North Korea launches missle test

[Murrell2878]

Not the one that could reack US shore according to CNN. This is the only article I've found on the net


U.S. officials: North Korea missile test may be near
Fuel trucks, equipment reportedly have left launch pad

WASHINGTON (CNN) -- Fuel trucks have departed the site where a North Korean missile sits on a launching pad, indicating that a test might be near, two senior U.S. State Department officials said Tuesday.

The removal of the fuel trucks and other auxiliary equipment means the North Koreans may have finished fueling the missile, said the officials, who did not want to be named because of the sensitivity of the information.

Should the North Koreans have completed the fueling "all they would need to do now is press the button," one of the sources said.

The second source said the launch could come Wednesday morning Korean time, which would be Tuesday evening ET.

But both officials said no hard evidence points to a launch coming soon.

"It's the Fourth of July and they know we are watching and they like to play with us," said one official, who has followed the North Korean program for years. (Watch why North Korea is talking about annihilating the U.S. -- 2:04)

The United States, Japan and other countries are concerned about North Korea's reported preparations for a long-range missile test. The North Koreans fired a Taepodong-1 missile over Japan in 1998 but declared a moratorium on future tests in 1999.

President Bush has warned North Korea that it will face further isolation if it violated agreements by test launching a missile believed capable of reaching the continental United States. (Full story)

"The North Koreans have made agreements with us in the past, and we expect them to keep their agreements," Bush said last month at the end of a European Union summit.

"It should make people nervous when nontransparent regimes, that have announced that they've got nuclear warheads, fire missiles," Bush said. "This is not the way you conduct business in the world. This is not the way that peaceful nations conduct their affairs."

On Monday, Pyongyang's state-run media carried a report accusing the United States of harassing North Korea and vowing to respond to any pre-emptive attack "with a relentless annihilating strike and a nuclear war with a mighty nuclear deterrent."

The White House has dismissed that threat as "hypothetical." (Full story)

Meanwhile, the Pentagon is taking steps to be ready for a possible military response to a North Korean missile launch.

The U.S. Northern Command recently increased security measures at its Cheyenne Mountain Air Force Station in Colorado Springs, Colorado, a military official confirmed.

Some command and control operations there might be used if the United States launched an interceptor missile in an attempt to shoot down the North Korean missile.

In other planning measures instituted in the past several days, Northern Command, along with the Federal Aviation Administration, has put standby commercial flight restrictions into place over Vandenberg Air Force Base in California and Fort Greely, Alaska, where the U.S. interceptor missiles are based.

[Murrell2878]

BREAKING NEWS North Korea has test-launched a missile but not the long-range weapon that the U.S. has been monitoring, sources tell CNN.

[Murrell2878]

North Korea test-launches 2 Scud missiles By ERIC TALMADGE, Associated Press Writer
13 minutes ago



TOKYO - North Korea test-launched two missiles Wednesday that landed in the Sea of Japan, but a Pentagon official said they were Scud missiles and not the longer-range variety that has been the focus of international concern.

ADVERTISEMENT



Japan's Kyodo news agency said they were believed to be mid-range Rodong missiles.

The reclusive communist state launched the first missile at 3:32 a.m., or 2:32 p.m. Tuesday EDT, and it crashed into the Sea of Japan several minutes later, public broadcaster NHK reported. Kyodo carried a similar report and quoted a government official as saying a second missile had also been fired.

A Pentagon official, who spoke only on condition of anonymity, said there were launches of two Scud missiles.

"The launch appears not to be the launch that has been in the news. This appears to be a launch of a lesser variety of scud missiles," the official said.

Han Song Ryol, deputy chief of North Korea's mission to the U.N. in New York, told The Associated Press in a telephone interview: "We diplomats do not know what the military is doing."

The reported launch came after weeks of speculation that the North was preparing to test its advanced Taepodong 2 missile from a site on its northeast coast. Experts believe a Taepodong 2 could reach the United States with a light payload.

The preparations had generated stern warnings from the United States and Japan, which had threatened possible economic sanctions in response.

Temperatures further heightened Monday when the North's main news agency quoted an unidentified newspaper analyst as saying Pyongyang was prepared to answer a U.S. military attack with "a relentless annihilating strike and a nuclear war."

