WAR North Korea Main Thread - All things Korea June 3rd - June 9th

Housecarl

On TB every waking moment
North Korea Main Thread - All things Korea May 27th - June 2nd
http://www.timebomb2000.com/vb/show...ain-Thread-All-things-Korea-May-27th-June-2nd

---

For links see article source.....
Posted for fair use.....
http://news.sky.com/story/un-extends-north-korea-sanctions-in-clear-message-to-pyongyang-10902861

UN extends North Korea sanctions in 'clear message' to Pyongyang

The US claims the sanctions send a "clear message" to North Korea to "stop firing ballistic missiles or face the consequences".

09:34, UK,
Saturday 03 June 2017

By Bethany Minelle, News Reporter
The United Nations Security Council has voted unanimously to expand sanctions against North Korea to include 14 more people and four organisations.

The US-drafted resolution has imposed a global travel ban and asset freeze on those added to the blacklist, which previously contained 39 individuals and 42 North Korean entities.

Among the new names targeted are the Koryo Bank and Strategic Rocket Force of the Korean People's Army, as well as the head of Pyongyang's overseas spying operations.

It was the first time since President Donald Trump took office that America and China - Pyongyang's only major ally - agreed to adopt such a resolution.

US Ambassador to the United Nations Nikki Haley said the council was sending a "clear message to North Korea today - stop firing ballistic missiles or face the consequences".

While she said the US would "continue to seek a peaceful, diplomatic resolution", she made clear they were "prepared to counteract North Korean aggression through other means, if necessary".

The public vote has been seen as a clear message to Pyongyang that the council is unhappy with their repeated defiance of the UN ban on ballistic missile launches.

Pyongyang has carried out 12 ballistic missile tests this year, as it attempts to develop a nuclear-tipped missile capable of hitting the US mainland.

As tensions have increased between Pyongyang and Washington, the US has been pressing China to rein in Kim Jong Un's nuclear programme.

Previously it was thought that China would only consider new sanctions on Pyongyang if North Korea conducted a long-range missile launch or another nuclear test.

US defence secretary James Mattis said the US was encouraged by China's efforts to restrain North Korea, and that the threat from North Korea was "clear and present".

The Chinese ambassador described the situation as "complex and sensitive" but said there was "a critical window of opportunity" to seek a resolution.

Japanese Prime Minister Shinzo Abe has voiced support for the unanimous UN decision and called on North Korea to refrain from repeated nuclear tests and missile launches.

Last week, North Korea fired what appears to be a short-range Scud missile off its east coast, with the rocket flying about 280 miles into the Sea of Japan.

Four days later, the US and Japan staged military training exercises in the Sea of Japan - the first exercise of its kind in 20 years.
 

Housecarl

On TB every waking moment
For links see article source.....
Posted for fair use.....
http://www.reuters.com/article/us-asia-security-idUSKBN18U015

World News | Sat Jun 3, 2017 | 3:37am EDT

Mattis praises China's efforts on North Korea, dials up pressure on South China Sea

By Idrees Ali and Lee Chyen Yee | SINGAPORE

The United States is encouraged by China's efforts to restrain North Korea but Washington will not accept Beijing's militarization of islands in the South China Sea, U.S. Defense Secretary Jim Mattis said on Saturday.

The comments by Mattis, during the annual Shangri-La Dialogue, show how U.S. President Donald Trump's administration is looking to balance working with China to restrain North Korea's advancing missile and nuclear programs while dealing with Beijing's activities in the South China Sea.

U.S. allies have been worried by Trump's actively courting Chinese President Xi Jinping to restrain North Korea, fearing Washington might allow China a more free rein elsewhere in the region.

Some allies have also expressed concern that Washington's withdrawal from the Trans-Pacific trade partnership and the Paris global climate accord signals the United States is diluting its global leadership role.

Speaking at the dialogue, Asia's premier security forum, Mattis said the United States remained fully engaged with its partners.

"Like it or not, we are a part of the world," he said. "What a crummy world if we all retreat inside our borders."

Nevertheless, reversing or slowing North Korea's nuclear and missile programs has become a security priority for Washington, given Pyongyang's vow to develop a nuclear-tipped missile capable of hitting the U.S. mainland.

The Trump administration has been pressing China aggressively to rein in its reclusive neighbor, warning all options are on the table if North Korea persists with its weapons programs.

"The Trump administration is encouraged by China's renewed commitment to work with the international community toward denuclearization," Mattis said.

"Ultimately, we believe China will come to recognize North Korea as a strategic liability, not an asset."

However, Mattis said seeking China's cooperation on North Korea did not mean Washington would not challenge Beijing's activities in the South China Sea.

The U.N. Security Council on Friday expanded targeted sanctions against North Korea after its repeated missile tests, adopting the first such resolution agreed by the United States and China since Trump took office.

In another sign of increased pressure on North Korea, Japan's navy and air force began a three-day military exercise with two U.S. aircraft carriers in the Sea of Japan on Thursday.

Japanese Defense Minister Tomomi Inada, speaking at the Singapore forum, said Tokyo backed the United States using any option to deal with North Korea, including military strikes, and was seeking a deeper alliance with Washington.

But she also said she was concerned about the situation in the South China Sea and in the East China Sea.

China's claims in the South China Sea, through which about $5 trillion in ship-borne trade passes each year, are contested by Brunei, Malaysia, the Philippines, Taiwan and Vietnam. China and Japan both claim islands in the East China Sea.

LOW-KEY
China, which sent only a low-key delegation to the forum, said its ties with the United States were vital for the region.

"I believe that if China and the United States can ensure no conflict, as well as maintain mutual respect, cooperation and trust, it will contribute greatly to security in the Asia Pacific and the world," Lt Gen He Lei, the head of Beijing's delegation, told reporters.

Related Coverage
Japan defense minister backs all U.S. options on North Korea, seeks deeper alliance

Allies around the world have been concerned about the commitment of the United States since Trump took office on Jan. 20 because of his "America First" rhetoric and expectations that he would concentrate on a domestic agenda.

Mattis sought to ease concerns for allies in the Asia-Pacific, saying the region was a priority and the primary effort was alliance building. He added, however, that countries must "contribute sufficiently to their own security."

In a sign of the U.S. commitment to the region, Mattis said that soon about 60 percent of overseas tactical aviation assets would be assigned to the region and he would work with the U.S. Congress on an Asia-Pacific stability initiative.

Mattis said the United States welcomed China's economic development, but he anticipated "friction" between the two countries.

"While competition between the U.S. and China, the world's two largest economies, is bound to occur, conflict is not inevitable," Mattis said.

While eager to work with China in dealing with North Korea, Mattis said the United States did not accept China placing weapons and other military assets on man-made islands in the South China Sea.

"We oppose countries militarizing artificial islands and enforcing excessive maritime claims," Mattis said. "We cannot and will not accept unilateral, coercive changes to the status quo."

Without giving details, Mattis also said the United States would take further steps to protect the U.S. homeland.

Earlier this week, the United States carried out a successful, first-ever missile defense test involving a simulated attack by an intercontinental ballistic missile, in a major milestone for a program meant to defend against a mounting North Korean threat.

(Additional reporting by Masayuki Kitano and Greg Torode; Editing by Raju Gopalakrishnan and Lincoln Feast)
 

Housecarl

On TB every waking moment
For links see article source.....
Posted for fair use.....
http://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2017/jun/1/north-korean-threatens-japan/

The North Korean threat to Japan

The U.S., working with Japan, must make the nuclear threat from North Korea a priority issue

By Joseph DeTrani - - Thursday, June 1, 2017

ANALYSIS/OPINION:

In early May, I was part of a fact-finding trip to Japan. What I learned from four days of discussions with senior government officials, legislators and scholars was invaluable. I’ve worked with Japanese counterparts for many years, especially on issues related to North Korea, but what I took away from this trip was Japan’s deep concern about the existential nuclear threat from North Korea and the need for the U.S., working with Japan, to more aggressively pursue a resolution of this issue. What also got my attention was Prime Minister Shinzo Abe’s pro-active contribution to peace in the region and the real progress made with Japan’s commitment to collective defense with its U.S. ally.

