North Korea to test ICBM?

[Galaril]

For some reason, I am more worried about this than in the past. It could be because my wife is in South Korea right now visiting family and won'tbe due to fly back until tomorrow or it could because I recently saw the movie" The Day After". Anyways, I am not a supporter of the current US admin but must say that this IS something to be comcerned about. The japanese say that if a test goes into there territory they will cosider that an attack, thus an attack of war. The US and Jpan are on alert status as we speak. What worries me most is this. The North test fires over Japan land the Japanese launch an attack on North Korea. The North Koreans attack Japan and US installations in Japan and Korea (South) The US attacks North korea. And than China tacks Korea and US Pacific Forces etc.

http://www.cnn.com/2006/US/06/13/nkorea.missile/index.html?section=cnn_latest

Citing a Japanese government source, the Sankei Shimbun is reporting that the North Korean government will address its people this evening via TV and radio.

The Yomiuri Shimbun, meanwhile, is reporting that U.S. officials have conveyed to Tokyo intelligence suggesting North Korea has begun fueling a missile for a possible test launch.

Other Japanese press report that through diplomatic channels in Beijing, Japan has warned North Korea against going through with a missile test.

Strangely enough, North Korea has apparently told a South Korean lawmaker that it has no plans to carry out a missile test.
That last thingworries me. Are they trying to ctach us at unawares?
Also:
Japan’s Kyodo News is reporting that if North Korea test launches a missile, the United States and Japan will deal with the matter in the UN Security Council. According to the report, the two will seek an expression of concern through either a chairman’s statement or a press statement. The United States is reportedly considering tabling a draft resolution with legally enforceable sanctions, but will likely avoid doing so due to almost certain Chinese objections.

Japanese Foreign Minister Aso Taro, meanwhile, has warned North Korea that if the missile lands in Japan, it would be regarded as an attack.

The Americans and Japanese are also stepping up their surveillance of North Korea. The US Navy has apparently deployed the missile range instrumentation ship Observation Island to Sasebo and an RC-135S to Kaneda. There are reports as well of American Aegis warships being deployed to the East Sea. There are also reports that Japan has deployed the Aegis destroyer Chokai from Sasebo to the East Sea. And according to the Sankei Simbun, Japan’s ultra-snazzy FPS-XX radar system has been put on a state of battle-readiness.

Here are some more info from other sources ie non-CNN:
http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,199821,00.html
http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,199957,00.html

[albionmoonlight]

"Japanese Foreign Minister Aso Taro, meanwhile, has warned North Korea that if the missile lands in Japan, it would be regarded as an attack."

This does not strike me as unreasonable on Japan's part. If a country launches a missle and it lands in your territory, how could you regard it as anything other than an attack?

[Galaril]

I agree 100%.

[Galaxy]

Iraq, with Iran and North Korea pitching us. Not going to be a pretty next decade.

[sachmo71]

ask yourself what north korea gains by provoking anyone into a war. then relax. :)

[Dutch]

Iraq, with Iran and North Korea pitching us. Not going to be a pretty next decade.

That's not what the executives over at Reuters and the AP are saying. There response was, "W00t!"

[Easy Mac]

Why are you worried about your wife, you said she was in South Korea. These are Inter-continental ballistic missiles, not intra-continental. She's safe man.

[DaddyTorgo]

the humerous part of me thinks we should just fly f-15's right outside of north korean airspace and shoot down the missle immediately once it leaves their airspace.

that wouldn't be against any international law would it? and it would be amusing as hell.

[Crapshoot]

the humerous part of me thinks we should just fly f-15's right outside of north korean airspace and shoot down the missle immediately once it leaves their airspace.

that wouldn't be against any international law would it? and it would be amusing as hell.

Not easy to shoot down a missile, and it would almost certainly provoke a war that might initially (before the US can get troops and its fleet over) allow the North Koreans to bombarb Seoul and cross the 38th parallel.

[DaddyTorgo]

i suppose you're right about the provoking part crapshoot, the image of it in my head was just extraordinarily amusing though.

[Dutch]

i suppose you're right about the provoking part crapshoot, the image of it in my head was just extraordinarily amusing though.

