http://hosted.ap.org/dynamic/stories/A/AS_KOREAS_NUCLEAR?SITE=OHCIN&SECTION=HOME&TEMPLATE=DEFAULT

Quote :

"Report: NKorea may fire missile toward Hawaii By HYUNG-JIN KIM Associated Press Writer AP Photo AP Photo/Lee Jin-man Buy AP Photo Reprints Latest News Report: NKorea may fire missile toward Hawaii SKorea to demand NKorea to free detained worker Iranian athletes wear green in apparent protest NKorea: US journalists plotted 'smear campaign' Police: SKorea man kills boy to hide drunk driving Your Questions Answered Ask AP: Following Sotomayor, movie closed captions SEOUL, South Korea (AP) -- North Korea may launch a long-range ballistic missile toward Hawaii in early July, a Japanese news report said Thursday, as Russia and China urged the regime to return to international disarmament talks on its rogue nuclear program. The missile, believed to be a Taepodong-2 with a range of up to 4,000 miles (6,500 kilometers), would be launched from North Korea's Dongchang-ni site on the northwestern coast, said the Yomiuri daily, Japan's top-selling newspaper. It cited an analysis by the Japanese Defense Ministry and intelligence gathered by U.S. reconnaissance satellites. The missile launch could come between July 4 and 8, the paper said. While the newspaper speculated the Taepodong-2 could fly over Japan and toward Hawaii, it said the missile would not be able to hit Hawaii's main islands, which are about 4,500 miles (7,200 kilometers) from the Korean peninsula. A spokesman for the Japanese Defense Ministry declined to comment on the report. South Korea's Defense Ministry and the National Intelligence Service - the country's main spy agency - said they could not confirm it. Tension on the divided Korean peninsula has spiked since the North conducted its second nuclear test on May 25 in defiance of repeated international warnings. The regime declared Saturday it would bolster its nuclear programs and threatened war in protest of U.N. sanctions taken for the nuclear test. U.S. officials have said the North has been preparing to fire a long-range missile capable of striking the western U.S. In Washington on Tuesday, Gen. James Cartwright, vice chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, said it would take at least three to five years for North Korea to pose a real threat to the U.S. west coast. President Barack Obama and South Korean President Lee Myung-bak met in Washington on Tuesday for a landmark summit in which they agreed to build a regional and global "strategic alliance" to persuade North Korea to dismantle all its nuclear weapons. Obama declared North Korea a "grave threat" to the world and pledged that the new U.N. sanctions on the communist regime will be aggressively enforced. The independent International Crisis Group think tank, meanwhile, said the North's massive stockpile of chemical weapons is no less serious a threat to the region than its nuclear arsenal. It said the North is believed to have between 2,500 and 5,000 tons of chemical weapons, including mustard gas, phosgene, blood agents and sarin. These weapons can be delivered with ballistic missiles and long-range artillery and are "sufficient to inflict massive civilian casualties on South Korea." "If progress is made on rolling back Pyongyang's nuclear ambitions, there could be opportunities to construct a cooperative diplomatic solution for chemical weapons and the suspected biological weapons program," the think tank said in a report released Wednesday night. It also called on the U.S. to engage the North in dialogue to defuse the nuclear crisis, saying "diplomacy is the least bad option." It said sanctions won't resolve the problem on their own, and military force is not an option. In a rare move, leaders of Russia and China used their meetings in Moscow on Wednesday to pressure the North to return to the nuclear talks and expressed "serious concerns" about tension on the Korean peninsula. The joint appeal appeared to be a signal that Moscow and Beijing are growing impatient with Pyongyang's stubbornness. Northeastern China and Russia's Far East both border North Korea, and Pyongyang's unpredictable actions have raised concern in both countries. After meetings at the Kremlin, Chinese President Hu Jintao joined Russian President Dmitry Medvedev in urging a peaceful resolution of the Korean standoff and the "swiftest renewal" of the now-frozen talks involving their countries as well as North and South Korea, Japan and the United States. "Russia and China are ready to foster the lowering of tension in Northeast Asia and call for the continuation of efforts by all sides to resolve disagreements through peaceful means, through dialogue and consultations," their statement said. The comments - contained in a lengthy statement that discussed other global issues - included no new initiatives, but it appeared to be carefully worded to avoid provoking Pyongyang. In remarks after their meetings, Medvedev made only a brief reference to North Korea, and Hu did not mention it. © 2009 The Associated Press. All rights reserved. This material may not be published, broadcast, rewritten or redistributed. Learn more about our Privacy Policy. "

When we have Russia and China urging North Korea to back down and talk out their nuclear program makes it only more worrisome.