Japan appreciates President Trump’s decision to make the North Korea nuclear threat a priority national security issue. For years, Japan has been living with this existential nuclear threat from North Korea. Now, the U.S. is seized with the reality that North Korea will soon become an existential nuclear threat to the U.S. The progress North Korea continues to make with its missile programs, definitely to include the recent Intermediate Range Ballistic Missile (IRBM) successes, with a mobile, solid fuel missile capable of reaching Guam, has correctly focused attention on the need to get North Korea to halt these missile launches and return to negotiations, ideally before they launch an Intercontinental Ballistic Missile (ICBM) capable of reaching the U.S.

Japan is supportive of President Trump’s strategy of “putting all options on the table.” Their preference would be returning to negotiations and getting China to use more of its leverage with North Korea to accomplish this goal. China’s decision to cease importing coal from North Korea in 2017 was movement in that direction. Another card available to China is the crude oil they provide to North Korea. Any reduction in the amount of oil China provides to North Korea would have immediate impact on the North’s economy and its ability to sustain its very vulnerable infrastructure.

A return to negotiations, however, must not only focus on halting North Korea’s nuclear and missile programs, it must also focus on our principal objective: Complete and verifiable denuclearization. There is a sense, and only a sense, that North Korea may believe that the progress they’ve made with its nuclear and missile programs has conditioned the international community to view a halt in these programs as the only realistic obtainable objective. Thus North Korea would retain its nuclear weapons and be accepted as a nuclear weapons state, albeit with a limited and capped nuclear weapons capability.

This would be a tragic mistake, not only for Japan and South Korea, but for the U.S. and those countries in the region. North Korea with even a few nuclear weapons would be a nuclear proliferation nightmare. Other countries, like South Korea, Japan, Taiwan, eventually may also decide that they need nuclear weapons, regardless of the U.S. nuclear umbrella. Also of concern has to be the accidental use of a nuclear weapon and the transfer, knowingly or accidentally, of a nuclear weapon or fissile material to a rogue state or terrorist organization.

The progress the U.S. is making in bringing Japan and South Korea together to address security issues with North Korea is impressive, and appreciated by Japan. This trilateral cooperation is a powerful message to Pyongyang that the U.S. and its two allies will work in tandem to address and ultimately resolve the nuclear issue with North Korea. The introduction of the Terminal High Altitude Area Defense (THAAD) in South Korea and the possible need for additional missile defense systems in Japan and in the region, depending on developments with North Korea, are issues Japan supports.

Finally, the U.S. decision to pull out of the Trans Pacific Partnership (TPP) was a disappointment to Japan. This will require, in my view, more of a U.S. effort to prove that we are committed to a real presence in the region and that our extended deterrence commitments to Japan are inviolable. China’s progress with its One Belt and One Road initiative and its investment and leadership in the Asia Infrastructure Investment Bank have captured the attention of Japan and others in the region, thus it’s only logical that the U.S. will have to do more to prove that we also are invested in and committed to the Asia-Pacific region for the long term.


•*Joseph R. DeTrani was the former U.S. special envoy for negotiations with North Korea.
 

Housecarl

On TB every waking moment
Hummm.....

For links see article source.....
Posted for fair use.....
http://38north.org/2017/06/wgraham060217/

North Korea Nuclear EMP Attack: An Existential Threat

By William R. Graham
02 June 2017

Analysts like Jack Liu and Jeffrey Lewis are to be commended for their interest in educating the public about North Korea’s missile and nuclear programs and endeavoring to provide their readers with “informed analysis.” However, in a series of recent articles, both analysts have written off the possibility of a nuclear electromagnetic pulse (EMP) attack from North Korea as “unlikely” and “science fiction” because they believe the 10 to 20 kiloton nuclear weapons currently possessed by North Korea are incapable of making an effective EMP attack. This dismisses the consensus view of EMP experts who have advanced degrees in physics and electrical engineering along with several decades of experience in the field—with access to classified data throughout that time—and who have conducted EMP tests on a wide variety of electronic systems, beginning in 1963.

By way of background, the Commission to Assess the Threat to the United States from Electromagnetic Pulse Attack was established by Congress in 2001 to advise the Congress, the President, the Department of Defense and other departments and agencies of the US Government on the nuclear EMP threat to military systems and civilian critical infrastructures. The EMP Commission was re-established in 2015 with its charter broadened to include natural EMP from solar storms, all manmade EMP threats, cyber-attack, sabotage and Combined-Arms Cyber Warfare. The EMP Commission charter gives it access to all relevant classified and unclassified data and the power to levy analysis upon the Department of Defense.

In the interest of better informing 38 North readers about the EMP threat, we offer this commentary to correct errors of fact, analysis, and myths about EMP.

Primitive and “Super-EMP” Nuclear Weapons are Both EMP Threats

The EMP Commission finds that even primitive, low-yield nuclear weapons are such a significant EMP threat that rogue states, like North Korea, or terrorists may well prefer using a nuclear weapon for EMP attack instead of destroying a city.[1] In its 2004 report, the Commission cautioned: “Certain types of relatively low-yield nuclear weapons can be employed to generate potentially catastrophic EMP effects over wide geographic areas, and designs for variants of such weapons may have been illicitly trafficked for a quarter-century.”

In 2004, two Russian generals, both EMP experts, warned the EMP Commission that the design for Russia’s super-EMP warhead, capable of generating high intensity EMP fields of 200,000 volts per meter, was “accidentally” transferred to North Korea, and that due to “brain drain,” Russian scientists were in North Korea, helping with their missile and nuclear weapon programs. South Korean military intelligence told their press that Russian scientists are in North Korea helping develop an EMP nuclear weapon. In 2013, a Chinese military commentator stated North Korea has super-EMP nuclear weapons.[2]

Super-EMP weapons are low-yield and designed to produce not a big kinetic explosion, but rather a high level of gamma rays, which generate the high-frequency E1 EMP that is most damaging to the broadest range of electronics. North Korean nuclear tests—including the first in 2006, which was predicted to the EMP Commission two years in advance by the two Russian EMP experts—mostly have yields consistent with the size of a super-EMP weapon. The Russian generals’ accurate prediction of when the North would perform its first nuclear test, and the yield being consistent with a super-EMP weapon, indicates their warning about a North Korean super-EMP weapon should be taken very seriously.

EMP Threat from Satellites

While most analysts are fixated on when in the future North Korea will develop highly reliable intercontinental ballistic missiles, guidance systems, and reentry vehicles capable of striking a US city, the present threat from EMP is largely ignored.*An EMP attack does not require an accurate guidance system because the area of effect, having a radius of hundreds or thousands of kilometers, is so large. No reentry vehicle is needed because the warhead is detonated at high-altitude, above the atmosphere. Missile reliability matters little because only one missile has to work to make an EMP attack.

For instance, North Korea could make an EMP attack against the United States by launching a short-range missile off a freighter or submarine or by lofting a warhead to 30 kilometers burst height by balloon. While such lower-altitude EMP attacks would not cover the whole US mainland, as would an attack at higher-altitude (300 kilometers), even a balloon-lofted warhead detonated at 30 kilometers altitude could blackout the Eastern Grid that supports most of the population and generates 75 percent of US electricity.