The Bush administration responded by saying while it had no intention of attacking, it was determined to protect the United States if North Korea launched a long-range missile.

In Tokyo, a group of ruling party members called Tuesday for immediate economic sanctions against North Korea if the communist nation conducted the test-launch.

[AMJets]

They just test launched the long-range missile, but it failed 40 seconds after it launched.

[boogerstyles]

hmmm... more and more that i think about it.... i think the bush adminisitration just chose the wrong spoke in the axis of evil:

"Iraq [North Korea] posses an immenent threat to our national security and posses weapons of mass destruction. Let's go to war."


well its ok! as long as we have a president who beleives in values [homophobia] and is a man of faith [although we are a secular nation], we gosh darnit, well let this slide. now lets drive are gas guzzling SUVs and stuff more burgers into our obese children and ignorantly just assume everything is ok!!!


god bless america

[Rebel Mike]

They wound up firing six according to a few other news sources. One was confirmed TPD 2, they also say a 2nd may have been launched. The TPD2 apparently fucked up 40 seconds after takeoff and crashed.

[nicolab]

from bbc.co.uk


N Korea 'fires seventh missile'

The Taepodong-2 is thought capable of reaching Alaska
North Korea has test-fired a seventh missile, Japanese and South Korean officials have said.
The launch took place at 1722 Japan time (0822 GMT), according to local media reports.

The news comes hours after North Korea test-fired at least six missiles, including a long-range Taepodong-2, sparking global condemnation.

The UN Security Council is due to hold an emergency meeting later on Wednesday to discuss the developments.

The closed UN session was requested by Japan, which said it was co-ordinating its response to the missile tests with the US and other countries.




In quotes: Missile reaction
Japan watches anxiously
N Korea's missile programme

Japanese Prime Minister Junichiro Koizumi told reporters he had information that Pyongyang had launched a seventh missile.

He said continued dialogue was necessary to defuse the standoff.

"We need both pressure and dialogue," Mr Koizumi said. "There will be no solution without dialogue."

Japanese and South Korean military are on high alert in the wake of the tests, and share prices have fallen in both countries.


See the possible range of North Korea's missiles
Pyongyang remained defiant. A foreign ministry official said such launches were a matter of national sovereignty, Japanese media reported.

Correspondents say Pyongyang may see this action as a way to get attention and break the diplomatic log jam over stalled talks on its nuclear capabilities.

The earlier missile launches came as the US celebrated its Independence Day holiday and launched the space shuttle from Florida.

Heightened alert

According to US officials, the North fired at least six missiles over a four-hour period, beginning at 0332 Japan time (1832 GMT Tuesday).


US officials said the Taepodong missile - thought capable of reaching Alaska - failed shortly after take-off, while the others fell into the Sea of Japan.

HAVE YOUR SAY
It's regrettable that a poor country invests its resources in weaponry

John, UK


Send us your comments
Market reaction

The US called the tests "provocative", while Japan announced sanctions.

Tokyo - one of North Korea's harshest critics, and in easy reach of a long-range missile - said it would ban the entry of North Korean officials, chartered flights and a ferry.

Analysts said the firing - Pyongyang's first test of a long-range missile since a self-imposed moratorium in 1999 - would also seriously damage prospects for stalled international talks on the North's nuclear programme.

The US and North Korea's neighbours have been on heightened alert in recent weeks amid suspicions that Pyongyang was preparing to launch the Taepodong-2, which has a range of up to 6,000 km (3,730 miles), putting parts of the US within striking distance.

The BBC's Charles Scanlon in Seoul says the North has been feeling under pressure and ignored in recent months, with the US refusing to negotiate on its demands over its nuclear plans.

Long-running talks over North Korea's nuclear capabilities have stalled, with six-party negotiations on the issue being repeatedly postponed as neither Washington nor Pyongyang are prepared to give ground.

The last time North Korea tested a long-range missile was in 1998, when it launched a Taepodong-1 over northern Japan.

[kinghenry89]

It's important to note that the missile failed. That's good news, but eventually they're going to get it right. The US needs China to support them in this--the Chinese are the only ones who can really stop Kim Jong Il (because 90% of Korea's fuel comes from China.)

