Japan may have no choice but to shoot down the next North Korean missile test

moon2012 said:
Aren't you the buffoon who thinks that 4 year old UN Resolutions don't count ? Yeppers- that's you.

Incidentally- the term ' Korean peninsular ' relates to both north and south. Now fuck off like I told you.
Click to expand...

afraid you have me confused with some one else......I have never discussed UN resolutions with you, nor do I give a fuck.......I have only pointed out that you are making shit up and everyone here knows it........I believe what you meant to say was that Korean peninsula relates to EITHER the north or the south and if it had been the north the news would have been full of it.........since it wasn't, you're the only one full of it......
 
PostmodernProphet said:
afraid you have me confused with some one else......I have never discussed UN resolutions with you, nor do I give a fuck.......I have only pointed out that you are making shit up and everyone here knows it........I believe what you meant to say was that Korean peninsula relates to EITHER the north or the south and if it had been the north the news would have been full of it.........since it wasn't, you're the only one full of it......
Click to expand...

The Korean peninsular is a singular term- and your particular news trough would never make a point of highlighting national criminality abroad. Quite the opposite.
 
moon2012 said:
Sorry, but no. Dump the law and we're all fucked. Those in power would quickly have us behaving like North Korean news announcers.
The law must be respected particularly when it doesn't suit your own interests.
Click to expand...
I don't know if the "law" is limited to 12 miles when it comes to ICBMs!! :rolleyes:
I would think that's a pretty weird reading of limited airspace sovereignty.

It's a moot point. The UN is passing resolutions condemning NK
 
moon2012 said:
The Korean peninsular is a singular term-
Click to expand...

sure.....and on it are two counties......why do you insist n lying about which one the South Korean and US bombers flew over......tell you what, I will admit you are right if you find even one news source that says they flew over North Korea.....
 
noise said:
I don't know if the "law" is limited to 12 miles when it comes to ICBMs!! :rolleyes:
I would think that's a pretty weird reading of limited airspace sovereignty.

It's a moot point. The UN is passing resolutions condemning NK
Click to expand...

Kim certainly has confidence in the legality of the launches- and rightly so according to the internationally accepted definition of what constitutes a country's airspace. It would be enlightening to know what the North Koreans say at the UN, but it's not reported here other than ' We do not intend to stop our tests ' - and that is generally reported in monstrous terms.

Are passing satellites violations of airspace ? Not according to the law- yet they are just as crucial to nuclear attack as any physical ICBM . No country can claim ' existential threat ' from a missile 350 miles up and on a trajectory to land far, far away in the sea. Such trajectories are, of course, immediately plotted . It was a total nonsense for Japan to sound warning sirens. The thread title is also a nonsense.

Also- the NK missiles are not armed and they are tests, nothing more. They could easily be passed off as components of NK's space program but they are presented as ICBMs in the face of the constant threats against that state from the US. I don't doubt for a second that the Chinese could have steered all of this in a sensible direction if not for the interferences- on the other side of the world- from a Washington driven by the military/industrial complex. That's the Chinese viewpoint.
 
Last edited:
PostmodernProphet said:
sure.....and on it are two counties......why do you insist n lying about which one the South Korean and US bombers flew over......tell you what, I will admit you are right if you find even one news source that says they flew over North Korea.....
Click to expand...

They are plentiful and , of course, they are recorded complaints by North Korea. The earliest I have found dates from the 1980s- and no doubt you will be familiar with the occasions where NK has actually captured US airmen in their territory.
You'd like to think that ' America right, foreigners wrong '. Ain't gonna happen now that the free Internet is here.

You can apologize for calling me a liar when you come to your senses, dimwit.

Also, reports of US bombers flying over ' the Korean peninsular ' are deliberately ambiguous , the Korean peninsular being a singular term.
 
moon2012 said:
Kim certainly has confidence in the legality of the launches- and rightly so according to the internationally accepted definition of what constitutes a country's airspace. It would be enlightening to know what the North Koreans say at the UN, but it's not reported here other than ' We do not intend to stop our tests ' - and that is generally reported in monstrous terms.

Are passing satellites violations of airspace ? Not according to the law- yet they are just as crucial to nuclear attack as any physical ICBM . No country can claim ' existential threat ' from a missile 350 miles up and on a trajectory to land far, far away in the sea. Such trajectories are, of course, immediately plotted . It was a total nonsense for Japan to sound warning sirens. The thread title is also a nonsense.