Moreover, an EMP attack could be made by a North Korean satellite. The design of an EMP or even a super-EMP weapon could be relatively small and lightweight, resembling the US W-79 Enhanced Radiation Warhead nuclear artillery shell of the 1980s, designed in the 1950s. Such a device could fit inside North Korea’s Kwangmyongsong-3 (KMS-3) and Kwangmyongsong-4 (KMS-4) satellites that presently orbit the Earth. The south polar trajectory of KMS-3 and KMS-4 evades US Ballistic Missile Early Warning Radars and National Missile Defenses, resembling a Russian secret weapon developed during the Cold War, called the Fractional Orbital Bombardment System (FOBS) that would have used a nuclear-armed satellite to make a surprise EMP attack on the United States.[3]

Kim Jong Un has threatened to reduce the United States to “ashes” with “nuclear thunderbolts” and threatened to retaliate for US diplomatic and military pressure by “ordering officials and scientists to complete preparations for a satellite launch as soon as possible” amid “the enemies’ harsh sanctions and moves to stifle” the North.[4]

Addressing Misinformation

Recent assessments by Jeffrey Lewis and Jack Liu regarding North Korea’s EMP capabilities have some fundamental flaws.[5]

For starters, in his article, Jeffrey Lewis claimed that “just one string of street lights failed in Honolulu” during the 1962 Starfish Prime high-altitude nuclear test, and that this is proof of EMP’s harmlessness.[6] In fact, the EMP knocked out 36 strings of street lights, caused a telecommunications microwave relay station to fail, burned out HF (high frequency) radio links (used for long-distance communications), set off burglar alarms, and caused other damage. The Hawaiian Islands also did not experience a catastrophic protracted blackout because they were on the far edge of the EMP field contour, where effects are weakest; are surrounded by an ocean, which mitigates EMP effects; and were still in an age dominated by vacuum tube electronics. In addition, the slow pulse (E3) component of the EMP waveform only couples effectively to very long electric power transmission lines present on large continents, but were in short supply in Hawaii.

Starfish Prime was not the only test of this kind. Russia, in 1961-62, also conducted a series of high-altitude nuclear bursts to test EMP effects over Kazakhstan, an industrialized area nearly as large as Western Europe.[7] That test damaged the Kazakh electric grid.[8] Moreover, modern electronics, in part because they are designed to operate at much lower voltages, are much more vulnerable to EMP than the electronics of 1962 exposed to Starfish Prime and the Kazakh nuclear tests. A similar EMP event over the US today would be an existential threat.[9]

In his article, Lewis also suggested that vehicle transportation would continue after an EMP event based on the fact that only 6 of 55 vehicles were shut down by a single simulated EMP test on vehicles.[10] However, the EMP test protocol limited testing vehicles only to upset, not to damage, because the EMP Commission could not afford to repair damaged cars. Even with this limitation, one vehicle was still damaged, indicating that at least 2 percent of vehicles were severely affected by EMP damage. Over 50 years of EMP testing indicates that full field damage to vehicles would probably be much higher than 2 percent. Modern vehicles are even more susceptible to EMP attack because of their much larger complement of electronics than present in the vehicles tested by the Commission more than a decade ago. Furthermore, vehicles cannot run without fuel and gas stations cannot operate without electricity. Gas pumps could also be damaged in an EMP attack.

In an article by Jack Liu, he asserts in a footnote that because EMP from atmospheric nuclear tests in Nevada did not blackout Las Vegas, therefore EMP is no threat. However, the nuclear tests he describes were all endo-atmospheric tests that do not generate appreciable EMP fields beyond a range of about 5 miles. The high-altitude EMP (HEMP) threat of interest requires exo-atmospheric detonation, at 30 kilometers altitude or above, and produces EMP out to ranges of hundreds to thousands of miles.

Liu also miscalculates that “a 20-kiloton bomb detonated at optimum height would have a maximum EMP damage distance of 20 kilometers” in part, because he assumes “15,000 volts/meter or higher” in the E1 EMP component is necessary for damage. This figure is an extreme overestimation of system damage field thresholds. Damage and upset to electronic systems will happen from E1 EMP field strengths far below Liu’s “15,000 volts/meter or higher.” A one meter wire connected to a semiconductor device, such as a mouse cord or interconnection cable, would place hundreds to thousands of volts on microelectronic devices out to ranges of hundreds of miles for low-yield devices. Based on our experience with many EMP tests, semiconductor junctions operate at a few volts, and will experience breakdown at a few volts over their operating point, allowing their power supply to destroy exposed junctions.

Furthermore, Liu ignores system upset as a vulnerability. Digital electronics can be upset by extraneous pulses of a few volts. For unmanned control systems present within the electric power grid, long-haul communication repeater stations, and gas pipelines, an electronic upset is tantamount to permanent damage. Temporary upset of electronics can also have catastrophic consequences for military operations. No electronics should be considered invulnerable to EMP unless hardened or tested to certify survivability. Some highly-critical unprotected electronics have been upset or damaged in simulated EMP tests, not at “15,000 volts/meter or higher,” but at threat levels far below 1,000 volts/meter.

Therefore, even for a low-yield 10-20 kiloton weapon, the EMP field should be considered dangerous for unprotected US systems. The EMP Commission 2004 Report warned against the US military’s increasing use of commercial-off-the-shelf-technology that is not protected against EMP: “Our increasing dependence on advanced electronics systems results in the potential for an increased EMP vulnerability of our technologically advanced forces, and if unaddressed makes EMP employment by an adversary an attractive asymmetric option.”[11] The North Korean missile test on April 29, which apparently detonated at an altitude of 72 kilometers, the optimum height-of-burst for EMP attack by a 10 KT warhead, would create a potentially damaging EMP field spanning an estimated 930 kilometer radius [kilometers radius = 110 (kilometers burst height to the 0.5 Power)], not Liu’s miscalculated 20 kilometer radius.

US Vulnerabilities to EMP

When assessing the potential vulnerability of US military forces and civilian critical infrastructures to EMP, it is necessary to be mindful of the complex interdependencies of these highly-networked systems, because EMP upset and damage of a very small fraction of the total system can cause total system failure.[12]

Real world failures of electric grids from various causes indicate that the Congressional EMP Commission, US Department of Defense, US Federal Energy Regulatory Commission (FERC), US Department of Homeland Security, and US Defense Threat Reduction Agency are right that a nuclear EMP attack would have catastrophic consequences. Significant and highly-disruptive blackouts have been caused by single-point failures cascading into system-wide failures, originating from damage comprising far less than 1 percent of the total system.[13]

In contrast to blackouts caused by single-point or small-scale failures, a nuclear EMP attack would inflict massive widespread damage to the electric grid, causing millions of failure points. With few exceptions, the US national electric grid is unhardened and untested against nuclear EMP attack. In the event of a nuclear EMP attack on the United States, a widespread protracted blackout is inevitable. This common sense assessment is also supported by the nation’s best computer modeling.[14]

Thus, even if North Korea only has primitive, low-yield nuclear weapons, and if other states or terrorists acquire one or a few such weapons as well as the capability to detonate them at an altitude of 30 kilometers or higher over the United States. As, the EMP Commission warned over a decade ago in its 2004 Report, “the damage level could be sufficient to be catastrophic to the Nation, and our current vulnerability invites attack.”

[1] John S. Foster, Jr., Earl Gjelde, William R. Graham, Robert J. Hermann, Henry M. Kluepfel, Richard L. Lawson, Gordon K. Soper, Lowell L. Wood, Jr., and Joan B. Woodard, Report of the Commission to Assess the Threat to the United States from Electromagnetic Pulse (EMP) Attack, Volume. 1: Executive Report (Washington DC: EMP Commission, 2004), 2.

[2] Peter V. Pry, Statement Before the United States Senate Subcommittee on Terrorism, Technology, and Homeland Security Hearing on Terrorism and the EMP Threat to Homeland Security: “Foreign Views of Electromagnetic Pulse (EMP) Attack,” March 8, 2005, https://www.gpo.gov/fdsys/pkg/CHRG-109shrg21324/pdf/CHRG-109shrg21324.pdf.; Min-sek Kim and Jee-ho Yoo, “Military Source Warns of North’s EMP Bomb” JoonAng Daily, September 2, 2009; Daguang Li, “North Korean Electromagnetic Attack Threatens South Korea’s Information Warfare Capabilities” Tzu Chin, June 1, 2012, 44-45.

[3] Miroslav Gyûrösi, “The Soviet Fractional Orbital Bombardment System Program,” Air Power Australia, January 27, 2014, http://www.ausairpower.net/APA-Sov-FOBS-Program.html.

[4] Alex Lockie, “North Korea threatens ‘nuclear thunderbolts’ as US And China finally work together,” Business Insider, April 14, 2017, http://www.businessinsider.com/north-korea-us-china-nuclear-thunderbolt-cooperation-war-2017-4; “US General: North Korea ‘will’ develop nuclear capabilities to hit America,” Fox News, September 20, 2016, www.foxnews.com/world/2016/09/20/north-korea-says-successfully-ground-tests-new-rocket-engine.html.

