if you haven?€™t seen that particular South Park, be sure you do.
ZDunk, “Did some Canadian give you a poke in the nose after you?€™d ran your mouth off too much in Itaewon one night?”
No, most Canadians I’ve met are pretty cool. But yes, I’ve had a few too many in Itaewon on occasion.
ZDunk, “Canadians live in a democratic society. They have the freedom to speak their mind.”
Iraqis who spoke their mind had their tounges chopped off. Why did you support the Iraqi holocaust anyway?
Mark, “And look up the definition of ‘genocide’ before you start throwing it around. Dictators can be bad people who kill thousands of their own without committing genocide.”
Thanks for defining genocide for me. And yes, the Anfal Campaign against the Kurds was genocide.
Mark, “Iraq full of bluster, but did not threaten the United States.”
Bullshit. Saddam harbored Abu Nidal and financed Hamas. This is a big threat. Al Qaeda are not the only terrorists in the Arab world.
Kimchi Pig, “America is in Iraq for one reason: oil.”
These are left-wing lies and you know it. As of June 30th, the Iraqis have 100% complete control of their oil. They can do whatever they want with it. The US invaded Iraq to get rid of Saddam, liberate the Iraqi people, and democratize Iraq.
Here’s the important question: why do terrorists blow up themselves along with people, buildings, and cars to meet the 72 virgins in heaven? Because the Arab world has crappy governments and crappy economies. There’s not much worth living for in this world. We need to install capitalist liberal democracies in the Arab world so people live for this world and not the next one. This will eliminate terrorism.
Kimchi Pig, “Further, Paul, if you believe in the cause so much, why not go enlist?”
No need to enlist since I’m already commissioned.
Jing, “The Kwangtung army operated only in NE China and not the entirety of Asia.”
All I know is that the Kwangtung Army terrorized China from 1931 to 1945.
freekorea, “Canada deserves much credit for its deployments to Afghanistan and its peacekeeping missions.”
Good point. Canadians, the French, and Germans are taking bullets for the U.S. in Kabul right now. They’re engaged in a peacekeeping mission, which is something the U.S. Army hates to do. Thank you, Canada. Thank you, France. Thank you, Germany.
freekorea, “Canada wrongly took the position that the war was ?€œillegal?€? because of France?€™s cynical veto.”
Actually, I’m glad France played bad cop on this one. The UN vote was never going to pass in the Security Council and better for the U.S. to clash heads with France, than with China or Russia. The French were smart.
Jtb…calling me ‘intolerant’ might have carried a little more weight if you hadn’t started your letter with what you think is a personal smear. I’m not gay, but what if I was? Who cares? How would it matter to this discussion?
Webb’s letter was clearly angry, as several other posters have noted. And you know what, I don’t quibble with his right to tell Canadians to shut up and follow America. So don’t quibble with my right to laugh in his face and refuse.
As for the nonsense about being less free…it’s ridiculous. Apart from death threats, Canadians can freely speak on any side of any matter. It’s some kind of bizarre American conditioning that convinces Americans that Canadians and Europeans are “less free”.
We’re certainly free enough to make Americans like jtb and Webb furious we won’t be loyal unthinking auxiliaries in every international matter, huh?
Asia by blog
Who’s saying what in Asian blogging? Find out below… Hong Kong, Taiwan and China Via Richard comes an interesting article on how a cousin of Pu Yi, China’s Last Emperor, got through the Cultural Revolution and was ironically working in the Summer P…
Kimchipig, Your mouth is way ahead of the facts again. This “chickenhawk” served for seven and a half years and is still in the reserves. Tell me, when did you ever put your safety or comfort on the line for something you believed in? Are your beliefs worth defending or are they printed on toilet paper?
As for “imperialism,” I noticed that Canada was very upset at being cut out of the post-war contracts. If Canada takes the highly principled stand that it won’t do any business with this new American colony (as opposed to doing business with Saddam), I’d give your argument a lot more weight.
America’s way happens to be right in this case. So is Britain’s, the Czech Republic’s, Kuwait’s, Italy’s, Poland’s, and Japan’s. If that’s unilateral, you slept through geometry class.
From what I understand, between Afghanistan and Canada’s other peacekeeping operations worldwide, the Canadian military is stretched rather thin itself. I’m not sure what Kimchipig’s stance on Canadian participation in Afghanistan is, but I’m sure the Defense Ministry has a website he could use if he’s interested in helping Canada fulfill its NATO obligations. Kimchipig: Bloggin’ from Kabul — I see definite possibilities there.