[Royal Tee]

I'm So Ronery
I'm so ronery
So ronery
So ronery and sadry arone

There's no one
Just me onry
Sitting on my rittle throne
I work very hard and make up great prans
But nobody ristens, no one understands
Seems that no one takes me serirousry

And so I'm ronery
A little ronery
Poor rittre me

There's nobody
I can rerate to
Feer rike a bird in a cage
It's kinda sihry
But not rearry
Because it's fihring my body with rage

I work rearry hard and I'm physicarry fit
But nobody here seems to rearize that
When I rure the world maybe they'rr notice me
But untir then I'rr just be ronery
Rittre ronery, poor rittre me
I'm so ronery
I'm so ronery

To view links in this forum your post count must be 10 or greater. Your post count is 0 momentarily.

[Italian Seafood]

hmmm... more and more that i think about it.... i think the bush adminisitration just chose the wrong spoke in the axis of evil:

"Iraq [North Korea] posses an immenent threat to our national security and posses weapons of mass destruction. Let's go to war."


well its ok! as long as we have a president who beleives in values [homophobia] and is a man of faith [although we are a secular nation], we gosh darnit, well let this slide. now lets drive are gas guzzling SUVs and stuff more burgers into our obese children and ignorantly just assume everything is ok!!!


god bless america

There was no wrong spoke, Saddam was just as bad as Il with a worse history. Good thing he's gone and it will be better when Il goes too.

[boogerstyles]

There was no wrong spoke, Saddam was just as bad as Il with a worse history. Good thing he's gone and it will be better when Il goes too.


he was a bad man, but he posed no threat to our national security. IL does, he has nuclear weapons and is devolping long range missle techonology.

sadam had no nukes, and shitty USSR scud missles which could barely reach the kuwaiti border.

sadams gone, and thats a good thing. but our militairy resources are stretched razor thin by iraq and we are in a budget deficit. so without a draft and extensive taxation there would be no way besides nuking the whole dam korean penisula of fighting a succesful war against him without subjecting our society to "total war" conditions. hes isolated his regime so much that economic sanctions wont have an effect against him like it would an iraq.

so they just blasted missles off on july 4th, i wonder if that was a coincedence. meanwhile, theres no realistic response we can do besides just condem the attacks, and the worst part about it is that Kim Jong-Il knows this.

[Italian Seafood]

he was a bad man, but he posed no threat to our national security. IL does, he has nuclear weapons and is devolping long range missle techonology.

sadam had no nukes, and shitty USSR scud missles which could barely reach the kuwaiti border.

sadams gone, and thats a good thing. but our militairy resources are stretched razor thin by iraq and we are in a budget deficit. so without a draft and extensive taxation there would be no way besides nuking the whole dam korean penisula of fighting a succesful war against him without subjecting our society to "total war" conditions. hes isolated his regime so much that economic sanctions wont have an effect against him like it would an iraq.

so they just blasted missles off on july 4th, i wonder if that was a coincedence. meanwhile, theres no realistic response we can do besides just condem the attacks, and the worst part about it is that Kim Jong-Il knows this.

I don't know that Saddam needed nukes to be a threat to the US, he was a sworn enemy of the west and had vast resources to support groups that did pose a threat to us. It's all interconnected, you can't really seperate one country from another and say this one was a threat and that one wasn't. We're talking about an enemy that comminicates and transfers funds all over the world, so cutting off regimes like Saddam's is an important step in fighting them. Same as the Taliban, they themselves couldn't hurt us but look at the damage caused just by them being there for bin Laden and his group.

As far as North Korea goes, the US would not be alone in stopping Il. Japan and South Korea have as much and probably more interest in stopping him and even though North Korea has good relations with China, I don't think China or Russia likes to see him firing off missles either.

[BIG COUNTRY]

I don't know that Saddam needed nukes to be a threat to the US, he was a sworn enemy of the west and had vast resources to support groups that did pose a threat to us. It's all interconnected, you can't really seperate one country from another and say this one was a threat and that one wasn't. We're talking about an enemy that comminicates and transfers funds all over the world, so cutting off regimes like Saddam's is an important step in fighting them. Same as the Taliban, they themselves couldn't hurt us but look at the damage caused just by them being there for bin Laden and his group.