[5] Jeffrey Lewis, “Would A North Korean Space Nuke Really Lay Waste to the U.S.?” New Scientist, www.newscientist.com/article/2129618; Lewis quoted in Cheyenne MacDonald, “A North Korean ‘Space Nuke’ Wouldn’t Lay Waste To America” Daily Mail, May 3, 2017, http://www.dailymail.co.uk/sciencet...-space-nuke-WOULDN-T-lay-waste-America.html.; Lewis interviewed by National Public Radio, “The North Korean Electromagnetic Pulse Threat, Or Lack Thereof,” NPR, April 27, 2017, www.npr.org/2017/04/27/525833275.; “NPR hosts laugh hysterically while America remains in the cross hairs of a North Korean nuclear warhead EMP apocalypse,” Natural News, May 1, 2017, www.naturalnews.com/2017-05-01-npr-laughs-hysterically-north-korean-emp-nuclear-attack.html.

[6] Lewis, “Would A North Korean Space Nuke Really Lay Waste to the U.S.?”

[7] High-altitude EMP (HEMP), the phenomenon under discussion, results from the detonation of a nuclear weapon at high-altitude, 30 kilometers or higher. All nuclear weapons, even a primitive Hiroshima-type A-bomb, can produce levels of HEMP damaging to modern electronics over large geographic regions.

[8] According to Electric Infrastructure Security Council, Report: USSR Nuclear EMP Upper Atmosphere Kazakhstan Test 184, (www.eiscouncil.org/APP_Data/upload/a4ce4b06-1a77-44d-83eb-842bb2a56fc6.pdf), citing research by Oak Ridge National Laboratory, a comparable EMP event over the U.S. today “would likely damage about 365 large transformers in the U.S. power grid, leaving about 40 percent of the U.S. population without electrical power for 4 to 10 years.”

[9] Foster, et al., Report of the Commission to Assess the Threat to the United States from Electromagnetic Pulse (EMP) Attack, Volume. 1: Executive Report, 4-8.

[10] Lewis, “Would A North Korean Space Nuke Really Lay Waste to the U.S.?”

[11] Ibid., 47.

[12] John S. Foster, Jr., Earl Gjelde, William R. Graham, Robert J. Hermann, Henry M. Kluepfel, Richard L. Lawson, Gordon K. Soper, Lowell L. Wood, Jr., and Joan B. Woodard, Report of the Commission to Assess the Threat to the United States from Electromagnetic Pulse (EMP) Attack: Critical National Infrastructures (Washington, D.C.: EMP Commission, April 2008), http://www.empcommission.org/ docs/A2473-EMP_Commission-7MB.pdf.

[13]For example, the Great Northeast Blackout of 2003—that put 50 million people in the dark for a day, contributed to at least 11 deaths, and cost an estimated $6 billion—originated from a single failure point when a powerline contacted a tree branch, damaging less than 0.0000001 (0.00001%) of the total system. The New York City Blackout of 1977, which resulted in the arrest of 4,500 looters and injury of 550 police officers, was caused by a lightning strike on a substation that tripped two circuit breakers. India’s nationwide blackout of 2012—the largest blackout in history, effecting 670 million people, 9% of the world population—was caused by overload of a single high-voltage powerline.

[14]Modeling by the US FERC reportedly assesses that a terrorist attack that destroys just 9 of 2,000 EHV transformers–merely 0.0045 (0.45%) of all EHV transformers in the US national electric grid–would be catastrophic damage, causing a protracted nationwide blackout. Modeling by the Congressional EMP Commission assesses that a terrorist nuclear EMP attack, using a primitive 10-kiloton nuclear weapon, could destroy dozens of EHV transformers, thousands of SCADAS and electronic systems, causing catastrophic collapse and protracted blackout of the US Eastern Grid, putting at risk the lives of millions. For the best unclassified modeling assessment of likely damage to the US national electric grid from nuclear EMP attack see: US Federal Energy Regulatory Commission (FERC) Interagency Report, coordinated with the Department of Defense and Oak Ridge National Laboratory: Electromagnetic Pulse: Effects on the U.S. Power Grid, Executive Summary (2010); FERC Interagency Report by Edward Savage, James Gilbert and William Radasky, The Early-Time (E1) High-Altitude Electromagnetic Pulse (HEMP) and Its Impact on the U.S. Power Grid (Meta-R-320) Metatech Corporation (January 2010); FERC Interagency Report by James Gilbert, John Kappenman, William Radasky, and Edward Savage, The Late-Time (E3) High-Altitude Electromagnetic Pulse (HEMP) and Its Impact on the U.S. Power Grid (Meta-R-321) Metatech Corporation (January 2010).
*
 

Housecarl

On TB every waking moment
For links see article source.....
Posted for fair use.....
http://www.armscontrolwonk.com/archive/1203304/tels-and-mels-and-tes-oh-my/

Image heavy so please go to see original article for them.... HC

TELs and MELs and TEs! Oh my!

by Scott LaFoy | June 1, 2017 | 1 Comment

A couple weeks back North Korea unveiled its*Hwasong-12 missile. *The*big hulking vehicle used for the test launch was*not a transporter-erector-launcher (TEL), but rather just a Transporter-Erector (TE)!

A TE (or*T/E) is neither a TEL nor*a MEL. And since we’re big on the rectification of names here at Arms Control Wonk, it seems like a good time to run down the differences among the three. Prepare for the excitement that can only come from the pedantic definitions of missile support equipment, illustrated by the very useful declassified diagrams from .

1. Transporter-Erector-Launcher (TEL)

The most common term for a truck or vehicle lugging around a missile is*“TEL”:*Transporter-Erector-Launcher. This is the most common of the three and is an integrated single vehicle that transports*the missile, erects*it, and launches it. Used for*everything from Scuds to the Topol-M to the Chinese DF-15 and DF-21D to almost all North Korean missiles, TELs are the easiest thing to find.

From left to right: A declassified notional diagram of a TEL;*a*Russian RT-2PM2 Topol-M ICBM TEL;*a*flock of Chinese DF-21C TELs in their natural habitat.
TELs are typically wheeled, but the DPRK has reintroduced tracked TELs into the mix after many decades of absence. Tracked TELs are effectively missiles mounted onto modified tank chassis, giving them different mobility options in regards to accessible terrain, though at the cost of maintenance and fuel consumption.

From left to right: The DPRK tracked TEL (possible KN-17 ASBM); the Soviet R-11 TEL;*a declassified diagram of the R-11’s firing table, pulled from CIA-RDP78T05439A000200370043-6

2. Mobile Erector*Launcher (MEL)

The second is slightly less common: MEL, Mobile Erector Launcher. This terminology is not consistently applied, but refers to a non-integrated carrier for a missile. While the TEL is a single vehicle, a MEL is a tractor-trailer set-up. A prime mover is attached to a trailer which has a lifting mechanism for elevating and launching the missile. MEL was used to describe the Pershing II missile system and Patriot anti-missile system. It has since been applied to various similar trailer-based launch systems, but is sometimes used interchangeably with “non-integrated TEL,” “trailer-type TEL,” or, confusingly, sometimes just TEL.

From left to right: A declassified early diagram of*what the CIA thought a future DF-21 launcher could look like;*Chinese DF-21A MELs; North Korean MEL from the April 15 parade.

Note that the diagram is labeled “TEL AS A TRAILER” not MEL. *Because nothing can be easy. *I still call the*non-integrated/tractor-trailers for the DF-21 TELs — and nobody will stop me.

*3. Transporter-Erector (TE)

Then comes the TE or T/E, the transporter erector. The U.S. uses Transporter Erector to refer to the large vehicles used to insert Minutemen III ICBMs into silos, but the more salient usage here is in reference to a vehicle that backs away from the missile launch position after erecting the missile. TEs are usually much lighter and thus risk significant damage if exposed to the violence of a missile launch.