Crapshoot says he is NOT in a joking mood today. :)

[Crapshoot]

i suppose you're right about the provoking part crapshoot, the image of it in my head was just extraordinarily amusing though.

Oh, it would be hilarious at some level - but I don't think, by their own admission, the US army has the capacity to handle two large scale war efforts at a given time. And politically, the start of another war in North Korea would be a disaster - since North Korea isn't going to be quite the pushover Iraq was.

My favorite memory about NK is when I lived in Ethiopia - every two weeks, the NK embassy would take out full page ads in the one English newspaper proclaiming their studies suggesting they would crush the American and Korean imperialist scum, and with military scenarios where they would be in Seoul within 10 dys - it was hilarious, especially because one could imagine some people believed it.

[Passacaglia]

You'd think if North Korea had ICBMs, it would have been in those pictures.

[sachmo71]

Oh, it would be hilarious at some level - but I don't think, by their own admission, the US army has the capacity to handle two large scale war efforts at a given time. And politically, the start of another war in North Korea would be a disaster - since North Korea isn't going to be quite the pushover Iraq was.

My favorite memory about NK is when I lived in Ethiopia - every two weeks, the NK embassy would take out full page ads in the one English newspaper proclaiming their studies suggesting they would crush the American and Korean imperialist scum, and with military scenarios where they would be in Seoul within 10 dys - it was hilarious, especially because one could imagine some people believed it.


The North Korean Army would by WAYYYY past Seoul in ten days.

[Crapshoot]

The North Korean Army would by WAYYYY past Seoul in ten days.

Eh - I'm basing this of 8 year old memories - it may have been Seoul in 10 days, or the southern city (I forget the name). :D You think the US air campaign wouldn't stop the advancement until significantly later ?

[st.cronin]

The North Korean Army would by WAYYYY past Seoul in ten days.


Yep.

Honestly, I don't understand why the heck we have troops in South Korea anyway. Just let China deal with that wacky continent. Everybody would be happier that way.

[Galaril]

Why are you worried about your wife, you said she was in South Korea. These are Inter-continental ballistic missiles, not intra-continental. She's safe man.


Mainly, I was more nervous with the Norks pummeling seoul with their 15,000 short range Frog Missiles and the like. Anyways, it appears to be much about nothing. I would assume cooler heads in China and the US would prevale in the end.

[Galaril]

Eh - I'm basing this of 8 year old memories - it may have been Seoul in 10 days, or the southern city (I forget the name). :D You think the US air campaign wouldn't stop the advancement until significantly later ?


No I don't think so. First or second wave of missiles would take out alot of the Air Bases pretty fast in South Korea and Japan. In addition, they would hit our carrier based air craft as well. We have always planned to hold out for a week until re-enforcements arrived from Hawaii and Alaska. However with our current ability to quickly extend air power that number is more like 72 hours. Seoul and most everything north of the Han River would be under communist control bt then.

[Dutch]

Yep.

Honestly, I don't understand why the heck we have troops in South Korea anyway. Just let China deal with that wacky continent. Everybody would be happier that way.

I agree. I don't really see what's in it for us to be in South Korea. If we left South Korea tommorrow, what is the worst thing that could happen? South Korea is invaded by North Korea? Okay. Who gives a shit? According to the news reports I've seen, the people of South Korea hate the US military presense, not North Korea.

We should leave.

[Galaril]

I agree. I don't really see what's in it for us to be in South Korea. If we left South Korea tommorrow, what is the worst thing that could happen? South Korea is invaded by North Korea? Okay. Who gives a shit? According to the news reports I've seen, the people of South Korea hate the US military presense, not North Korea.

We should leave.


I also, think it is acomplete utter waste of man power. Plus, South Koreans HATE with a capital H the US Military and they don't think much better about Americans, in general, to be honest.

[Galaxy]

I've always read that the older South Koreans want the presence, but the younger generation doesn't.

Also, is China and Japan on a hate relationship? What would that do to a war?

