Do you have adblock enabled?
 
If you can read this, either the style sheet didn't load or you have an older browser that doesn't support style sheets. Try clearing your browser cache and refreshing the page.

(The Big Story)   U.S. last week: "We're not concerned about a nuclear threat from North Korea." U.S. this week: "Uhh, let's add some interceptors along the west coast. You know, just in case"   (bigstory.ap.org ) divider line
    More: Scary, North Koreans, interceptors, U.S., North Korean ICBM, Vandenberg Air Force Base, Air Force bases, missile defense, Defense Secretary Chuck Hagel  
•       •       •

6949 clicks; posted to Main » on 15 Mar 2013 at 4:56 PM (3 years ago)   |   Favorite    |   share:  Share on Twitter share via Email Share on Facebook   more»



199 Comments     (+0 »)
 
View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest


Oldest | « | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | » | Newest | Show all

 
2013-03-15 08:29:27 PM  

doglover: CygnusDarius: Which begs the questions, what the fark does China gain by having North Korea as their biatch?

Options.


Options for what?.
 
2013-03-15 08:31:19 PM  

JeffDenver: I like how all the liberals have finally STFU about missile defense. It's a good thing we ignored your assholes and funded it anyway eh?


www.vibrant.com

www.cpa.org.au
 
2013-03-15 08:43:37 PM  

hardinparamedic: JeffDenver: Yes, no liberal has ever opposed national missile defense. I totally made that up just now. You caught me.

I really don't care if they have or not, the point is irrelevant. I'm sure some strawman conservatives and strawman liberals have opposed everything under the sun at some point. The 105th Congress which voted to fund the Missile Defense system in 1999 was 45% Democrat and 55% Republican, and delivered a vote of 97-3.

A program which, even today, has not produced an effective and mass-deployable weapons system, despite costing over 30 Billion Dollars, and projected to greatly exceed it's budget before all is said and done.


It's a good thing "liberal" and Democrat are not synonymous and he said "liberal".

The problem now is that the internet won't let arguments disappear. When NMD was scrapped when Obama took office, self-described liberals cheered.

Fark thread

Another Fark thread

One dealing with NK and missiles
 
2013-03-15 08:44:03 PM  

dennysgod: [media.ft.com image 418x452]

Well I guess it's technically possible they could hit Alaska but so far their rockets act like torpedoes.


Depends if Sarah Palin can see the rocket from her house.

/I sense win-win!
 
2013-03-15 08:45:45 PM  

neongoats: To The Escape Zeppelin!: Why do they need a missile? Just put it on a freighter and sail the damn thing right into San Francisco. Sure you might not get the best position from the bay but it's a nuclear weapon, close counts.

Fark you for continuing to spread this stupid meme. The only thing stupider than thinking they can just load it on a boat and sail it into San Francisco is thinking they can hide it up their asshole and blow it up during a white house tour.


I'd be interested in what kind of safeguards exist to prevent this, assuming the container left from somewhere other than NK of course. Most cargo inspection happens onshore doesn't it? That's a little late.

/Waiting for the TSA to ruin boating based on this idea. Facts won't stop them.
 
2013-03-15 08:52:41 PM  
We wouldn't want the smoking gun to be in the form of a mushroom cloud, so why don't we take a few hundred billion $ out of our vast household surplus that was not needed for the highly successful (and under budget, I might add) F35, F22, V22 and EFV programs, to name a few.
Surely, we must do everything in our power to stop hundreds, if not thousands of North Korean precision ICBMs from hitting the U.S. mainland.
After all, Kim Jong Un was seen with Muammar Gaddafi in Tora Bora, going over the final details of the bomb schematics, as shown by Bibi Natanyoohoo at the UN not too long ago.

/If you're not with us, you're with the turrerrists
//in that case, a drone strike might be imminent
 
2013-03-15 08:55:09 PM  

Mrbogey: The problem now is that the internet won't let arguments disappear. When NMD was scrapped when Obama took office, self-described liberals cheered.


The problem was that the NMD program was a prime example of wasteful spending. The system had not evolved, period, beyond gamed launches and intercepts, even when they were gamed failed approximately 30-40% of the time. Even when the system had not evolved, the funding and waste continued into the program. On the other hand, you have systems like SM-3/AEGIS which have the theoretical capability of intercepting ICBMs in the terminal phase, but have never been explored beyond theory.