An example of a Transporter Erector. Note lack of firing table, this TE carries only the missile and would need to be set up at a pre-established firing position to work
Examples include the Chinese DF-3, one basing mode for the DF-4, and now the Hwasong-12’s test launch configuration. The DF-3 and DF-4 used very light trailers to move the unfueled missiles onto a pre-set firing table. *You can see this in a video of a DF-4 launching.

From left to right: A DF-4 is rolled out on a light trailer; a crane places a firing tableset on a very specific pre-surveyed point at a launch position; the*DF-4 being elevated into position at a training site. Thanks to Xu Tianran for posting these images originally

The Hwasong-12 is weird, as it appears to use something based on the same chassis as the Musudan’s TEL. And like the Musudan, it carries a firing table along with it. *So far, so good.

However, in the test footage released after the first successful Hwasong-12 test, the “TEL” is seen erecting the missile, ground crews attach the firing table to the ground, and then the vehicle pulls away! The Hwasong-12’s “TEL” actually is a TE with a detachable firing table, allowing for the vehicle to clear the area —*avoiding any damage if the missile goes, as Jeffrey likes to say, kablooie.

*
From left to right:*The DPRK Hwasong-12 TE with elevating arm still up; the transporter-erector pulling away from the Hwasong-12; The Hwasong-12*a few seconds prior to launch, with*TE nowhere*to be seen.

I’m not aware of this configuration existing in any other missile system, but as the Pukguksong-2 and the ASBM have shown, the DPRK has some pretty interesting ideas for how to build TEL configurations. It may be the case that this is just a testing configuration and eventually the missile is moved to a more traditional TEL set-up, or it could be the case that this

TO SUM UP

TEL: One big vehicle that transports, erects, and launches the missile.

MEL: A tractor-trailer (two vehicles) in which the trailer*erects and launches missile.

TE: Either a tractor-trailer combination or single*vehicle that transports and erects missile, but leaves the missile on a firing table and departs*prior to launch.

Possible DPRK TE: Modified TEL that drops firing table and missile at launch position. Possibly could be hardened (or the basis for a future hardened) TEL, but unclear.
Analysts are inconsistent in their use of these terms, making them frustrating to explicitly and definitively differentiate.

The Hwasong-12 deviates from typical TE designs, as typical TEs are very light trailers attached to (more or less) generic prime movers. The Hwasong-12 instead appears to use the same special heavy vehicle chassis as the Musudan. Unlike the Musudan, which fires with the actual vehicle still attached, the Hwasong-12’s prime mover detaches its firing table and clears the launch site.

There*are other combinations for non-ballistic missile systems (like the fancy TELARs that some SAMs have), but these are the three vehicle types most relevant for ballistic missiles. I’m sure that within the engineering and space launch community, where things are better formalized and standardized, there is a more rigorous set of definitions, but these are the ones used for decades by the analyst community on both the classified and open-source side. Almost any land-based mobile or transportable offensive ballistic missile system will be carried in one of these three configurations, with TEL being the most common and TE being the least.
*


Filed Under: missiles, north korea
Tagged With: Definitions, Hwasong-12, Launchers, MEL, TE, TEL

Comments

E. Parris (NPIC 1963--) (History)
June 2, 2017 at 9:08 am
It is probably a waste of time to categorize the varieties of missile systems being shown to us by the North Koreans. .Old-timers will recognize this show as being similar to the twice-annual missile shows put on by the Russians during the years when they were struggling with the SS-6 missile system–badly out-numbered by contemporary US missile forces. Nevertheless, the Russians sought to even the numbers by moving MR-and IRBM missiles to nearby Cuba. Similarly, North Korea could resort to similar adventurism, and must be watched quite carefully. They must become aware of the “rules of the game.”
Reply
 

Lilbitsnana

On TB every waking moment
Noon in Korea‏ @NoonInKorea 1h1 hour ago

Unlike his father & grandpa, Kim Jong Un loves to fly: 9 personal runways found in NK, all next to vacation homes



Noon in Korea‏ @NoonInKorea 57m57 minutes ago
Replying to @NoonInKorea

Becuz road conditions are so bad in NK, it may take days for him to travel to vacation destinations: that's why flying is favored.


Noon in Korea‏ @NoonInKorea 49m49 minutes ago
Replying to @NoonInKorea

KJU's 9th personal runway is found in Changsong near the border & Yalu River. It's rumored to have an emergency, underground tunnel to China
 

Melodi

Disaster Cat
North Korea rejects UN sanctions
Updated / Sunday, 4 Jun 2017 12:30

North Korea says it will continue its weapons development


North Korea "fully rejects" the latest round of sanctions against its citizens and entities by the United Nations and will continue its weapons development, its official KCNA news agency said.

The UN Security Council on Friday expanded targeted sanctions against North Korea after its repeated missile tests, adopting the first such resolution agreed by the United States and Pyongyang's only major ally China since President Donald Trump took office.

The sanctions resolution "is a crafty hostile act with the purpose of putting a curb on the DPRK's buildup of nuclear forces, disarming it and causing economic suffocation to it," the foreign ministry spokesman said in a statement carried by its official KCNA news agency.

DPRK is short for Democratic People's Republic of Korea, the North's official name.

"Whatever sanctions and pressure may follow, we will not flinch from the road to build up nuclear forces which was chosen to defend the sovereignty of the country and the rights to national existence and will move forward towards the final victory," the spokesman said.

North Korea has rejected all U.N. Security Council resolutions dating back to 2006 when it conducted its first nuclear test, saying such moves directly infringe its sovereign right to self-defense.

The United States has struggled to slow North Korea's nuclear and missile programmes, which have become a security priority given Pyongyang's vow to develop a nuclear-tipped missile capable of hitting the US mainland.

The Trump administration has been pressing China aggressively to rein in its neighbour, warning that all options are on the table if Pyongyang persists with its nuclear and missile development.

North Korea blamed the United States and China for "railroading and enforcing" the sanctions resolution at the UN Security Council "after having drafted it in the backroom at their own pleasure."

"It is a fatal miscalculation if the countries ... would even think that they can delay or hold in check the eye-opening development of the (North's) nuclear forces even for a moment," the spokesman said.

Adding names to the UN blacklist mean a global travel ban and asset freeze, making the listings more symbolic given the isolated nature of official North Korean entities and the sophisticated network of front companies used by Pyongyang to evade current sanctions.

The UN Security Council first imposed sanctions on Pyongyang in 2006 over its ballistic missile and nuclear programmes and has increased the measures in response to five nuclear tests and two long-range missile launches.

North Korea is threatening a sixth nuclear test.


RTÉ.ie is the website of Raidió Teilifís Éireann, Ireland's National Public Service Broadcaster.
RTÉ is not responsible for the content of external internet sites. Images courtesy of Inpho.ie and Getty Images

© RTÉ 2017
https://www.rte.ie/news/world/2017/0604/880220-north-korea/
 

Housecarl

On TB every waking moment
For links see article source.....
Posted for fair use.....
http://www.realcleardefense.com/art...ill_amid_tension_from_north_korea_111515.html

Japan Holds Evacuation Drill Amid Tension From North Korea

By Associated Press
June 04, 2017

TOKYO (AP) — A Japanese town conducted an evacuation drill Sunday amid rising fear that a North Korean ballistic missile could hit Japanese soil.

More than 280 residents and schoolchildren from Abu, a small town with a population of just over 3,400 on Japan’s western coast, rushed to designated school buildings to seek shelter after sirens from loudspeakers warned them of a possible missile flight and debris falling on them.

The drill follows three consecutive weeks of North Korean missile tests. Last week, a missile splashed into the sea inside Japan’s 200-mile exclusive economic zone off the country’s western coast.

It was the second such drill since March, when Tokyo instructed local governments to review their contingency plans and conduct evacuation exercises.

A similar drill was conducted Sunday in the neighboring prefecture of Fukuoka in southern Japan, and others are planned over the next few months.
 