[Crapshoot]

The US ain't leaving South Korea soon - they don't want the Chinese influence expanding in the Asian sector, and the loss of a significant military asset in Asia makes no sense, given the larger strategic goals. Besides, both the South Korean and Japanese governments recognize that the US forces provide some level of a deterrent to the North.

[Galaxy]

http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/13361343/

[Dutch]

I also, think it is acomplete utter waste of man power. Plus, South Koreans HATE with a capital H the US Military and they don't think much better about Americans, in general, to be honest.

There ya go. And you have had plenty of first-hand experience with seeing that relationship, if I'm not mistaken.

[Desnudo]

I agree. I don't really see what's in it for us to be in South Korea. If we left South Korea tommorrow, what is the worst thing that could happen? South Korea is invaded by North Korea? Okay. Who gives a shit? According to the news reports I've seen, the people of South Korea hate the US military presense, not North Korea.

We should leave.

I still believe we have a duty to protect democratic countries and prevent the spread of whatever you would call the batshit nutballs running North Korea from spreading their influence.

[DaddyTorgo]

I still believe we have a duty to protect democratic countries and prevent the spread of whatever you would call the batshit nutballs running North Korea from spreading their influence.

i'd go ahead and just call them batshit nutballs at this point

[Groundhog]

Also, is China and Japan on a hate relationship? What would that do to a war?

That would be the interesting part. If a war started in Korea, it would cause a lot of problems in that region.

[Galaxy]

Dola....Also saw that New Zealand and Australia back the US today.

[Groundhog]

Dola....Also saw that New Zealand and Australia back the US today.

As we tend to do. :cool:

War in Korea is inevitable and is a far bigger problem than Iraq ever was. If Asia explodes in to war it's going to get very ugly very fast.

[Galaril]

That would be the interesting part. If a war started in Korea, it would cause a lot of problems in that region.


Most likely situation is this:

A) North Korea attack Japan

B) Japan pummels North Korea with Support from the US (Japan-based Forces)

C) South Koreans stand by idly at least until Japan starts to really kick the Norths asses or......

D) The North Koreans go after US interests in Korea or the US (Korea-based Forces) go after the NORKS to help their ally Japan.

E) If this happens the South Koreans military will fracture into deserters say (30-40%), 30-40% fight against the US and Japan forces maybe even in concert with NORKS Forces and the remaining 30-40% will fight as intended against the North Koreans.

[Groundhog]

Most likely situation is this:

A) North Korea attack Japan

B) Japan pummels North Korea with Support from the US (Japan-based Forces)

C) South Koreans stand by idly at least until Japan starts to really kick the Norths asses or......

D) The North Koreans go after US interests in Korea or the US (Korea-based Forces) go after the NORKS to help their ally Japan.

E) If this happens the South Koreans military will fracture into deserters say (30-40%), 30-40% fight against the US and Japan forces maybe even in concert with NORKS Forces and the remaining 30-40% will fight as intended against the North Koreans.

Yeah, probably not far from the truth. Though what China does will probably be most interesting of all.

[Galaxy]

Just curious, why would North Korea attack Japan over South Korea first? I'm too up to date on the NK-Japan relations.

[Galaril]

Just curious, why would North Korea attack Japan over South Korea first? I'm too up to date on the NK-Japan relations.


Same reason South Korea would rather attack Japan if the opportunity arose. They are historical antagonists for the last 1200 years or more. Koreans call themselves Minguk, it means "one race". Koreans are not concerned so much if they are a Northern or Southern (South koreans more so) but what is important is they are all Koreans. The division many now blame the US and USSR. so, since the USSR are gone it is just the USA.

[Galaril]

Yeah, probably not far from the truth. Though what China does will probably be most interesting of all.


Oh, shit I forgot China. Yeah, I think as long as the US doesn't us Nukes, even tactical ones, bio weapons/chemical weapons ie mustard gas etc, or try to over run the whole country via the ground forces. The Chinese would never allow US bases along their border. Also, China has to think of the US as a major trading partner what is North Korea? Really, just a nuasance mostly. I often think the Chinese would invade or annex North Korea if they had anythng of value.

[Galaxy]

Do you see China going after Taiwan, Tibet, or Hong Kong (if they progress on pro-democratic movements) if Korea flares up?