I actually posted a detailed analysis of the deployable military strength of Canada and Francegermany yesterday:
http://freekorea.blogspot.com/.....d-war.html
The answer is that Canada’s forces are indeed already deployed to the max, so sending Canadians to Iraq never had to be an issue. If you look at the strength of the French and German militaries, you find that if both of them scraped together every last soldat, they could come up with 36,000 troops–about 1/4 of U.S. strength in Iraq now. And of course, it’s unlikely Francegermany would send any troops, much less a significant number. Unless Kerry is thinking of using troops from Russia, China, or some other country about which I’d never have guessed, I see no way he could pull it off.
The only allied forces who can replace us are the Iraqis themselves.
Because America way is the only way. However, tell me that in five years and I will believe you. Have a look at Iraq’s history.
But you are the beacon of impartial rationality, right? Psshaw!
I like Americans. I detest the far-right faction of the Republican party is all. The kind of people who bark directives at Canada to shut up and follow. You are the person with the closed worldview, buddy.
kimchipig, “Paul, why don?€™t you make a positive effort for the Iraq war..go an enlist.”
I answered this question in my previous post. The abbreviation after my name here is a clue.
kimchipig, “The ?€œdeposing dictators?€? line is pure brainwashing.”
No, dictators are the sole remaining threat to the free world. History shows that a liberal democracy does not go to war with another liberal democracy. A democracy represented by the people have no interest in attacking another country who share those same values. Here’s another (and strange) way of putting it: a country with a McDonald’s has never been at war with another country with a McDonald’s. Take a look at this map for example:
http://www.freedomhouse.org/pd.....ap2003.pdf
After all these countries are green, we neocons will have to find another cause, like colonizing Mars.
kimchipig, “Seeing American kids getting killed in an unwinnable war pains me a lot.”
I’m glad you commisserate with the sacrifices of our fighting forces, but I think you’re being disingenuous here. American soldiers are dying in Iraq now so American civilians won’t have to jump off the 80th floor of a burning building with no parachute later. You seem to care about American soldiers dying, but what about all the Iraqis who died under Saddam? What about the men who were put into wood chipping machines feet first? What about the women who were raped by Uday and then fed to his Dobermans? Did these deaths ‘pain you’? But yeah, you’re right, they’re just a bunch of brownskins, they don’t matter much.
kimchipig, “there is no oil in Syria. What about Iran?”
These two countries are next. Be patient. One dictator at a time.
freekorea, “it?€™s unlikely Francegermany would send any troops, much less a significant number.”
Do you see the irony here? Why do the Eurowhiners have underdeveloped militaries? Because they’re a part of NATO and know that the U.S. will save them. They complain about U.S. “hegemony,” when they know it’s U.S. “hegemony” that protects them, like in WW2 and the Cold War.
Zdunk, “I like Americans. I detest the far-right faction of the Republican party is all.”
I’m actually a neocon more than a Republican. Remember, “a neoconservative is a liberal who’s been mugged by reality.” We had influence in the LBJ administration and then McGovern and Carter ignored us. We found our savior in Ronald Reagan and we’ve all defected to the Republicans since.
Vote for Bush. He listens to neocons. Don’t vote for Kerry. He listens to Jane Fonda. If you want to see the U.S. military stand down and Islamofascism make wonderful strides in the next four years, then vote for Kerry.
kimchipig, “Because America way is the only way.”
What is the Canadian way? We want to hear your ideas. What is the alternative to fighting Islamofascism/terrorism? I can never get a straight answer from liberals on this question. Unfortunately, I think your answer is that you are willing to see a “nuclear 9/11″ in Baltimore or Paris before taking all these inevitable actions. We had our 9/11, we’re not going to see another one.
And since when does an alleged “global hegemon” simultaenously be a whipping boy. Which one is it? You can’t have both. These are incompatible ideas. Sheesh. I give up. Have it your way. Let Osama run the world. I’m off to Mars.
Paul Webb, this discussion is finished. You are so far gone, so lunatic, that we will say nothing.
Of the Anglophones back in March 2003, I wondered why a majority of Americans, British, and Australians supported the invasion, but Canadians did not. Must be the French influence.
Asia by Blog - Month in review
Thank you to everyone for the good wishes. Everyone is doing well. Now to keep you going…as part of the Winds of Change team I provide a monthly briefing on Asian goings-on, particularly China and SE Asia. I thought this would give me a good opportun…
Simon’s E. Asia Overview: Aug 25/04
It’s time to have a look at East Asia and what’s been making the news in Asian blogs over the past month. We cover China (in depth), as well as Taiwan, Hong Kong, Korea, Japan, and Southeast Asia (Indonesia, Malaysia, Philippines, Singapore et. al).