TidesofTruth

Veteran Member
North Korea claims it now has the ability to strike the United States using its latest intermediate-range ballistic missile.
That's according to the North's state-run newspaper, the Rodong Sinmum.
The Workers' Party daily says the Hwasong-12 missile tested in mid-May was fired at the highest angle... and that it reached the maximum altitude of more than 21-hundred kilometers before landing in the East Sea, some 7-hundred-90 kilometers away.
Meaning... at a normal launch angle, it could reach America's military base in Guam.
Many analysts agree the Hwasong-12 breakthrough is the "first step" towards developing an ICBM capable of striking the U.S mainland.
Experts also warn Pyongyang may have access to more advanced engines.
http://global-newscast.blogspot.com/2017/06/north-korea-claims-latest-test-proved.html
 

Lilbitsnana

On TB every waking moment
China Daily Asia‏Verified account @ChinaDailyAsia Jun 5

DPRK leader Kim Jong-un calls on air force to be ready to strike aircraft carriers http://www.chinadailyasia.com/articles/99/61/8/1496645203435.html … #DPRK


posted for fair use and discussion
http://www.chinadailyasia.com/articles/99/61/8/1496645203435.html


Monday, June 05, 2017, 15:29
DPRK's Kim asks air force to prepare to strike aircraft carriers
By Xinhua

This undated picture released from the official Korean Central News Agency (KCNA) of the Democratic People's Republic of Korea (DPRK), on May 28, 2017 shows DPRK leader Kim Jong-un (center, in white shirt) watching the test of a new anti-aircraft guided weapon system organized by the Academy of National Defence Science at an undisclosed location. (STR / KCNA via KNS / AFP)

PYONGYANG – Kim Jong-un, the top leader of the Democratic People's Republic of Korea (DPRK), has called on the country's air force to be ready to strike aircraft carriers, the official media reported Monday.

"Fighter pilots successfully performed diverse artistry flights, their flights were wonderful and they fully showed scientific flying and perfect aviation," the Korean Central News Agency (KCNA) quoted Kim as saying.

The DPRK leader made the statement while guiding the combat flight contest among commanding officers of the Korean People's Army Air and Anti-Air Force-2017, said KCNA.

The contest was aimed at "training all the flight commanding officers to be a-match-for-a-hundred fighters capable of destroying any targets including enemy aircraft carriers ... and encouraging all the army to be combat-ready for national reunification," said the KCNA.

The contest was held separately among a group of division or brigade commanders, a group of commanders of pursuit fighters, bomber and raider regiments, a group of commanders of light transport planes, helicopter and education aircraft regiments and a group of young graduates of pilot-training institutions, the KCNA reported without specifying the date of the event.

The contest took place while the United States is holding extended naval exercises with the Republic of Korea (ROK) off the ROK coast with the participation of aircraft carrier Carl Vinson.
 

TerryK

TB Fanatic
So why even bother with the thousands of troops risking their lives and the billions of dollars spent for a country that really doesn't want us there.
I'm sick of committing American dollars and lives to countries that want to play politics with them.
For 65 years, at great cost, we have defended South Korea and afforded them the luxury of electing snowflake pacifist presidents.
Time to pull out, lock stock and barrel and let them do whatever they want, as long as it isn't under our umbrella of protection.
It's easy as hell to talk pacifist and can't we all just get along, and there is no need for this antimissile system, when you are hiding behind the US military might.
Let them stand, OR FALL on their own.



https://www.nytimes.com/2017/06/07/world/asia/south-korea-thaad-missile-defense-us.html
South Korea Suspends Deployment of U.S. Antimissile System

By MOTOKO RICHJUNE 7, 2017
Continue reading the main story Share This Page


08korea-1-master768.jpg


Protesting the American missile defense system, known as Thaad, in Seoul, South Korea, last week. Credit Yonhap, via European Pressphoto Agency TOKYO — South Korea’s newly elected president, Moon Jae-in, has suspended the deployment of an American missile defense system, an apparent concession to China and a significant break with the United States on policy toward North Korea.
In comments to reporters, a senior official from the presidential Blue House in Seoul said on Wednesday that the two launchers of the Terminal High Altitude Area Defense system that had been installed could remain but that four launchers that had yet to be deployed would not be set up until the administration completed an environmental assessment.


The missile defense system, known as Thaad, has been controversial in South Korea and has drawn sharp criticism from China, which views the system’s radar as a threat. Beijing has taken retaliatory economic measures against Seoul, including curtailing the flow of Chinese tourists and punishing South Korean companies in China.
During his campaign, Mr. Moon, who won the presidency last month, complained that the United States and the previous South Korean administration rushed to deploy Thaad before the election to present him with a fait accompli. His decision to suspend the installation could strain relations with the White House, which has taken a hard line in confronting North Korea and its nuclear weapons program. It could also raise concerns about United States efforts to present a tough, unified position with Japan and South Korea against the North.
Continue reading the main story








Mr. Moon, who has said he wants to try to resolve the North’s nuclear crisis through dialogue, has also suggested that South Korea must “learn to say no” to Washington. He has already signaled a softening stance toward North Korea by encouraging aid groups to visit the country, although the North has rejected those offers since Seoul supported new United Nations sanctions.
Analysts said that as protesters demonstrated against the Thaad installation and South Korean businesses pressured the government to improve relations with China, Mr. Moon may have decided that suspending the progress of the missile defense system was politically expedient.
“I think he is trying to find a diplomatic way to slow down the process to placate the business community and placate his political supporters,” said Stephen R. Nagy, senior associate professor of politics and international studies at International Christian University in Tokyo.
Mr. Moon may also have sensed that China was not going to back down. When Lee Hae-chan, South Korea’s special presidential envoy, visited Beijing last month, President Xi Jinping did not concede anything during a meeting they jointly oversaw.
China’s strategy is to stand firm in its objections to Thaad to force Mr. Moon to modify — or even eliminate — a missile defense system that the Chinese suspect he does not like, either.
The defense system officially went into operation in late April on an abandoned golf course in Seongju, 135 miles southeast of Seoul, when two of six launchers were installed. United States military officials have said that the system is already “operational and has the ability to intercept North Korean missiles.”
This week, Mr. Moon accused the Ministry of Defense of trying to dodge a full environmental assessment as required by the law.
According to the law, any military installation on a site of more than 330,000 square meters requires a full analysis of the potential environmental and social effects. The ministry had divided the site, at 700,000 square meters, into two parcels to expedite the installation.
The Interpreter Newsletter

Understand the world with sharp insight and commentary on the major news stories of the week.




Supporters of Mr. Moon said the president was simply working to ensure that the Thaad battery complied with the law.
“The previous administration wasn’t really clear and transparent about the review process, and basically this is a legal procedure,” said Choi Jong-kun, a professor of political science at Yonsei University in Seoul.
Mr. Choi said that the president was eager to follow the legal procedure given that he was elected after his predecessor, Park Geun-hye, was impeached and ousted after accusations of corruption.
“The previous government failed to defend the constitutionality of the legal process in many fields,” Mr. Choi said. “So this president cannot repeat those same mistakes.” He added: “Is he saying ‘no’ to the United States? No. He is saying ‘yes’ to his constitutional responsibility.”
A spokeswoman for the United States forces in South Korea referred requests for comment to the Blue House.
Opponents of Mr. Moon said the suspension was probably a first step toward rejecting the missile defense system altogether. Oh Shin-hwan, a spokesman for the conservative-leaning Bareun Party, said in a statement that because the environmental review would take more than a year to complete, “the government does not intend to deploy the remaining four launchers.”
“North Korean provocations are occurring almost every day,” the statement continued. “And South Korea is saying that it will defend the country with half of the Thaad system. It is in effect saying that the government will not take into consideration the safety of Korean citizens, United States service members and their families.”

Analysts said it was too early to determine the ultimate outcome of the assessment. The early deployment “was rushed, so if the rush has been slowed down a bit, it’s not the end of the world,” said Gordon Flake, the chief executive of the Perth-U.S. Asia Center at the University of Western Australia.
But, he added, Mr. Moon “has to be aware of a fundamentally changed strategic environment in the last several years in Northeast Asia.” As North Korea rapidly develops the capability to launch missiles that could hit Japan and American bases in the region, Mr. Flake said, “decisions that South Korea makes have regional and global implications.”
Scott A. Snyder, senior fellow for Korea studies and director of the program on United States-Korea policy at the Council on Foreign Relations, said in an email that American officials should explain the need for the defense system to the new administration and that Mr. Moon’s supporters should not reject it simply because Ms. Park had approved it or give in to pressure from China.
“Thaad is at risk of becoming overpoliticized,” Mr. Snyder wrote. “And both sides need to take a deep breath and reaffirm common objectives and means for dealing with them rather than allowing Thaad to become a neuralgic and reflexive object of confrontation.”
 