[Groundhog]

Do you see China going after Taiwan, Tibet, or Hong Kong (if they progress on pro-democratic movements) if Korea flares up?

That's what I was getting at. I think China will be out to grab as much as they can if an all-out-war situation arose. China is easily the biggest military danger in the region. North Korea are spooky, but when compared with what China could do...

[Galaril]

That's what I was getting at. I think China will be out to grab as much as they can if an all-out-war situation arose. China is easily the biggest military danger in the region. North Korea are spooky, but when compared with what China could do...


That is certainly a possiblity. Tibet I am not so sure there is much interest from China, to be honest and Hong Kong already is China's for the most part. Taiwan they might take a shot at if they could work out a deal behind closed doors to make aswap Taiwan for North Korea. Personally I would make that deal in a second. We can withdraw most of our forces from South Korea and saving tons of money and it's a public relations bonus in Korea at least. The threat of North Korea and their Nukes technology transfer business to troublesome nations would be eliminated. It might help to improve ties with at leats Japan and South Korea but it might make them worse. Lastly, taiwan seems to be interested in rejoining China eventaully.

[st.cronin]

I wouldn't object a bit if China decided to annex the entire Korean peninsula.

[Franklinnoble]

China can't afford a war with the United States. It would be economic suicide. There might be some bluster, but not more than that.

I don't see how North Korea has anything to gain from going to war with anybody at this point. They would have no sympathy in the international community by going on the offensive, and it would make the United States everyone's best friend again.

[Groundhog]

China can't afford a war with the United States. It would be economic suicide. There might be some bluster, but not more than that.

I don't see how North Korea has anything to gain from going to war with anybody at this point. They would have no sympathy in the international community by going on the offensive, and it would make the United States everyone's best friend again.

The United States can't afford a war with China, either.

North Korea may not have anything to gain from our perspective, but they certainly do from their own. Their people starve while the government uses all it's money to maintain it's massive military, all while their people are bombarded with propaganda both anti-USA and anti-South Korea. North Korea believes it's destiny is to control all of Korea, and one day it will try and make that happen. It may not seem logical or wise from our perspective, but we aren't looking at the situation through a lens of madness like North Korea's government is.

[Franklinnoble]

The United States can't afford a war with China, either.

North Korea may not have anything to gain from our perspective, but they certainly do from their own. Their people starve while the government uses all it's money to maintain it's massive military, all while their people are bombarded with propaganda both anti-USA and anti-South Korea. North Korea believes it's destiny is to control all of Korea, and one day it will try and make that happen. It may not seem logical or wise from our perspective, but we aren't looking at the situation through a lens of madness like North Korea's government is.

Wal-Mart can always exploit another third-world country for cheap labor to make the junk for their stores. China will not be able to find another consumer like the USA. A war would hurt us financially, but it would utterly destroy them.

Besides, the Chinese navy is a joke. I don't think we'd be stupid enough to engage in a land war over there, and they have no feasible means to attack our soil (aside from the nuclear option, which, well, let's not go there).

I can't really comment on the insanity of Kim Jong Il and his cohorts. I'm guessing they're headed for a collapse similar to what happened to the Soviet Union, but maybe he's just crazy enough to push the button before it happens. Who knows? But my guess is that North Korea won't have a single ally in any war they start, and the United States won't have to do all the heavy lifting to put that dog down.

[Riggins44]

The Chinese will be our masters. Korea is just a puppet that China whips out for our amusement. Usually around the time that the term "trade deficit" is in the news. It's all a big joke. Learn Chinese soon.

Learn Chinese Online (http://www.csulb.edu/~txie/online.htm)

[Groundhog]

Besides, the Chinese navy is a joke. I don't think we'd be stupid enough to engage in a land war over there, and they have no feasible means to attack our soil (aside from the nuclear option, which, well, let's not go there).

Well, I'm not talking about an actual attack on the US. More likely is China invading South Korea or elsewhere, forcing the US to either intervene or get the hell out of there. The issue is not about China and the US going to war on US soil, but about what sort of military action the US would take against China on Chinese/Korean soil.