We can create theater ABM systems which protect our troops and civilians, for far cheaper, using existing technology, than we can using that same existing technology to do the same for ICBM interception? This is what I'm expected to believe as a taxpayer?

But, ironically, we can defund NASA and the military space programs at the same time. SMH, America.
 
2013-03-15 09:14:55 PM  

CygnusDarius: doglover: CygnusDarius: Which begs the questions, what the fark does China gain by having North Korea as their biatch?

Options.

Options for what?.


They have control of the Korean peninsula via diplomacy with NK. They can start a war there at any time. They can make peace there at any time. They can use it as a springboard or a smokescreen.

Look at it like this: the world is a house. China has a great big attack dog in the room next door that will bite everyone if it's let loose. A dog is fairly easy to put down with a gun, and most people in this metaphorical house have those. However, it's a small house and it's going to be a bloody and traumatic night if that dog is let out of the room. So China takes care of the dog and uses her as leverage against people who want the dog to stop barking and trying to bite people.
 
2013-03-15 09:20:23 PM  
All it takes is:

One working bomb
One working missile
One day that no one is paying attention.

Blame China for this mess.
 
2013-03-15 09:20:51 PM  
The real danger is North Korea trading nuclear material on the black market. You don't need a missle to glass a major city.

Watch Countdown To Zero to see how easy it would be for terrorists to build a nuclear device and smuggle it into a major city. Scary stuff.
 
2013-03-15 09:27:01 PM  
No way NK poses a threat right now.

But it's not like they wave a  wand and these missile sites are up and running. By the time we have these units up and operational we will likely be facing a more imminent threat from them.

It's anyones guess if it amounts to a real threat, even at that point, but that's not a gamble worth making.

drwiki: /Waiting for the TSA to ruin boating based on this idea. Facts won't stop them.


The reason we have such abysmal security regarding our ports is because there really isn't a feasible way to check everything without grinding our ports (and consequently our economy) to a complete stall.

Facts do stop them, quite often actually.
 
2013-03-15 09:30:58 PM  
Dammit, I wanted to live in Fallout 3/NV, not Farrowt Tlee.
 
2013-03-15 09:43:50 PM  

MurphyMurphy: The reason we have such abysmal security regarding our ports is because there really isn't a feasible way to check everything without grinding our ports (and consequently our economy) to a complete stall.

Facts do stop them, quite often actually.


Not really, no. It's  hard to hide a device like North Korea has the technology for. Those devices are crude, require a lot of shielding, and put off a lot of waste decay. The Department of Energy NEST teams have been doing nuclear threat detection and response for the past few decades now, and the US has drones that can scan large areas for radioactive material and nuclear devices.
 
2013-03-15 10:08:40 PM  

real_headhoncho: All it takes is:

One working bomb
One working missile
One day that no one is paying attention.

Blame China for this mess.


You should write under the name Thom Clancy.
 
2013-03-15 10:24:10 PM  

hardinparamedic: JeffDenver: I am filled with hate and fear of oppressive non-democracies. Blowing them up feels better than taking drugs.

And military spending is the one type of spending I don't have a problem with. There is no issue more important that Defense.

[cdn.ebaumsworld.com image 320x220] 

Let's play the feud! Number one answer on the board, among 100 people surveyed, Troll or Complete Idiot!


That was a great episode.  In my top 3 for sure.
 
2013-03-15 10:25:44 PM  

dennysgod: [media.ft.com image 418x452]

Well I guess it's technically possible they could hit Alaska but so far their rockets act like torpedoes.


Holy fark they have a missile called No Dong?!  That  is the punchline.
 
2013-03-15 10:26:31 PM  
Good excuse for a training exercise with a sense of urgency. We'd be fools to pass that up.
 
2013-03-15 10:36:18 PM  

hardinparamedic: MurphyMurphy: The reason we have such abysmal security regarding our ports is because there really isn't a feasible way to check everything without grinding our ports (and consequently our economy) to a complete stall.

Facts do stop them, quite often actually.

