1
   

N. Korea: U.S. attack will be met with 'annihilating strike'

 
 
Reply Mon 3 Jul, 2006 12:02 pm
N. Korea: U.S. attack will be met with 'annihilating strike'

7/3/2006

SEOUL (AP) - North Korea would respond to a pre-emptive U.S. military attack with an "annihilating strike and a nuclear war," the state-run media said Monday, heightening anti-U.S. rhetoric amid close scrutiny of its missile program.

The Korean Central News Agency, citing an unidentified Rodong Sinmun newspaper "analyst," accused the United States of increasing military pressure on the isolated communist state and basing new spy planes on the Korean Peninsula.

The North Korean threat of retaliation, which is often voiced by its state-controlled media, comes amid U.S. official reports that Pyongyang has shown signs of preparing for a test of a long-range missile. North Korea claims it has the right to such a launch.

On Friday, Pyongyang accused the United States of driving the situation on the Korean Peninsula "to the brink of war," and said it is fully prepared to counter any U.S. aggression.

Monday's report accused Washington of escalating military pressure on the country with war exercises, a massive arms buildup and aerial espionage by basing new spy planes in South Korea.

"This is a grave military provocation and blackmail to the DPRK, being an indication that the U.S. is rapidly pushing ahead in various fields with the extremely dangerous war moves," the dispatch said.

"The army and people of the DPRK are now in full preparedness to answer a pre-emptive attack with a relentless annihilating strike and a nuclear war with a mighty nuclear deterrent," the report said.

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

White House spokesman Tony Snow refused to respond to what he called ''a hypothetical situation.''

''It is a statement about what may happen if something that hasn't happened happened, if you follow my drift,'' he said.

North Korea routinely accuses the U.S. of aerial espionage, issuing a tally of such flights at the end of every month. The U.S. military doesn't comment, although it acknowledges monitoring North Korean military activity.

Washington and Japan have said in recent weeks that spy satellite images show North Korea has taken steps to prepare a long-range Taepodong-2 missile for a test-launch.

Estimates for the range of the missile vary widely, but at least one U.S. study said it could be able to reach parts of the United States with a light payload.

Speculation that Pyongyang could fire the missile has waned in recent days since the country's top ally and a major source of its energy supplies, China, reportedly urged North Korea not to go ahead with the test.

A news report said Monday that China has offered a new proposal over the stalled six-party talks on North Korea's nuclear program.

Chinese State Councilor Tang Jiaxuan told Ichiro Ozawa, the head of Japan's main opposition party, that China had relayed the proposal to Japan, the two Koreas, the United States and Russia, Kyodo News agency reported, citing party officials.

The report did not elaborate on the proposal. An opposition party spokesman in Tokyo could not be reached for comment.

Ozawa is in Beijing for a six-day stay that party officials hope will include a meeting with Chinese President Hu Jintao, according to Kyodo.

Meanwhile, a South Korean government official said Seoul is considering buying U.S. shipborne SM-2 missiles to bolster its missile-defense system.

The move is the latest by South Korea and Japan to strengthen their defenses amid signs of the North Korean missile test. Seoul announced last week the purchase of Patriot interceptor missiles from Germany.

SM-2 missiles, however, are reportedly effective against cruise missiles and at striking aircraft but would not be able to hit a long-range missile.

"I understand that we have requested information" on the missiles for purchase, said Park Sung-soo, an official at the Defense Acquisition Program Administration, without elaborating.

The U.S. Defense Security Cooperation Agency notified Congress of the possible sale last week, according to its website. The order would be for 48 SM-2 Block IIIB tactical standard missiles and associated equipment and training.

The agency estimated the cost at $111 million.

South Korea would use the missiles to defend its new KDX-III Aegis destroyer, and already uses SM-2 Block IIIA missiles in its ship combat systems, the agency said. The prime contractor will be Raytheon Systems Company of Tucson, the agency said.

In early June, the Pentagon notified Congress that the U.S. could sell Japan nine upgraded SM-3 missiles and related equipment for use on their Aegis destroyers. The price tag was put at up to $438 million.

Japan already has four Aegis destroyers operating with SM-2 missiles, and two more are under construction, the Pentagon said.

Last week, officials said that South Korea had notified Germany of its interest in buying Patriot interceptor missiles, with the aim of replacing its outdated Nike-Hercules missiles by 2010.

The Nike-Hercules missiles have served as South Korea's main anti-aircraft weapons for some 40 years, but the Patriot missiles are more advanced at intercepting and destroying incoming ballistic missiles, cruise missiles and enemy aircraft.