If China attacked Japan it would really force the US, as well as the other allies, in to action, but an attack on Korea... maybe not quite so much.

I can't really comment on the insanity of Kim Jong Il and his cohorts. I'm guessing they're headed for a collapse similar to what happened to the Soviet Union, but maybe he's just crazy enough to push the button before it happens. Who knows? But my guess is that North Korea won't have a single ally in any war they start, and the United States won't have to do all the heavy lifting to put that dog down.

They won't have any allies, but an invasion of North Korea would be a terrible mess.

[Franklinnoble]

The Chinese will be our masters. Korea is just a puppet that China whips out for our amusement. Usually around the time that the term "trade deficit" is in the news. It's all a big joke. Learn Chinese soon.

Learn Chinese Online (http://engrish.com/)

Fixed (subtle).

[Franklinnoble]

http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,200263,00.html

Rumored that the US may try to shoot down the missile.

[Surtt]

China can't afford a war with the United States. It would be economic suicide. There might be some bluster, but not more than that.



Don't forget Tiananmen Square.
China will take enormous short term consequences for their long term goals.

[Franklinnoble]

Don't forget Tiananmen Square.
China will take enormous short term consequences for their long term goals.

In the grand scheme of things, Tiananment Square was nothing compared to going to war with the United States.

If they attack the US, there's gonna be regime change over there.

[sachmo71]

As we tend to do. :cool:

War in Korea is inevitable and is a far bigger problem than Iraq ever was. If Asia explodes in to war it's going to get very ugly very fast.


Inevitable? I disagree strongly. All Kim wants is money and to win political battles. He wants to be known as a bad ass. He will not push this to a war.

[Groundhog]

Inevitable? I disagree strongly. All Kim wants is money and to win political battles. He wants to be known as a bad ass. He will not push this to a war.

How do you explain how North Korea uses this money they want, then? Their people starve while Kim spends big on his military. That's their priority.

[Groundhog]

In the grand scheme of things, Tiananment Square was nothing compared to going to war with the United States.

If they attack the US, there's gonna be regime change over there.

Fun Fact: China is not Iraq. Don't let that footage of the US military "shock and awe"'ing it's way through Iraq's desert fool you. China has 281 million men fit for military service, compared to 55 million in the US, and China spends slightly more of their GDP on their military. Couple that with the fact that a war would take place on their soil and that the US is already stretched militarily and you've got an icky situation.

I'm not saying China would walk away clear victors - they'd probably lose in the long run, depending on which US allies joined the fray - but the US wouldn't just be driving tanks in to Beijing.

[sachmo71]

How do you explain how North Korea uses this money they want, then? Their people starve while Kim spends big on his military. That's their priority.


He spends it on Rambo movies. :)

The problem is, a war in Korea will not give him what he wants. He will be defeated. Attacking another country in today's world, sorry, attacking an economically viable country in today's world gets you kicked squarely in the bottom. If the argument is that he has to fight because he has spent so much money on his military, I reject that. Kim may be ill, but he is not blind. All this would get for him is ruin. I don't see how that is to his advantage.

[Daimyo]

China doesn't have the naval power to to take back Taiwan by force right now. From my personal experience over there I honestly don't think they care too much about Taiwan deep down. The whole Taiwan thing is really about saving face... and as long as Taiwan doesn't force China's hand by flaunting independence too much I don't think China will make the first move. I expect the China-Taiwan thing to be resolved diplomatically within 10 years with Taiwan going back to China peacefully. The assumption in America is that Taiwanese would rather die than go back, but thats only one perspective... there are almost an equal number who would welcome it.

I also don't see what China has to gain by supporting NK in a war with the US and Japan. For whatever reason people seem to assume there is this great solidarity among communist states (that was the whole foundation of the domino theory right?), but in reality they don't really like each other. China and Vietnam fought a war and China never really got along Russia that well either. I don't think they like having a crazy dictator next door any more than we like having them there.

[Groundhog]

I also don't see what China has to gain by supporting NK in a war with the US and Japan. For whatever reason people seem to assume there is this great solidarity among communist states (that was the whole foundation of the domino theory right?), but in reality they don't really like each other. China and Vietnam fought a war and China never really got along Russia that well either. I don't think they like having a crazy dictator next door any more than we like having them there.