Not really, no. It's  hard to hide a device like North Korea has the technology for. Those devices are crude, require a lot of shielding, and put off a lot of waste decay. The Department of Energy NEST teams have been doing nuclear threat detection and response for the past few decades now, and the US has drones that can scan large areas for radioactive material and nuclear devices.


It's not that hard to hide a very destructive device. A shipping container is more than adequate to hide a device and enough shielding to prevent bells and whistles on wide terrain aerial scans.

Whether NK has the ability to make a device that can fit in a shielded container isn't really material to the discussion. I know this thread is about the NK missile threat but I was simply commenting on why it is we can't check every single container on every single ship. And we can't.

We do our best with what we have, but it's simply not enough. The same can be said of our entire border. It simply cannot be made airtight and the idea that it can be is a lie sold to garner taxpayer support... it's a lie I support, a necessary lie that allows people the confidence and peace of mind to operate in their day-to-day and allows us to fund the projects that can take us as close to 'safe' as we can get... but it's still a half-truth.

We are a couple technological leaps from making those aerial sweeps as accurate and fool-proof as we are wont to believe they are. I'm sure we'll get there in time but for now if someone has the means and will all they need is the right plan and a bit of luck.

...and all of that is moot, because by the time the ship is at the port getting scanned, if it has a nuke on board it's already reached it's destination/target.
 
2013-03-15 10:59:59 PM  
All you need is enough highly enriched uranium (the size of a tennis ball) to turn New York City into ash.
 
2013-03-15 11:07:18 PM  
The US is adding intercepters because North Korea is giving them an excuse to.
We dont fear North Korea and the intercepters can be used to defend against China and Russia too.

Its just like the goverment pushing an assault rifle  ban. Right now is a good time because Newtown gave them an excuse to outlaw guns.
 
2013-03-15 11:15:10 PM  
JeffDenver:
The problem with MAD is that you have to assume the other side is rational enough not to risk destroying themselves just to destroy you.

That's why this is so convenient. These ballistic defense things are really bad for international relations, especially with Russia.


RUSSIA: Hey USA, I notice you built some more ballistic defense stuff.
USA: Yeah?
RUSSIA: Well... you're not supposed to do that, remember? Treaties and stuff?
USA: Oh, this isn't for you. This is for North Korea.
RUSSIA: ...
 
2013-03-15 11:22:55 PM  
I guarantee if they drive them up and down Highway 99, there will be no nuclear attack on the west coast of the US.
 
2013-03-15 11:32:24 PM  
The first rule of public service: CYA. Regardless of how asinine the fantasy scenario is.
 
2013-03-15 11:43:48 PM  
hardinparamedic:

You almost sound like you know what you're talking about. Keep up the almost good work.
 
2013-03-15 11:46:00 PM  
I was surprised by the $1 billion price tag for 14 interceptors, what a bargain.
/Not like they'll ever be used but....
 
2013-03-15 11:48:37 PM  

PiffMan420: All you need is enough highly enriched uranium (the size of a tennis ball) to turn New York City into ash.


Right. And all you need to get from NYC to Sydney is 125 gallons of Jet-A.
 
2013-03-15 11:49:04 PM  
Why yes,......That was a compliment.
 
2013-03-15 11:51:12 PM  

God-is-a-Taco: NK is a convenient cover for another layer of defense against Russia and China


Shhhh, you're not supposed to tell anyone.
/And the one in Poland yeah that's for Iran, yeah, no really...
 
2013-03-16 12:01:00 AM  

neongoats: Yeah, it's worked so well for us too, that nation building. Look at the bastions of freedom and democracy we have created.


I agree. Modern Iraq is far preferable to what Saddam's Iraq was.
 
2013-03-16 12:04:18 AM  
MurphyMurphy:

Yeah, so is there any chance you'll just STFU ???
 
2013-03-16 12:10:03 AM  

hardinparamedic: make me some tea: While I don't disagree that it's more for show than anything else, their underground tests did not fizzle.

No, they just proved North Korea has reached 1938, and can build a crude Teller-Ullam Triggered Device.

The NK test reached a yield of 5-7kT. For comparison, Trinity shot was 20kT.

GAT_00: I think there is zero chance they have a deployable warhead and I question whether they have a missile that could reach us even without a warhead.