As far as North Korea goes, the US would not be alone in stopping Il. Japan and South Korea have as much and probably more interest in stopping him and even though North Korea has good relations with China, I don't think China or Russia likes to see him firing off missles either.
You could say that however Saddam didnt have many ties with Osama and he was actually an enemy of Osama's. Plus if we want to go after countries that support groups that attak us, then Saudi Arabia would get the boot but instead theyre our allies. Iran would also have been challenged first. This war wasnt worth the 3,000+ US and allied soldiers that have been killed and it certainly wasnt worth the hundreds of thouands innocent civilians that are being killed.

[typeOnegative13NY]

I don't know that Saddam needed nukes to be a threat to the US, he was a sworn enemy of the west and had vast resources to support groups that did pose a threat to us. It's all interconnected, you can't really seperate one country from another and say this one was a threat and that one wasn't. We're talking about an enemy that comminicates and transfers funds all over the world, so cutting off regimes like Saddam's is an important step in fighting them. Same as the Taliban, they themselves couldn't hurt us but look at the damage caused just by them being there for bin Laden and his group.

As far as North Korea goes, the US would not be alone in stopping Il. Japan and South Korea have as much and probably more interest in stopping him and even though North Korea has good relations with China, I don't think China or Russia likes to see him firing off missles either.You know,that may be true. But he was still down the chain from much greater threats to us. There is no use in trying to tell yourself that us invading Iraq ahead of many other things we could have done was with all good intentions and completely justified,because it clearly wasn't.

[Italian Seafood]

You could say that however Saddam didnt have many ties with Osama and he was actually an enemy of Osama's. Plus if we want to go after countries that support groups that attak us, then Saudi Arabia would get the boot but instead theyre our allies. Iran would also have been challenged first. This war wasnt worth the 3,000+ US and allied soldiers that have been killed and it certainly wasnt worth the hundreds of thouands innocent civilians that are being killed.

There are plenty of other groups besides al Qaeda, so it doesn't matter if Saddam was friendly with Osama or not. He gave cash to the families of suicide bombers and sat on a wealth of oil which enabled him to be a huge supporter of terrorism. Although the 9/11 attacks were the catalyst for the War on Terror, the war is bigger than just avenging the one attack. You don't give groups like Hamas, etc, a free pass because you can't tie them specifically to 9/11. You have to go after them all, it's not a police case.

You could make a case that Saudi Arabia or Iran should have been first, but Iraq an obvious choice given Saddam's history and it's geography. Contrary to your claim that our military is stretched "razon thin", we now have an established presence in Iraq with a country and government that is stabalizing over time. That gives us a much stronger foothold if we did have to fight Iran than we'd have had if Saddam was still there firing scuds at us.

[Italian Seafood]

You know,that may be true. But he was still down the chain from much greater threats to us. There is no use in trying to tell yourself that us invading Iraq ahead of many other things we could have done was with all good intentions and completely justified,because it clearly wasn't.

I don't think anything any government does is with all good intentions, but as I stated in the post above, you have to start somewhere. After 9/11 there was no reason to be dicking around with Saddam and weapons inspectors any longer, there's too much else to deal with, as you both have mentioned. Saddam had 12 years to get his act together after the first Gulf War, the clock ran out on him.

[typeOnegative13NY]

I don't think anything any government does is with all good intentions, but as I stated in the post above, you have to start somewhere. After 9/11 there was no reason to be dicking around with Saddam and weapons inspectors any longer, there's too much else to deal with, as you both have mentioned. Saddam had 12 years to get his act together after the first Gulf War, the clock ran out on him.
After 9/11,Iraq was one of the last places we should have went. It is a failure and on top of it,the CIA just shut down their Bin Laden organization,whatever that is. It all smells like bullshit.

[Italian Seafood]

After 9/11,Iraq was one of the last places we should have went. It is a failure and on top of it,the CIA just shut down their Bin Laden organization,whatever that is. It all smells like bullshit.

I don't think it was one of the last places we should have gone, it's in the heart of the Middle East, on a wealth of oil and had one of the most troublesome leaders in recent history. Again, you can make a case for any number of places, Iraq being one of them.