I really hope this is incorrect intelligence/ignorance, but it was just posted 5 minutes ago.

6/18/2009 2:30:57 AM

if only there were a 4 page thread devoted to this sort of thing.

6/18/2009 3:05:16 AM

If only this weren't 30 minutes old news..

More Sources (all within an hour):

Many More Sources:

http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,527020,00.html
http://en.rian.ru/world/20090618/155282803.html
http://www.nationalterroralert.com/updates/2009/06/17/north-korea-may-launch-missile-toward-hawaii-in-july/
http://www.honoluluadvertiser.com/article/20090617/NEWS08/906170374/Hawai+i+warned+of+missile+threat

Or here for all: http://news.google.com/news?q=North+Korea+Missile+Hawaii&hl=en&client=firefox-a&rls=org.mozilla:en-US:official&hs=k1B&um=1&ie=UTF-8&ei=vuY5Svv7OsGMtgeV6bTiDA&sa=X&oi=news_group&resnum=1&ct=title

6/18/2009 3:07:15 AM

Herro....

6/18/2009 3:14:41 AM

Fear Mongering.

6/18/2009 10:06:10 AM

they're just angry that their previous show of aggression didn't maintain our attention (because of the situation and iran and whatnot). kji is obviously very childish and needs attention every once in a while.

6/18/2009 10:55:11 AM

The curious question is, if they did strike Hawaii with a missile, how would the United States respond? Any sort of military action is a guaranteed war that will leave tens of thousands dead within weeks. The last war against North Korea cost 36,516 American lives with a total of around 2 million military casualties in a short span of three years. This is the kind of war that would easily draw in the Japanese, Chinese, and even the Russians, and having five of the world's largest armies, economies, etc. in a war would be a mess to say the least.

I'm assuming that our government would be forced to respond with the full might of the American military, but given the potential costs, I'm not sure if they'd do so. Air strikes? Invasion even at the risk of drawing in the Chinese?

6/18/2009 11:06:05 AM

I imagine NK would be heavily bombed and special forces would make an attempt on the leadership if the bombing failed. I would not expect an invasion in the short term because of all of the competing interests in the region.

6/18/2009 11:09:25 AM

I can't imagine any country on the planet that would have a problem with us beginning tactical strikes immediately in the event of a missile hitting our territory.

6/18/2009 11:12:05 AM

yeah, i mean - i don't see how that is even a "curious question".....

you bomb Hawaii? You'll get bombed back to the stone age. Simple as that. The Japanese bombed Hawaii once before - maybe NK should see what happened to them.
It probably would be foolish to start a ground invasion, but you can bet that there would be ICBMs and B-2s on the way across the Pacific before the fires are put out in Hawaii.

6/18/2009 11:16:56 AM

NKorea may have missile blow up on launch pad. We can only hope.

6/18/2009 11:29:24 AM

Quote :

"Latest News Report: NKorea may fire missile toward Hawaii SKorea to demand NKorea to free detained worker Iranian athletes wear green in apparent protest NKorea: US journalists plotted 'smear campaign' Police: SKorea man kills boy to hide drunk driving"

hahaha..i read those like they were the CNN summary's of the current article and then thought WTF does any of this have to do with NKorea firing a missle at Hawaii??

6/18/2009 11:47:36 AM

Quote :

"I imagine NK would be heavily bombed and special forces would make an attempt on the leadership if the bombing failed. I would not expect an invasion in the short term because of all of the competing interests in the region... you bomb Hawaii? You'll get bombed back to the stone age. Simple as that..."

The reason that its a "curious question" is that the entire Korean peninsula has been setup for a full scale war for the last 58 years with about 1.1 million or so soldiers (30k or so being Americans) facing off against each other along the 38th parallel with over ten thousand pieces of prepositioned armor, artillery, etc. ready to strike at a moment's notice. They've got missiles ready to strike Japan which could easily draw that nation into a conflict. The Chinese have been the traditional military ally of North Korea, so they could be drawn in if all hell breaks loose, especially if it looks like NK is losing. Its a scenario that both sides have drilled intensively for over the last 55 years or so. A heavy bombing campaign and a SF intervention would probably be more than enough to trigger a full war, thus the curious question.