That being said, it isn't completely impossible that they do.

The only active missile platforms in use right now by North Korea that could possibly deliver a nuclear payload are based on the SCUD B and D system, which has a range of ~300KM or so. The only thing Japan MIGHT have to worry about is the MRBM that they built off of the SCUD-B platform, the Rodong-1, which has a range of 900KM, but the accuracy (worse than that of the infamously inaccurate SCUD) and ability of the Rodong-1 is quesitonable in and of itsself.

The taepodong-1 and taepodong-2 ICBM platforms have failed, notoriously and hilariously, every time they have been launched in a military test.


They put a satellite into orbit didn't they (they manage finally?), I mean, that could hit USA even if they're not trying.
 
2013-03-16 12:12:01 AM  
I wonder if we are hours, days or a month from war.

When it starts, N Korea's life expectancy will be in minutes.

I don't think we would go easy on a nation bent on nuking us.

Do they even have a clue as to what we could do to them? Why would they invite and prevoke....
 
2013-03-16 12:40:12 AM  
Ok, quick question.

Here was the headline I submitted for this story:

U.S Government Official Last Week: "Obviously North Korea isn't a threat and we aren't taking their blustering seriously". This Week: "Well, we've decided to install these Missile Defense Weapons JUST IN CASE"

How is this headline not plagiarism?  Just wondering...
 
2013-03-16 01:03:26 AM  

8 inches: Ok, quick question.

Here was the headline I submitted for this story:

U.S Government Official Last Week: "Obviously North Korea isn't a threat and we aren't taking their blustering seriously". This Week: "Well, we've decided to install these Missile Defense Weapons JUST IN CASE"

How is this headline not plagiarism?  Just wondering...


Yours was too official and wordy like and here I think they go by the 10,000 monkey's on a typewriter and sometimes they write the same thing.
/But hey you've got greenlights and truth be told it doesn't mater...
//Cheers, at least you knew about the story before I did ; )
/And no not subby/subbette
 
2013-03-16 01:07:22 AM  
To everyone saying they dont have the technology to properly navigate a rocket:  I hate to break it to you, but technology has come a long farking way in a very short time.  You can literally build a guidance system at home with parts ordered off the internet.  If your target is as large as a city, that shiat becomes... simplistic.  Stop being retarded.
 
2013-03-16 01:38:25 AM  

spawn73: They put a satellite into orbit didn't they (they manage finally?), I mean, that could hit USA even if they're not trying.


So much win, Spawn. SO much win.

Didn't parts from that launch hit a Chinese satellite, by the way?

Alonjar: To everyone saying they dont have the technology to properly navigate a rocket:  I hate to break it to you, but technology has come a long farking way in a very short time.  You can literally build a guidance system at home with parts ordered off the internet.  If your target is as large as a city, that shiat becomes... simplistic.  Stop being retarded.


Problem 1)A 5kT ground detonation will not do much damage to a modern, concrete and steel city. One of the reasons that the 17kT Fat Man did so much damage was because of the construction of Hiroshima was all wood and rice paper, predominantly.
Problem 2)All of North Korea's space and theater ballistic systems are based off the soviet SCUD platform, which was notoriously inaccurate, and highly kill-able by the Patriot missile system. Literally, if you're being attacked by a SCUD, your best and safest place to be was the target that SCUD was headed for.
Problem 3) You can build a guidance system using American GPS satellites. However, ICBMs do not use GPS guidance when targeting their re-entry path. Inertal and other mechanisms of re-entry guidance are far more complex than simply plugging in a GPS chip. Cruise missiles do, but all of the systems that North Korea possesses would be killable using existing CIWS, AEGIS, and Patriot systems. In addition, they do not possess the range to strike anyone but South Korea.

FutherMucker: hardinparamedic:

You almost sound like you know what you're talking about. Keep up the almost good work.


If I've gotten something wrong, I'm open to correction.
 
2013-03-16 02:32:55 AM  

hardinparamedic: spawn73: They put a satellite into orbit didn't they (they manage finally?), I mean, that could hit USA even if they're not trying.

So much win, Spawn. SO much win.

Didn't parts from that launch hit a Chinese satellite, by the way?