Oreally

Right from the start
deployment suspended until an "environmental assessment".

wonder if this ploy will work for stopping a NK invasion?
 

Housecarl

On TB every waking moment
For links see article source.....
Posted for fair use.....
http://www.reuters.com/article/us-usa-northkorea-missiles-idUSKBN18Y2XA

World News | Wed Jun 7, 2017 | 3:54pm EDT

Head of U.S. missile defense says North Korea missile advances a 'great concern'

The head of the U.S. Missile Defense Agency, Vice Admiral James Syring, said on Wednesday that technological advances demonstrated by North Korea in its ballistic missile program in the past six months had caused him "great concern."

Syring told a hearing of the U.S. House Armed Services Committee that it was incumbent on his agency to assume that North Korea today could "range" the United States with an intercontinental ballistic missile carrying a nuclear warhead.

"I would not say we are comfortably ahead of the threat; I would say we are addressing the threat that we know today," Syring said.

"The advancements in the last six months have caused great concern to me and others, in the advancement of and demonstration of technology of ballistic missiles from North Korea.

"It is incumbent on us to assume that North Korea today can range the United States with an ICBM carrying a nuclear warhead."

North Korea has conducted dozens of missile tests since the start of last year, as well as its fourth and fifth nuclear bomb tests.

Also In World News
Islamist militants strike heart of Tehran, Iran blames Saudis
On eve of election, May tries to put focus back on Brexit

It has said it is working to develop a nuclear-tipped ICBM capable of reaching the U.S. mainland, presenting U.S. President Donald Trump with perhaps his most pressing security threat.

Missile experts say North Korea could soon test its first ICBM, but believe it will take until at least 2020 before it is capable of fielding an operational nuclear-tipped ICBM.

(Reporting by David Brunnstrom; Editing by James Dalgleish)
 

Lilbitsnana

On TB every waking moment
N. Korea fires multiple ground-to-ship missiles

Conflict News‏ @Conflicts 5m5 minutes ago

BREAKING: N. Korea fires multiple ground-to-ship missiles: S. Korean military - @YonhapNews


Yonhap News Agency‏ @YonhapNews 10m10 minutes ago

(URGENT) N. Korea fires multiple ground-to-ship missiles: S. Korean military http://english.yonhapnews.co.kr/news...001400315.html


http://english.yonhapnews.co.kr/news...001500315.html


N. Korea fires multiple ballistic missiles: S. Korean military


2017/06/08 07:44



SEOUL, June 8 (Yonhap) -- North Korea launched a salvo of apparent ballistic missiles from its east coast Thursday, South Korea's military said.

"North Korea fired multiple unidentified projectiles, assumed to be surface-to-ship missiles, this morning from the vicinity of Wonsan, Gangwon Province," the Joint Chiefs of Staff (JCS).

It was immediately reported to President Moon Jae-in, it added.

lcd@yna.co.kr

(END)
 

Possible Impact

TB Fanatic
zerohedge‏ @zerohedge 6m
N. Korea fires multiple ground-to-ship missiles: S. Korean military
- Yonhap



logo.gif


N. Korea fires multiple ballistic missiles: S. Korean military

2017/06/08 07:44
http://english.yonhapnews.co.kr/news/2017/06/08/0200000000AEN20170608001500315.html

SEOUL, June 8 (Yonhap) -- North Korea launched a salvo
of apparent ballistic missiles from its east coast Thursday,
South Korea's military said.

"North Korea fired multiple unidentified projectiles,
assumed to be surface-to-ship missiles, this morning
from the vicinity of Wonsan, Gangwon Province,"
the Joint Chiefs of Staff (JCS).

It was immediately reported to President Moon Jae-in,
it added.

lcd@yna.co.kr
(END)
 

TheSearcher

Are you sure about that?
zerohedge‏ @zerohedge 6m
N. Korea fires multiple ground-to-ship missiles: S. Korean military
- Yonhap



logo.gif


N. Korea fires multiple ballistic missiles: S. Korean military

2017/06/08 07:44
http://english.yonhapnews.co.kr/news/2017/06/08/0200000000AEN20170608001500315.html

SEOUL, June 8 (Yonhap) -- North Korea launched a salvo
of apparent ballistic missiles from its east coast Thursday,
South Korea's military said.

"North Korea fired multiple unidentified projectiles,
assumed to be surface-to-ship missiles, this morning
from the vicinity of Wonsan, Gangwon Province,"
the Joint Chiefs of Staff (JCS).

It was immediately reported to President Moon Jae-in,
it added.

lcd@yna.co.kr
(END)

Perhaps Mr. Moon will now pull his head out of his ass?
 

Lilbitsnana

On TB every waking moment
Yonhap News Agency‏ @YonhapNews 7m7 minutes ago

(URGENT) N. Korea's 'cruise missiles' fired Thursday travel around 200 km: S. Korean military
http://english.yonhapnews.co.kr/news/2017/06/08/0200000000AEN20170608001700315.html




(URGENT) N. Korea's 'cruise missiles' fired Thursday travel around 200 km: S. Korean military

2017/06/08 08:18

Article View Option

SNS Share

(END)





N. Korea fires multiple ground-to-ship missiles

Conflict News‏ @Conflicts 5m5 minutes ago

BREAKING: N. Korea fires multiple ground-to-ship missiles: S. Korean military - @YonhapNews


Yonhap News Agency‏ @YonhapNews 10m10 minutes ago

(URGENT) N. Korea fires multiple ground-to-ship missiles: S. Korean military http://english.yonhapnews.co.kr/news...001400315.html


http://english.yonhapnews.co.kr/news...001500315.html


N. Korea fires multiple ballistic missiles: S. Korean military


2017/06/08 07:44



SEOUL, June 8 (Yonhap) -- North Korea launched a salvo of apparent ballistic missiles from its east coast Thursday, South Korea's military said.

"North Korea fired multiple unidentified projectiles, assumed to be surface-to-ship missiles, this morning from the vicinity of Wonsan, Gangwon Province," the Joint Chiefs of Staff (JCS).

It was immediately reported to President Moon Jae-in, it added.

lcd@yna.co.kr

(END)
 

Lilbitsnana

On TB every waking moment
Strat 2 Intel Retweeted
CivMilAir
✈ ��‏ @CivMilAir 37m37 minutes ago

���� USAF Cobra Ball Ballistic Missile detection platform got airborne earlier.


Breaking in the news now - North Korea firing missiles.
 

Vegas321

Live free and survive
I soo would love Japan to say enough, and pull off a bunch of airstrikes on the Norks. Let Japan pull the trigger and we finish the job right behind them.
 

TerryK

TB Fanatic
When the country you are defending wants to hamstring you, and thinks nothing of putting both their own citizens and our US military members and their families in danger, it it time to back our bags and leave them to the tender attention of the North.
When they deliberately hamstring and endanger us, while still demanding we be ready to shed blood for them, they are an ally no more and don't deserve our protection or the blood that was shed for them in the past.
Go to hell, Mr. Moon.
 

TheSearcher

Are you sure about that?
When the country you are defending wants to hamstring you, and thinks nothing of putting both their own citizens and our US military members and their families in danger, it it time to back our bags and leave them to the tender attention of the North.
When they deliberately hamstring and endanger us, while still demanding we be ready to shed blood for them, they are an ally no more and don't deserve our protection or the blood that was shed for them in the past.
Go to hell, Mr. Moon.