6/18/2009 12:23:00 PM

If North Korea were to actually hit Hawaii -- or miss in a credible attempt to hit Hawaii -- I seriously doubt that China would intervene militarily on their behalf. They've already been trying to distance themselves from NK in light of its recent belligerence.

I suspect that the most violent initial response would be a large, possibly multinational airstrike on communist artillery emplacements on the border (in an attempt to pre-empt massive destruction in Seoul) and various nuclear and missile sites. This would be followed by a sustained, almost certainly multinational air campaign against government and military targets, with military action being minimal. I agree with many others here that invasion is unlikely.

Actually, assuming any of this comes to pass, I can see China as a likely invader of the North. That allows them to look good internationally and keep it communist while getting rid of the problematic regime currently in place.

6/18/2009 1:08:06 PM

called it in the other thread.

Quote :

"I bet North Korea does something stupid and outlandish in the next weeks since noone is paying them any attention, they are like a small child with ballistic missiles, nuclear material and an army."

[Edited on June 18, 2009 at 1:54 PM. Reason : cuz everyone is giving Iran all the attention waaaaahh. ]

6/18/2009 1:50:36 PM

If it were me in command, I'd cut this bitch off with the quickness. Drop a single Minuteman on Pyongyang and let them see what the consequences are of wielding the big stick. I would not advocate a nuclear response unless the country is armed with nuclear warheads, but if a missile was fired that was a credible nuclear threat to any of our citizens, I would have the Minuteman in the air before the NK missile made it to Hawaii.

6/18/2009 2:06:18 PM

I don't understand the rush to want to nuke the bastards. It wouldn't be remarkably more effective than a conventional bombing campaign. Nuking Pyongyang is like using bunker busters on cavemen. Yes, you will kill a whole fuckton, but so what? A much smaller demonstration of force would get the job done.

6/18/2009 2:18:15 PM

Obama: I'm sorry that we angered you NKorea. We deserved that missile - we'll try to do better next time.

6/18/2009 2:28:58 PM

Quote :

"I don't understand the rush to want to nuke the bastards. It wouldn't be remarkably more effective than a conventional bombing campaign."

Exactly, and the use of nukes then invites a massive backlash from the rest of the world because everyone and everything downwind of our targets will be irradiated. The collateral damage associated with the use of nuclear weapons is insanely huge usually, which is why they have been so rarely used in warfare. That and the fact that the use of them will almost certainly result a retaliatory strike on US soil or a US territory from the country we attack, should they have that capability. This strike could be nuclear, chemical or biological, but you'd better believe it will be some WMD action son. They wont answer our nuke with some little conventional bomb if they can help it son.

Anyway, a nuclear strike is completely retarded in this case, espeically when the "south half" of this relatively small place is a friendly country and there are quite a few other friendly territories in the area.

6/18/2009 2:32:20 PM

Why in the world would we use nukes? We could be just as effective with precise convential bombs.

6/18/2009 2:34:58 PM

1. You don't take any options off the table.

2. The thought of being attacked by nuclear weapons is so undesirable that it has a deterrent effect.

3. Some of you obviously need to familiarize yourselves with tactical nuclear weapons.

6/18/2009 4:08:55 PM

Realistically, an air-detonation of a 300-KT warhead above Pyongyang would doubtfully cause significant collateral damage to surrounding territories in terms of fallout. Get over the Cold War mentality of bombs blowing fallout thousands of kilometers and nuclear winter.

However, the stigma associated with nukes would probably result in the backlash already referenced by others in the thread. Honestly, you're not going to get the job done with a single nuke anyway, so even if you nuked you'd probably need to bomb sites conventionally. Might as well just stick with traditional air strikes and not open that door again.

I wouldn't be against air strikes if a missile was launched that even looked like it was aimed at US territory. And what Saabturbo (son) said applies in reverse. If a WMD (nuclear, biological, chemical) were to hit our territory then nukes would be in order and I don't think other countries would fault us for it.

6/18/2009 4:18:05 PM

Say hello to my little friend!

6/18/2009 9:41:16 PM

Say herro to my rittle friend!

fixed

6/18/2009 9:43:44 PM

^ No you didn't!



[Edited on June 18, 2009 at 9:54 PM. Reason : ^^ BTW, that's the Davy Crockett with nuclear warhead--10 or 20 ton yield. ]

6/18/2009 9:49:07 PM