I don't think they'd support North Korea either; I think they'd try and take them over. Like you said, Kim is a neighbour you'd like to be rid of.

[Crapshoot]

China doesn't have the naval power to to take back Taiwan by force right now. From my personal experience over there I honestly don't think they care too much about Taiwan deep down. The whole Taiwan thing is really about saving face... and as long as Taiwan doesn't force China's hand by flaunting independence too much I don't think China will make the first move. I expect the China-Taiwan thing to be resolved diplomatically within 10 years with Taiwan going back to China peacefully. The assumption in America is that Taiwanese would rather die than go back, but thats only one perspective... there are almost an equal number who would welcome it.


Yup - China can bombard Taiwan to bits, but capturing the island is not yet feasible, short of a scorched earth policy. Taiwan's military is set up with one, and only one goal: defending against a Chinese invasion. China has too many great power ambitions to target Taiwan. 50 years from now, I expect both the Korean peninsula and "Greater China" to be united. Samuel P. Huntington put it best - he mentioned that the hysteria about North Korea's nukes got greater the further you advanced from the Korean peninsula itself.

[Buccaneer]

Three aircraft carriers filled the skies with fighters as one of the largest U.S. military exercises in decades got underway Tuesday off this tiny island in the western Pacific.

For the first time ever, a Chinese delegation was sent to observe the U.S. war games. But as the show of American military power began, North Korea — one of the region's most unpredictable countries — was rattling some swords of its own.

The maneuvers, dubbed "Valiant Shield (javascript:yzwc();siteSearch('Valiant Shield');)," bring three carriers together in the Pacific for the first time since the Vietnam War. Some 30 ships, 280 aircraft and 22,000 troops will be participating in the five-day war games, which end Friday.


I thought the part of inviting a Chinese delegate was pretty funny.

[JPhillips]

Franklin: Please reference WAR, KOREAN.

[sachmo71]

I thought the part of inviting a Chinese delegate was pretty funny.


"Hey, check THIS out, Wang!"

[Buccaneer]

"Hey, check THIS out, Wang!"

and then Wang crapped in his britches.

[sachmo71]

and then Wang crapped in his britches.


seeing 3 carrier air wings flying around the pacific skies will do that to a dude.

[Groundhog]

Pretty funny stuff this article. I love how the US government is talking about Nth Korea like they would a child who acts naughty to get attention.

Article is in italics, as the formatting is screwed when I put it in CODE boxes.

hxxp://www.canada.com/topics/news/world/story.html?id=e96392e4-f3c6-4971-9cb0-ca19aa061475&k=57688

Burt Herman, Canadian Press
Published: Wednesday, June 21, 2006

SEOUL, South Korea (AP) - North Korea called Wednesday for direct talks with the United States over a potential missile test, but the U.S. administration rejected the overture, saying threats aren't the way to seek dialogue.

"You don't normally engage in conversations by threatening to launch intercontinental ballistic missiles," UN Ambassador John Bolton said. "It's not a way to produce a conversation because if you acquiesce in aberrant behaviour you simply encourage the repetition of it, which we're obviously not going to do."

U.S. President George W. Bush, meeting with European leaders in Austria, said North Korea faced further isolation if it went ahead with any launch.

"It should make people nervous when non-transparent regimes who have announced they have nuclear warheads, fire missiles," Bush said. "This is not the way you conduct business in the world."

Earlier Wednesday, Han Song Ryol, deputy chief of North Korea's mission to the United Nations, said Pyongyang was seeking to resolve the missile test concerns through direct talks with the United States.

"North Korea as a sovereign state has the right to develop, deploy, test fire and export a missile," he told South Korea's Yonhap news agency. "We are aware of the U.S. concerns about our missile test-launch. So our position is that we should resolve the issue through negotiations."

Pyongyang has consistently pressed for direct dialogue with the United States, while Washington insists it will only speak to the North at six-country nuclear talks. The North has refused to return to the nuclear talks since November, in anger over a U.S. crackdown on the country's alleged illicit financial activity.