As for it being a failure, please elaborate. We took Saddam out in three weeks, captured him, took out his sons, rounded up many of his top guys, held elections, transferred power and helped them set up a government. Not exactly a failure.

This is about North Korea, anyway, I don't know how we got into this, this is old news. The "Axis of Evil" is 1/3 out of the way, I don't think it would have been realistic to take on everyone at once.

[Cman55]

Now, every good conservative will tell you Saddam, and his WMD's, were triple the threat NK is even though NK is selling their missiles on the open market, has possession of Nukes, has test fired missiles over Japan and will eventually have missiles that will hit not only Alaska, but Seattle and the entire NW coast.

Then again, its real important to pick the fights you know you can win. That is, pick on the country weakened by 10 years of embargo instead of a country backed by what will be the most populous, and powerful, country on the planet unless the USA gets its head out of its collective asshole within the next 20 years..

Now THAT's real leadership folks! Bought to you by ChickenHawks Inc.

[BIG COUNTRY]

I don't think it was one of the last places we should have gone, it's in the heart of the Middle East, on a wealth of oil and had one of the most troublesome leaders in recent history. Again, you can make a case for any number of places, Iraq being one of them.

As for it being a failure, please elaborate. We took Saddam out in three weeks, captured him, took out his sons, rounded up many of his top guys, held elections, transferred power and helped them set up a government. Not exactly a failure.

This is about North Korea, anyway, I don't know how we got into this, this is old news. The "Axis of Evil" is 1/3 out of the way, I don't think it would have been realistic to take on everyone at once.
Iraq was one of the easiest places to pick because it was supposed to be an easy win. North Korea would have been disastrous and Iran isnt an easy place to take over. So Iraq seemed like an easy choice, instead it has failed and more and more innocent people are getting killed in the sectarian war that is breaking out.

That govt. isnt very stable and none of those in power have credentials, I doubt the Axis of Evil is 1/3 out of the way as Iran, Saudi Arabia(Our allies), North Koria, Lebanon and Syria are still around. Not to mention many warlords in Africa and terrorist groups in South America are still around. We havent made the world much better, we picked what our president told us was an easy fight and we are paying the consequences, as are the Iraqi people who live in fear now as everyday dozens upon dozens are killed.

[Italian Seafood]

We must be reading different news, Bro. That's all I can tell you. The war in Iraq is closer to the end than the beginning, it's kind of pointless to keep arguing against going at this point. We're there. Why would you want to pick a fight where the odds are more stacked against you, anyway? I hope you're not a military strategist.

[BIG COUNTRY]

We must be reading different news, Bro. That's all I can tell you. The war in Iraq is closer to the end than the beginning, it's kind of pointless to keep arguing against going at this point. We're there. Why would you want to pick a fight where the odds are more stacked against you, anyway? I hope you're not a military strategist.
Maybe because the bigger nations were more of a threat to us. Also this Iraqi conflict will drag on even after we leave as a sectarian war between Sunni's and Shiite's as the 2 cant live together. Saddam was an asshole but he held them together, something which probably will never be done again.

[abyzmul]

Maybe because the bigger nations were more of a threat to us. Also this Iraqi conflict will drag on even after we leave as a sectarian war between Sunni's and Shiite's as the 2 cant live together. Saddam was an asshole but he held them together, something which probably will never be done again.
Are you kidding me? Saddam 'held them together'?!?!? Saddam executed thousands of Shi'ites. In 2004 they marched through the streets of Baghdad demanding his execution.

[ROCaMOB]

Are you kidding me? Saddam 'held them together'?!?!? Saddam executed thousands of Shi'ites.

And Coalition forces have killed over 30,000 Iraqi Civillians -- Sunni and Shi'ites -- and the country is in no better shape than it was before it was invaded.

In 2004 they marched through the streets of Baghdad demanding his execution.

And who said they weren't a democracy?? In 2004 we marched through the streets demanding Bush be taken out of office. Granted, he didn't directly kill anyone, (minus the hundreds he executed while Governor of Texas) but it's a different culture over there. Saddam didn't hold them together by any means -- but with him in power Iraq wasn't a breeding ground for terrorism.

i.e Al Zarqawi, The "most wanted terrorist" (I don't know when bin Laden was taken off that list) was still living in Jordan.

