NoKos not so Long Dong

Questions asked on LST this Am regarding Kim Jong Il's Dong ca n be answered here:

First off, Kim Jong Il doesn't have a Dong. It's NoDong…which is the same thing.

The hype kicked into high gear when the New York Times claimed that the Norks "completed fueling a long-range ballistic missile" over the weekend. But the report is getting fishier by the second. The Norks generally rely on a highly corrosive gasoline-kerosene mix for their missile fuel, and an oxidizer containing nitric acid. It's nasty, metal-eating stuff. And once fueled up, the missile has to be launched quickly — two or three days, I've been told — or else the missile is basically ruined.It's now been four days. And there's been no launch. Which means it's becoming increasingly unlikely that a missile has been fueled. So much for Perry's demand "to strike the [missile] if North Korea refuses to drain the fuel out."

And, of course, there may not be an ICBM at all. Remember, the North Koreans have launched exactly one intermediate-range ballistic missile, in 1998. The thing — a combination of smaller, Nodong and Scud missiles — went about 2,000 km or so. Now, U.S. intelligence assumes the Norks have been working on strapping together more Nodongs and Scuds (or, at least, their engines) for an ICBM — something that can reach three to five times further, and hit the U.S. But no one has actually seen the weapon. Even how many the stages the mystery missile has in unknown; some folks say two, others say three.

Published in: on June 23, 2006 at 5:41 pm  Comments (15)  

The URI to TrackBack this entry is:

RSS feed for comments on this post.

15 CommentsLeave a comment

  1. I doubt the news all the time. I wonder some times why a people who defeated Nazi Germany and Imperial Japan at the same time, and a people who beat the Soviet Union for hegemony would be afraid of pissants like the DPRK, Iraq or Iran. I wonder too why the newsies and politicans avoid evidence and facts. I mean this isn’t magic. As you mentioned a corrosive type fuel doens’t wait on politics. Neither do NBC weapons cease to degrade over time simply because a politicians will it. Thanks.

  2. I know a bit about CBR weapons, and agree with your assessment of “degrading” WMD. Ther’s a post over on MilBlogs that posits a reason why the existence of these shells has been kept secret. The Hadjis make thier IEDs out of UX arty shells, but probably lack the training to be able to tell HE from WMD and may possibly have even used some without even knowing that they had. MSM and Gummint reporting that “there are no WMD in Iraq” keeps them from trying to tell the difference.

    You and I both know that no matter how long that stuff has been in there, it still has a lethal capability…it just can’t be used as designed, that’s all. and the Sarin is packaged in a Binary Shell which makes it even that much safer for them to handle.

    I hope that now that they know this stuff is over there and there is apparently a lot of it (500 shells is NOT a small number and besepaks of much more) they won’t try taking some aprat to get at the stuff inside and spread it out in a shopping mall in Kansas at Christmas time.

  3. sarge et al,

    They knew that stuff was over there. What they found was relatively small in comparison to the tens of thousands of weapons that had been discovered/destroyed over the years.

    If this was major news and significant, then explain to me why Bush/administration has not said a word. Explain to me why defense/intelligence officials say it’s a non-story.

    Do you have any good explanations? Not conspiracy theories.

  4. Shakey;

    Read my last post again. Now, imagine the intelligence community says this:

    There are WMD shells laying around all over the place in Iraq that still contain lethal chemicals that can be used in attacks.

    WWTTD? (What Would the Terrorists Do?)

  5. sarge, with all due respect, you’re being somewhat naive. The terrorists know that these things are laying around.

    And it’s not “all over the place”. We’ve been all over the place, and yes we’ve found some caches, but the majority of them have been discovered/destroyed/dismantled.

  6. Shakey’

    No problem. You are one of those people who will never be convinced that Saddam had QWMD. I remember last year when the first of these were reported and you said “It’s only three shells.”

    Now, of course, you’re saying “It’s only 500 shells, and they are old.”

    Next you’ll be saying “Those 200 people dead in the square were killed with old ammunition, it’s no big deal.”

    Of course, if you can tell me the difference between what an 1990’s Iraqi Army HE shell and a Chemical shell is, then you can convince me that the average towelhead will be able to tell as well.

    But I bet they didin’t even bother thrying to tell the difference as long as we were saying all over the place “There’s no WMD in Iraq.”

  7. Sarge, explain to me why Bush or anyone in his adminstration is not touting this great find. Please explain that to me.

    Also, please explain to me why the defense/intelligence officials say it’s a non-story.

    Can you?

  8. Sahkes;

    I;ve explained it to you twice. If you can’t understand it now, you never will.

    Apparently our mind is completely closed, or you have been brainwashed not to see anything logical.

    We don’t make it public knowledge thagt there are WMD weapons in Iraq that terrorists can use.

    This makes sense to some people. But to those with Bush Derangement Syndrome, it makes no sense at all.

    But not to worry, I have another source and will post on this later today.

  9. Yes exactly, the weapons can’t be used as intended. Therefore this discovery isn’t a smoking gun. The fact remains that Saddam posed no threat to the U.S.A. and had no nuclear, chemical or biological weapons. Since the war was sold on the basis of a proximate threat, it seems reasonable at least to question the competance of the decision makers. War in the national interest is a fact of life, but war has unforseen consequences, and I would like to think our leaders know what they are doing. But I don’t. Al Qaeda, came to Iraq in the wake of our intervention. That being the case, we may want to reconsider how our interests are best served. We do no service to America by adopting sacrosanct talking points. Thanks.

  10. Noe let me get this straight:

    There is no WMD in Iraq because the WMD we found is not the WMD we were looking for.

    Got it.

  11. sarge, you finally get it. We did not go into Iraq based upon these weapons that were found. We knew they were there already!

    The weapons that Bush said Saddam had have never been found. Even Bush has said this. Do you really need me to reference his quote?

    You’re grasping at straws with this like Santorum did. He embarrassed himself.

  12. Shakey”You completely miss my point, probably because you think you are debating a different one. Watxch for the next post and you will get it.

  13. The argument you are making is an equivocation. Saddam had no NBC weapons in his arsenal and no way to launch them against the U.S. if he did. Planes and toxic waste buried in the ground do not constitute a threat to the U.S.. Why the pants-wetting paranoia that the Saddam was about to get us? Truly,a very strange pathology.

  14. Again;

    You are debating a point I am not making. Go here:

  15. BTW;

    NBC is an acronym for Nuclear, Bilogoical, and Chemical weapons./

    Sarin and mustard are chemical weapons.

Leave a Reply

Please log in using one of these methods to post your comment: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s

%d bloggers like this: