Selig Harrison might not get much love at the Hole, but his latest Wapo piece did provoke a pretty interesting response at Foreign Policy:
…whatever the merits of Harrison’s suggestion when it comes to North Korea’s nuclear weapons, the United States should not accept Pyongyang’s development of long-range missile systems, which can be paired with an admitted nuclear weapons arsenal, as still another fait accompli.
So what does the writer think should be done about it?
Our warning would be that, if you stand up the missile (itself a plain violation of UN Security Council Resolution 1718), the United States will take it down.
Yes, you have heard that before.
On the other hand, some folks think an NK missile test would make for good target practice.
{ 6 comments… read them below or add one }
That’s what I’m talking about – see what a great selling point for the spinoff Aegis-equipped warships if they’re demonstrated to be able to knock out a live-fire ballistic missile being tested.
That link also provides information ‘from an anonymous Pentagon official’ about U.S. battleships.
TTBOMK, the U.S. Navy doesn’t have any more active battleships.
It’s good to see that some of the unanswered comments that I post round here still manage to seep into the subconscious somehow.
One problem with shooting it down is it might encourgae the North to take a pot shot at an airliner. If they do that then you’d better know how you’re going to respond.
They come at you with a knife, you go at them with a gun….
Cactus McH,
You are correct, no more battleships on the active list. Nearest one in reserve is the Iowa, BB-61, anchored in Suisun bay near San Francisco, CA. Not Aegis-equipped by the way, so if activated and used to respond to missile crisis would have take it out in a preemptive manner, on the launch pad, by using her Tomahawk Land Attack Missiles or close in to gunnery range and use the 16-inch guns to pummel the site the old fashioned way. Kinder, gentler battleship option is to let the missile fly and then demolish the site with above options.
Andy,
It may be time to begin looking earnestly at what military solutions the US has to deal with a NK long-range missile test. As a defense hawk sitting safely in my office in Silicon Valley, I may not have the credibility to offer a proposal that would likely “impact” most of the people on this forum. But at first blush it would seem that any muscular response from the US would put huge strains on our alliances with SK and Japan, and, far more imporantly, risk an all-but-certain military response from the North against the South.
So, the challenge is for someone on this forum – I nominate Eujin – to lay out a viable scenario whereby the US takes out a NK missile, either on the launch pad or in flight, in such a way as to also prevent the North from going ballistic (pun intended).
Eujin? (Bonus points if you mention “Iran” in your answer.)
Cheers,
David Barch
San Jose, CA
You must log in to post a comment.
{ 1 trackback }