Also- the NK missiles are not armed and they are tests, nothing more. They could easily be passed off as components of NK's space program but they are presented as ICBMs in the face of the constant threats against that state from the US. I don't doubt for a second that the Chinese could have steered all of this in a sensible direction if not for the interferences- on the other side of the world- from a Washington driven by the military/industrial complex. That's the Chinese viewpoint.
Click to expand...
you are way too lenient on NK.China has many reasons for not wanting to interfere as well.

How do we know which missile is not armed and which isn't? Everything looks like have nuke miniturization-
the problem for them is re-entry for ICBM's..

Put yourself in Japan's place; would you be arguing some off tangent legality?

and as far as I know killer satellites are deployed yet, but even then they are by nature in a permanent orbit-
which is not the case with a flyover
 
moon2012 said:
They are plentiful and , of course, they are recorded complaints by North Korea. The earliest I have found dates from the 1980s- and no doubt you will be familiar with the occasions where NK has actually captured US airmen in their territory.
You'd like to think that ' America right, foreigners wrong '. Ain't gonna happen now that the free Internet is here.

You can apologize for calling me a liar when you come to your senses, dimwit.

Also, reports of US bombers flying over ' the Korean peninsular ' are deliberately ambiguous , the Korean peninsular being a singular term.
Click to expand...

the only one you need to document is the recent one you were lying about.......
 
noise said:
I don't know if the "law" is limited to 12 miles when it comes to ICBMs!! :rolleyes:
I would think that's a pretty weird reading of limited airspace sovereignty.

It's a moot point. The UN is passing resolutions condemning NK
Click to expand...

Especially as it was unannounced, could have had a nuclear warhead and if it failed, like so many of it predecessors, landed on Japanese soil. Ignore anything that Moontwat says the only ones allowed an opinion are the South Koreans and Japan. I am beginning to sense that they may very well decide to lance the boil once and for all.
 
Last edited:
noise said:
I don't know if the "law" is limited to 12 miles when it comes to ICBMs!! :rolleyes:
I would think that's a pretty weird reading of limited airspace sovereignty.

It's a moot point. The UN is passing resolutions condemning NK
Click to expand...

You remember the USSR shot down our U-2 spy plane in the 60's at very high altitude. It was considered justifiable.
 
So, are the LWNJ's still ignoring the President's caveat ... that he won't act militarily without South Korea's blessings. That seems to have been edited out of their narrative.
 
Bigdog said:
You remember the USSR shot down our U-2 spy plane in the 60's at very high altitude. It was considered justifiable.
Click to expand...
well it was espionage. Countries are supposed to be able to counter espionage.
The U2 wasn't an existential threat either..don't forget the purpose of these tests.

I hope we/Japan start using ABM systems on these
 
noise said:
it's a ridiculous proposition that NK's missiles are legitimate/legal firings over Japan
Click to expand...

I cannot understand why you take Moontwat seriously. There is no international agreement regarding international airspace. Some consider the Kármán line, set at 100 kms, to be the edge of space but that's it.
 
Last edited:
noise said:
well it was espionage. Countries are supposed to be able to counter espionage.
The U2 wasn't an existential threat either..don't forget the purpose of these tests.

I hope we/Japan start using ABM systems on these
Click to expand...

The U2 was replaced by satellites and no one is trying to shoot them down. But the argument was not about "mission", but rather who owns the airspace, and how far up does that right extend.

Once the ABMs are used, counter measures to them will be developed.
 
Japan WON'T fire at an unarmed missile.

This is more Trump stupidity.

.. and no, South Koreans won't fight Trump's war either.
 
Bigdog said:
The U2 was replaced by satellites and no one is trying to shoot them down. But the argument was not about "mission", but rather who owns the airspace, and how far up does that right extend.

Once the ABMs are used, counter measures to them will be developed.
Click to expand...
there is only so much an ICBM can do as a "counter-measure" -i don't think it can even release chaff.
Our ABM systems are getting better - I think Japan has some too ( besides basic Aegis)

what are you trying to say? the U2 was over 12 miles up? I don't follow your logic
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top