Alonjar: To everyone saying they dont have the technology to properly navigate a rocket:  I hate to break it to you, but technology has come a long farking way in a very short time.  You can literally build a guidance system at home with parts ordered off the internet.  If your target is as large as a city, that shiat becomes... simplistic.  Stop being retarded.

Problem 1)A 5kT ground detonation will not do much damage to a modern, concrete and steel city. One of the reasons that the 17kT Fat Man did so much damage was because of the construction of Hiroshima was all wood and rice paper, predominantly.
Problem 2)All of North Korea's space and theater ballistic systems are based off the soviet SCUD platform, which was notoriously inaccurate, and highly kill-able by the Patriot missile system. Literally, if you're being attacked by a SCUD, your best and safest place to be was the target that SCUD was headed for.
Problem 3) You can build a guidance system using American GPS satellites. However, ICBMs do not use GPS guidance when targeting their re-entry path. Inertal and other mechanisms of re-entry guidance are far more complex than simply plugging in a GPS chip. Cruise missiles do, but all of the systems that North Korea possesses would be killable using existing CIWS, AEGIS, and Patriot systems. In addition, they do not possess the range to strike anyone but South Korea.

FutherMucker: hardinparamedic:

You almost sound like you know what you're talking about. Keep up the almost good work.

If I've gotten something wrong, I'm open to correction.


Yea, even a 1 megaton weapon isn't even even a city killer for a large city. The book Warday had it right with pattern bombing of cities like San Antonio. I think it was 6 - 1 MT weapons were used and then you get a dead zone.

Granted even 1 bomb in a city now and it will change everything, no matter what the yield is.
 
2013-03-16 03:45:54 AM  

JeffDenver: hardinparamedic: Ah. I see you ignored the fact that you're blatantly lying

Yes, no liberal has ever opposed national missile defense. I totally made that up just now. You caught me.


Nixon was a liberal?

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Anti-Ballistic_Missile_Treaty
 
2013-03-16 03:56:52 AM  

MooseKiller: dennysgod: [media.ft.com image 418x452]

Well I guess it's technically possible they could hit Alaska but so far their rockets act like torpedoes.

I read through my homeowner's insurance policy a while back.  Interestingly, there is a clause in there that states my house is not covered if it is damaged/destroyed by a nuclear event, whether accidental or intentional.


Remember that, next time some idiot tells you hippies and NIMBYS are holding back nuclear power in this country.

It ain't hippies, it's the commercial insurance industry...
 
2013-03-16 04:04:52 AM  

JeffDenver: neongoats: Yeah, it's worked so well for us too, that nation building. Look at the bastions of freedom and democracy we have created.

I agree. Modern Iraq is far preferable to what Saddam's Iraq was.


Not according to the actual people who actually live there.

As opposed to neocon chickenhawks living in a fantasy land...
 
2013-03-16 05:23:03 AM  

hardinparamedic: spawn73: They put a satellite into orbit didn't they (they manage finally?), I mean, that could hit USA even if they're not trying.

So much win, Spawn. SO much win.

Didn't parts from that launch hit a Chinese satellite, by the way?

Alonjar: To everyone saying they dont have the technology to properly navigate a rocket:  I hate to break it to you, but technology has come a long farking way in a very short time.  You can literally build a guidance system at home with parts ordered off the internet.  If your target is as large as a city, that shiat becomes... simplistic.  Stop being retarded.

Problem 1)A 5kT ground detonation will not do much damage to a modern, concrete and steel city. One of the reasons that the 17kT Fat Man did so much damage was because of the construction of Hiroshima was all wood and rice paper, predominantly.
Problem 2)All of North Korea's space and theater ballistic systems are based off the soviet SCUD platform, which was notoriously inaccurate, and highly kill-able by the Patriot missile system. Literally, if you're being attacked by a SCUD, your best and safest place to be was the target that SCUD was headed for.
Problem 3) You can build a guidance system using American GPS satellites. However, ICBMs do not use GPS guidance when targeting their re-entry path. Inertal and other mechanisms of re-entry guidance are far more complex than simply plugging in a GPS chip. Cruise missiles do, but all of the systems that North Korea possesses would be killable using existing CIWS, AEGIS, and Patriot systems. In addition, they do not possess the range to strike anyone but South Korea.