[abyzmul]

And Coalition forces have killed over 30,000 Iraqi Civillians -- Sunni and Shi'ites -- and the country is in no better shape than it was before it was invaded.



And who said they weren't a democracy?? In 2004 we marched through the streets demanding Bush be taken out of office. Granted, he didn't directly kill anyone, (minus the hundreds he executed while Governor of Texas) but it's a different culture over there. Saddam didn't hold them together by any means -- but with him in power Iraq wasn't a breeding ground for terrorism.

i.e Al Zarqawi, The "most wanted terrorist" (I don't know when bin Laden was taken off that list) was still living in Jordan.
I've learned by reading your posts that you are worthless to respond to, so I'll just point out that your response is typical.

[ROCaMOB]

I've learned by reading your posts that you are worthless to respond to, so I'll just point out that your response is typical.

That weak comment makes you the meanest poster on this board? wow.

[abyzmul]

That weak comment makes you the meanest poster on this board? wow.
That's right, just move along, there's nothing your empty posts will accomplish here.

[ROCaMOB]

That's right, just move along, there's nothing your empty posts will accomplish here.

My empty posts? I responded to your post with my view of Saddam and what's going on over there. Maybe if I sat on this boad ALL DAY, with nothing better to do I would be angry too. Or are you angry because your one true love (Jetophile, I believe her name is) is only a screen name and probably the only female contact you have ever had?

[abyzmul]

My empty posts? I responded to your post with my view of Saddam and what's going on over there. Maybe if I sat on this boad ALL DAY, with nothing better to do I would be angry too. Or are you angry because your one true love (Jetophile, I believe her name is) is only a screen name and probably the only female contact you have ever had?
Nice try, but you're obviously not smart enough to bait me if you think that weak effort will work. Back to the drawing board, sparky.

[ROCaMOB]

Nice try, but you're obviously not smart enough to bait me if you think that weak effort will work. Back to the drawing board, sparky.
I would rather have an empty post than an empty life. Bye Sweetie

[Italian Seafood]

Maybe because the bigger nations were more of a threat to us. Also this Iraqi conflict will drag on even after we leave as a sectarian war between Sunni's and Shiite's as the 2 cant live together. Saddam was an asshole but he held them together, something which probably will never be done again.

I don't think anyone really knows which is the biggest threat. North Korea's missles that were supposed to reach us went about 40 miles and died, not to mention we have missle defense systems still in place from the Cold War that intercepted what was going on the other day. So likely it wasn't worth invading them, considering we already fought a war there and still have troops along the border of North and South Korea.

A few years ago nobody probably thought a bunch of Arabs doing jumping jacks in the desert in Afghanistan posed any threat to us, but we saw how that went. So people can debate that kind of thing all day, depending on which political party they belong to. As for your prediction of a civil war in Iraq, that remains to be seen. I'm sure the people who were having their family members pulled off the streets and executed or raped by Saddam and his sons, etc, will take their chances.

[Murrell2878]

CNN Breaking News-- Iranians were believed to be present at North Korea's July 4 missile tests, assistant Secretary of State Chris Hill, the chief U.S. negotiator with Pyongyang, testified today.

[GreenHornet]

CNN Breaking News-- Iranians were believed to be present at North Korea's July 4 missile tests, assistant Secretary of State Chris Hill, the chief U.S. negotiator with Pyongyang, testified today.

Typical. I think we are headed for a war with Korea. Iran may get into the mix, too. I think the Korean front will be partnered by Japan.

We may be heading for a mini-WW 3. I still believe the use of wmd's would be limited or non-existent.

[Murrell2878]

Typical. I think we are headed for a war with Korea. Iran may get into the mix, too. I think the Korean front will be partnered by Japan.

We may be heading for a mini-WW 3. I still believe the use of wmd's would be limited or non-existent.

Let's hope so.

[nyscene911]

CNN Breaking News-- Iranians were believed to be present at North Korea's July 4 missile tests, assistant Secretary of State Chris Hill, the chief U.S. negotiator with Pyongyang, testified today.

For some strange reason, I doubt that this is actually true. We were looking to go to war with Iran. How convienent that we just got it...