Well, I wouldn't go that far. Not just yet. I would first direct Mr. Moon to some selected readings about a chap from Britain named Chamberlain and the dangers of appeasement.
 

night driver

ESFP adrift in INTJ sea
Remember, Moon has a constituency that he has to placate. Just like Donald Trump.
If memory serves, moon is a former member of the Korean Special Forces. I think we'll find he knows just exactly how far he can push things.
 

almost ready

Inactive
The news report appears to be slanted towards sounding like a big deal, when it is the suspension of the four launchers that President Moon was pissed off about -- because he had not been informed of them.

THe other launchers remain in place. The whole NYT story appears to be written, as night driver said, with the intention of placating Moon's pacifist voters. Also, the addition of the extra launchers offered Moon this opportunity to sound tough without actually doing anything.

Trump usually asks for a pony when he wants a kitten, then he has plenty of chips on the table to trade.

I don't see anything here.

If you missed the NYT report

https://www.nytimes.com/2017/06/07/world/asia/south-korea-thaad-missile-defense-us.html?_r=0

It's not recommended. Just slanted and skewed Democrats trying to sound annoyed about nothing.

Moon sounds like he's trying to please everyone. Good luck with that. On the bright side, he can change his mind on a dime and the first launchers are in place and, hopefully, his men trained in their proper use. That will come in handy.
 

Housecarl

On TB every waking moment
And in many ways at this point the networked THAAD radar is still in place and operational....

Also note the degree of "slow roll" in siting this moblie weapon system...
 

peacewithin

Leave a ❤️print wherever u go
https://rusreality.com/2017/06/06/the-us-removed-two-aircraft-carrier-off-the-coast-of-the-dprk/

THE US REMOVED TWO AIRCRAFT CARRIER OFF THE COAST OF THE DPRK
June 6, 2017 World

Two US Navy aircraft carrier left the sea of Japan. On Tuesday, June 6, according to TV channel NHK with reference to the representative of the Pentagon.

In the official in the us military announced that the ships of the “Carl Vinson” (USS Carl Vinson) and “Ronald Reagan” (USS Ronald Reagan) went after the three-day exercise, which took place in the area last week. It is known that the “Carl Vinson” is directed to the place of their permanent home in San Diego (California).

However, the Pentagon has said it will continue to monitor the situation on the Korean Peninsula, and stands ready to respond flexibly to changing situations.

More at the link.
 

Lilbitsnana

On TB every waking moment
He won't give them up and if they think he would, then they are stupid.


posted for fair use and discussion
http://english.yonhapnews.co.kr/northkorea/2017/06/09/39/0401000000AEN20170609000300315F.html

U.S. experts call for peace treaty with N. Korea to encourage Pyongyang to denuclearize

2017/06/09 03:46

WASHINGTON, June 8 (Yonhap) -- The United States should consider concluding a peace treaty with North Korea without preconditions in order to encourage the communist nation to give up its nuclear programs, a former U.S. diplomat and an expert suggested Thursday.

James Dobbins, a former assistant secretary of state, and Jeffrey Hornung, a political scientist at the RAND Corp., made the case in a joint op-ed piece in the New York Times, saying it's important to assure the North's leader that he won't end up like Saddam Hussein of Iraq or Muammar el-Qaddafi of Libya.

"Successive American presidents have insisted on a number of preconditions before any serious peace negotiations could start, including a commitment to denuclearization and the halting of further missile tests," the experts said.

"But North Korea's supreme leader, Kim Jong-un, is unlikely to agree to give up his country's nuclear and missile programs without receiving convincing assurances that he will not suffer the fate of Saddam Hussein of Iraq or Muammar el-Qaddafi of Libya," they added.

A peace treaty formally ending the Korean War, including American recognition of the government in Pyongyang and an opening of diplomatic relations, is an essential component of such assurance, they said.

They also cited as an example the United States' 1974 establishment of an embassy in East Germany while continuing to regard West Germany as the sole legitimate successor government of the historical German state and of a future reunified Germany.

"One can imagine using similarly creative ideas in a peace treaty to bridge some of the differences between the two Koreas," they said.

U.S. officials should be considering what would make an agreement work, such as what governments would participate and how an agreement would be verified and enforced, they said.

"The complete dismantling of North Korea's nuclear weapons and missile programs should remain Washington's ultimate objective. Standing ready to formally end the old war may be the key to getting there without starting a new one," the said.

jschang@yna.co.kr

(END)
 

Lilbitsnana

On TB every waking moment
Noon in Korea‏ @NoonInKorea 11m11 minutes ago

SK experts think NK's anti-ship missiles have "waypoint" features which increase accuracy & make evasion difficult


Noon in Korea‏ @NoonInKorea 6m6 minutes ago
Replying to @NoonInKorea

The missiles fired from Wonsan are thought to have performed circular flights before zooming in on the pre-identified target on East Sea.



Noon in Korea‏ @NoonInKorea 2m2 minutes ago
Replying to @NoonInKorea

Those circular-pattern flights show that the missiles have "waypoint coordinates," which enable targeting objects shielded by obstructions



Noon in Korea‏ @NoonInKorea 9m9 minutes ago
Replying to @NoonInKorea

Examples are vessels hiding behind islands or structures built on mountain sides. This greatly increases the "functionality" of missiles.


Noon in Korea‏ @NoonInKorea 7m7 minutes ago
Replying to @NoonInKorea

They could theoretically target SK vessels below the NLL, if deployed on the western shore. Since they fly at low altitudes (50-100 meters),


Noon in Korea‏ @NoonInKorea 2m2 minutes ago
Replying to @NoonInKorea

detecting them with Aegis Spy-1D or land-based ballistic missile radars, let alone shooting them down, will be difficult.


Noon in Korea‏ @NoonInKorea 8m8 minutes ago
Replying to @NoonInKorea

"The flight pattern of this missile is different. It's like an airliner with a jet engine that zooms in on a target"



Noon in Korea‏ @NoonInKorea 35s35 seconds ago

NK seems to have revamped its KN-01 missiles & turned them into land-based anti-ship missiles w "waypoint" features
 

Housecarl

On TB every waking moment
He won't give them up and if they think he would, then they are stupid.


posted for fair use and discussion
http://english.yonhapnews.co.kr/northkorea/2017/06/09/39/0401000000AEN20170609000300315F.html

U.S. experts call for peace treaty with N. Korea to encourage Pyongyang to denuclearize

2017/06/09 03:46

WASHINGTON, June 8 (Yonhap) -- The United States should consider concluding a peace treaty with North Korea without preconditions in order to encourage the communist nation to give up its nuclear programs, a former U.S. diplomat and an expert suggested Thursday.

James Dobbins, a former assistant secretary of state, and Jeffrey Hornung, a political scientist at the RAND Corp., made the case in a joint op-ed piece in the New York Times, saying it's important to assure the North's leader that he won't end up like Saddam Hussein of Iraq or Muammar el-Qaddafi of Libya.

"Successive American presidents have insisted on a number of preconditions before any serious peace negotiations could start, including a commitment to denuclearization and the halting of further missile tests," the experts said.

"But North Korea's supreme leader, Kim Jong-un, is unlikely to agree to give up his country's nuclear and missile programs without receiving convincing assurances that he will not suffer the fate of Saddam Hussein of Iraq or Muammar el-Qaddafi of Libya," they added.

A peace treaty formally ending the Korean War, including American recognition of the government in Pyongyang and an opening of diplomatic relations, is an essential component of such assurance, they said.

They also cited as an example the United States' 1974 establishment of an embassy in East Germany while continuing to regard West Germany as the sole legitimate successor government of the historical German state and of a future reunified Germany.

"One can imagine using similarly creative ideas in a peace treaty to bridge some of the differences between the two Koreas," they said.

U.S. officials should be considering what would make an agreement work, such as what governments would participate and how an agreement would be verified and enforced, they said.

"The complete dismantling of North Korea's nuclear weapons and missile programs should remain Washington's ultimate objective. Standing ready to formally end the old war may be the key to getting there without starting a new one," the said.

jschang@yna.co.kr

(END)

They're going to try everything possible to chill out the peninsula, which at the same time in removing the crisis allows everyone to get on with actual business.

A peace treaty also leaves Beijing without something they can screw with everyone else with plausible deniability. Anything they pull after that comes back right on them.
 
Top