FutherMucker: hardinparamedic:

You almost sound like you know what you're talking about. Keep up the almost good work.

If I've gotten something wrong, I'm open to correction.


Did you quit being a Bronx?
 
2013-03-16 06:01:24 AM  
Good story to keep our minds off the billions of bullets fatherland homeland security is buying.
 
2013-03-16 07:01:42 AM  

CygnusDarius: Which begs the questions, what the fark does China gain by having North Korea as their biatch? Does North Korea have any resource in abundance that only China can get?


In the days of the Korean war and the Vietnam war (and other US aggressions) it keeps American imperialist assholes from setting up bases on their borders. It worked, they ceased aggression as soon as the yanks dragged their tired defeated asses out of their region.

Modern day, ... not so sure

They view them here currently as a "little brother we are one day going to have to kick the shiat out of, but still a brother"
 
2013-03-16 09:51:50 AM  

God-is-a-Taco: JeffDenver:
The problem with MAD is that you have to assume the other side is rational enough not to risk destroying themselves just to destroy you.

That's why this is so convenient. These ballistic defense things are really bad for international relations, especially with Russia.


RUSSIA: Hey USA, I notice you built some more ballistic defense stuff.
USA: Yeah?
RUSSIA: Well... you're not supposed to do that, remember? Treaties and stuff?
USA: Oh, this isn't for you. This is for North Korea.
RUSSIA: ...


That treaty had an exist clause for either side.  We exercised it.
 
2013-03-16 09:55:36 AM  

hasty ambush: God-is-a-Taco: JeffDenver:
The problem with MAD is that you have to assume the other side is rational enough not to risk destroying themselves just to destroy you.

That's why this is so convenient. These ballistic defense things are really bad for international relations, especially with Russia.


RUSSIA: Hey USA, I notice you built some more ballistic defense stuff.
USA: Yeah?
RUSSIA: Well... you're not supposed to do that, remember? Treaties and stuff?
USA: Oh, this isn't for you. This is for North Korea.
RUSSIA: ...

That treaty had an exist  exit clause for either side.  We exercised it.

FTFM

 
2013-03-16 01:59:43 PM  

PunGent: Nixon was a liberal?

Yeah, pretty much. He bent over and spread his buttcheeks for China. Most of his policies (certainly his foreign policy) are what real conservatives would consider liberal today.

 
2013-03-16 02:01:44 PM  

PunGent: JeffDenver: neongoats: Yeah, it's worked so well for us too, that nation building. Look at the bastions of freedom and democracy we have created.

I agree. Modern Iraq is far preferable to what Saddam's Iraq was.

Not according to the actual people who actually live there. As opposed to neocon chickenhawks living in a fantasy land...


I had no idea you knew everyone in Iraq personally. Your facebook feed must be flooded every day.

For people that loved Saddam so much they sure were in a hurry to hang him.
 
2013-03-17 01:29:25 PM  

JeffDenver: PunGent: JeffDenver: neongoats: Yeah, it's worked so well for us too, that nation building. Look at the bastions of freedom and democracy we have created.

I agree. Modern Iraq is far preferable to what Saddam's Iraq was.

Not according to the actual people who actually live there. As opposed to neocon chickenhawks living in a fantasy land...

I had no idea you knew everyone in Iraq personally. Your facebook feed must be flooded every day.

For people that loved Saddam so much they sure were in a hurry to hang him.


For people that supported him for a decade, we were sure in a hurry to throw him under a bus :)

And, you can always tell when someone hasn't read "Fiasco".
 
2013-03-17 04:11:50 PM  

PunGent: For people that supported him for a decade, we were sure in a hurry to throw him under a bus :)


We sure were. Why, it's almost as if we never really supported him at all eh?
 
Displayed 49 of 199 comments


Oldest | « | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | » | Newest | Show all


View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest

This thread is archived, and closed to new comments.

Continue Farking
Submit a Link »
On Twitter








In Other Media
  1. Links are submitted by members of the Fark community.

  2. When community members submit a link, they also write a custom headline for the story.

  3. Other Farkers comment on the links. This is the number of comments. Click here to read them.

  4. Click here to submit a link.

Report