U.S. State Department deputy spokesman Adam Ereli reiterated the U.S. position Wednesday, saying direct talks with North Korea are "not in the cards."

"The issue of North Korea's nuclear program is not a U.S.-North Korea issue. It is an issue that concerns the entire region," he told reporters in Washington.

"If North Korea wants to talk to the United States about its missile-launch programs or its nuclear program or about security and stability on the peninsula in general, then we should do it through the six-party process," Ereli said. "It's a multilateral approach which provides for, within it, bilateral engagement."

The missile crisis led former South Korean President Kim Dae-jung to cancel a trip next week to the North that could have offered a rare chance for talks. In addition, South Korea said a missile test could affect Seoul's humanitarian aid to Pyongyang.

Washington was weighing responses to a potential test that could include attempting to shoot down the missile, U.S. officials have said.

Bolton said he was continuing discussions with UN Security Council members on possible action, and had met with Russia's UN ambassador.

"Obviously the priority remains trying to persuade North Korea not to conduct the launch," Bolton said at UN headquarters in New York.

After North Korea surprised the world in 1998 by firing a missile that flew over Japan into the Pacific, the Security Council issued a press statement, its mildest comment. But Bolton said there would be stronger council reaction this time.

"There's no question about it," Bolton said. "We're seeing broad support for something stronger but we don't want to be in a position where we're predicting the future or doing anything other than making it clear we don't think the launch ought to take place."

U.S. Ambassador to Japan Thomas Scheiffer said the United States has means of responding to a North Korean missile test that it didn't have in 1998, and is considering "all options."

In comments published Wednesday, North Korea said its self-imposed moratorium on testing long-range missiles no longer applies because it's not in direct dialogue with Washington, suggesting it would hold off on any launch if Washington agreed to new talks.

North Korea imposed its missile moratorium in 1999 amid friendlier relations with the United States during then-president Bill Clinton's administration. During a 2002 summit with Japan, North Korean leader Kim Jong Il signed an agreement to extend the moratorium until at least 2003, and reaffirmed the launch ban at another summit in 2004.

Intelligence reports say the North is possibly fuelling a Taepodong-2 missile with a range experts estimate could be up to 15,000 kilometres, making it capable of reaching parts of the United States.

There are diverging expert opinions on whether fuelling would mean a launch was imminent, due to the highly corrosive nature of the fuel, or whether the North could wait a month or more.

North Korea claims it has nuclear weapons, but isn't believed to have a design that would be small and light enough to top a missile.

The European Union appealed Wednesday to the North to cancel any plans for a launch.

"We must say that what they are trying to do . . . will have consequences," EU foreign and security affairs chief Javier Solana said on the sidelines of the European meeting with Bush.

North Korea have in turn said that they may not launch the missile if the US agreed to talks. North Korea's Han Song-ryol, deputy chief of their mission to the UN, said: "Some say our missile test launch is a violation of the moratorium, but this is not the case. North Korea as a sovereign state has the right to develop, deploy, test fire and export a missile. We are aware of the US concerns about our missile test-launch. So our position is that we should resolve the issue through negotiations."

[BishopMVP]

China doesn't have the naval power to to take back Taiwan by force right now.And they won't. Not just because of the US, but because parallel with the Chinese build-up (which the media loves hyping) there is also a big Japanese naval build-up going on (which nobody in the media ever mentions.)

Like others have said, in the case of North Korea I don't think anybody expects them to use an ICBM or to ever start a war. Use for blackmail, sure (and it works - thanks Jimmy Carter and Bill Clinton! Nice Nobel Prize you got there!) Start a war, no. The one dangerous aspect, helpfully spelled out by Han Song-ryol, deputy chief of their mission to the UN - "North Korea as a sovereign state has the right to develop, deploy, test fire and export a missile."

[sachmo71]

"You don't normally engage in conversations by threatening to launch intercontinental ballistic missiles," UN Ambassador John Bolton said. "It's not a way to produce a conversation because if you acquiesce in aberrant behaviour you simply encourage the repetition of it, which we're obviously not going to do."


Says the man who's country has three carriers running exercises on the North Korean side of the world.