South Korea's military as yet has no Patriots, although some are already deployed on U.S. bases in the country, where about 29,500 U.S. troops are stationed as a deterrent against communist North Korea.

usatoday
  • Topic Stats
  • Top Replies
  • Link to this Topic
Type: Discussion • Score: 1 • Views: 393 • Replies: 7
No top replies

 
Brandon9000
 
  1  
Reply Mon 3 Jul, 2006 12:13 pm
Yes, it's a good thing we never let Iraq get to this point.
0 Replies
 
paull
 
  1  
Reply Mon 3 Jul, 2006 12:50 pm
North Korea will never get anywhere until they change the name of their capitol.
0 Replies
 
Asherman
 
  1  
Reply Mon 3 Jul, 2006 12:54 pm
DPRK Steps Up the Heat Again

U.S. forces were ready to conduct a pre-emptive strike on the DPRK nuclear facilities when President Clinton ordered a stand-down. Rather than risk resumption of combat operations in the Korean War, he struck a deal with the DPRK. They promised that they would aboandon their efforts to produce a nuclear weapon (stop enriching uranium, etc.), and return would recieve food, fuel and technology from the U.S., Japan, and ROK. The food and fuel was diverted to the North Korean Army and Political elites, while the people continued to starve. Nuclear research never slowed down, and the nuclear weapons program merely went under cover. The opportunity to remove the capability of the DPRK of ever launching a nuclear attack was lost forever.

The DPRK has pursued a similar course of action in developing missile delivery systems. They began with obsolete Russian designs and are now producing much improved SCUDs in large numbers. Some have been sold to countries in Southwest Asia, like DPRK's partner Iran. They test fired a missile over Japan back in 1998, but have only recently shown interest in testing the TD-2. That missile should be, and is, a matter of concern for nations even outside East Asia.

The test missile has been on the pad now for well over two weeks. There were reports that fueling had begun Wednesday or Tuesday week before last. If that is so, the corrosive effects of liquid rocket fuel may cause this test to be scrubed. Unloading liquid fuel from a missile is a touchy business. If the fueling reports were inaccurate, or if the fuel was quickly removed from the tanks, the test might still happen. I'm unsure how long it would take the DPRK to fully fuel the TD-2.

Brandon said, "Yes, it's a good thing we never let Iraq get to this point" in response to todays report that the DPRK threatens nuclear war if the outisde world interferes with them. I suppose the inference is that the U.S. is chomping at the bit to attack DPRK missile and nuclear weapons facilities, but is constrained by fear of nuclear retaliation. LOL. The DPRK will fire the first shot, and we shall fire the last.

The real lesson isn't Iraq in any case, its Iran and its nuclear weapons program that is today about where the DPRK was back when President Clinton decided to 'buy them off". Iran is no more trustworthy than their buddies on the Korean Peninsula, and they are truly more dangerous to world peace and stability. Even so, it is likely that Iran will be unhampered in its effort to develop a nuclear arsenal capable of attacking Israel specifically, and to blackmail every other nation in the region.
0 Replies
 
Bi-Polar Bear
 
  1  
Reply Mon 3 Jul, 2006 01:27 pm
Brandon9000 wrote:
Yes, it's a good thing we never let Iraq get to this point.


Yes, your hero, like all schoolyard bullies, only picks fights with people he's sure he can whip. Good thing he's got all you sycophants to back him up right? Oh wait I forgot you can support , want and approve of the war but you don't have to take part in it. 'scuse.

Laughing Laughing you guys slay me.
0 Replies
 
freedom4free
 
  1  
Reply Mon 3 Jul, 2006 01:43 pm
Yeah Brandon9000, Sadam could have modernize these warheads... Laughing

Lucky we found these deadly WMD's, now we should destroy them.

http://www.cia.gov/cia/reports/iraq_wmd_2004/images/ch5_anxB_img19.jpg
0 Replies
 
Asherman
 
  1  
Reply Mon 3 Jul, 2006 01:59 pm
I don't think Brandon's hero is, or was, Saddam. Saddam might have thought the United States would never dare actually follow through on its commitment to enforce the Cease Fire Conditions. Well, Saddam was wrong, and those who today see him and Iraq as victims, if not heros, are also wrong.

Of course, you may believe that the DPRK and Iran would have been invaded already if they didn't have the ability to threaten nuclear war. The only thing keeping President Bush from occupying the Russia, France, Britain, Pakistan, India and China is their nuclear arsenals. Perhaps the United States only supports those warmongering Israelis is out of fear of the Israeli Bomb.
0 Replies
 
old europe
 
  1  
Reply Mon 3 Jul, 2006 04:03 pm
Brandon9000 wrote:
Yes, it's a good thing we never let Iraq get to this point.


You, Brandon, and who else?

Funny.

You know, I've always thought it was thanks to the UN sanctions that Saddam didn't have any long-range missiles by the time the US decided to wage war on Iraq...
0 Replies
 
 

Related Topics

Obama '08? - Discussion by sozobe
Let's get rid of the Electoral College - Discussion by Robert Gentel
McCain's VP: - Discussion by Cycloptichorn
Food Stamp Turkeys - Discussion by H2O MAN
The 2008 Democrat Convention - Discussion by Lash
McCain is blowing his election chances. - Discussion by McGentrix
Snowdon is a dummy - Discussion by cicerone imposter
TEA PARTY TO AMERICA: NOW WHAT?! - Discussion by farmerman
 
  1. Forums
  2. » N. Korea: U.S. attack will be met with 'annihilating strike'
Copyright © 2024 MadLab, LLC :: Terms of Service :: Privacy Policy :: Page generated in 0.04 seconds on 09/28/2024 at 07:22:37