Bush warns Canada could be a target of North Korean missiles

[Canadian.Trucker]

Bomark + DEW line = winning combination  Let's bring it back old school.

Perhaps placing a system such as what the Aegis cruisers have on our Frigates/Destroyers would be a possibility.  If I remember correctly the Aegis had limited success in intercepting some missiles.

Failing that, trained sharks with lasers.

Throw me a frickin' bone? ;D

 

[CanadaPhil]

  that is the whole point! They can't aim the missiles! They don't have any contol over them, so they can land anywhere! Whether they intend to hit Vancouver or London, England, they have no control over the missile system. THAT is the threat to us. The fact that we share a border with a nation they have threatened to attack, and to do it with a missile that cannot be aimed. You trackin' now?

Yes THAT is the point.

The article noted in the first post misrepresented Bush's comments entirely. I watched the press conference live yesterday.

What Bush was in fact saying was that the missiles could malfunction and hit Canada, so it would be in our interests to at least revisit the whole idea of missile defence if the government chose to.

 

[CanadaPhil]

And oh yeah..... No we DO NOT have any means of defending against a missile attack (Except of course what NORAD can provide)

ADATS is virtually useless at countering missiles.

It is intended for local area air defence and as a last resort? against armoured forces. I believe the effective range is about 10km and we have less than 40 of them.

 

[xenobard]

We could purchase a few F35's when they come out, one variation thereof is said to be equiped with particle / high-powered laser beam weapons.  These could take out ICBMs, couldn't they?

 

[Centurian1985]

That is the whole point! They can't aim the missiles! They don't have any contol over them, so they can land anywhere! Whether they intend to hit Vancouver or London, England, they have no control over the missile system. THAT is the threat to us. The fact that we share a border with a nation they have threatened to attack, and to do it with a missile that cannot be aimed. You trackin' now?

I'm trackin' now!  My apologies, I saw the posts as a knee-jerk reaction to a tin-pot dictator.    

In that case, you are looking at a distance of about 8,000 km that can be traversed in about 25 minutes by a modern ICBM, probably about 30-35 minutes for a less dynamic system that NK is developing, with the final rate of descent (the last 100 km) at about 4 km/s.  

For an interum solution, there is a base at Comox that, if occupied by by CF-18's armed with AAM's, and given enough notice, could knock the system out (low chance of success).  A Canadian frigate armed with short-range SAMs could be used to intercept within the final 25 km of flight, if in the right position and receiving real-time tracking information (slightly better chance of success).

However, travelling at about +/-14,000 kmh still makes it a hard target ot hit.  Best option for a long-term solution would be the purchase of a 4 x mobile Patriot missile systems.  Although it's success rate has been debated, it is still reputed to be the best Western ABM system.  

The problem here is not the solution but the chain of command and associated actions.  Effective engagement would require a) authorization to fire from the Prime Minister (or rep) within 25 minutes of launch notification, b) clearance of all air traffic from the missile approach corridor within 25 minutes of launch, c) an emergency message system warning all occupants of the southwest BC region to take cover (to avoid either being hit by the missile if missed by our assets, or to avoid being hit by missile fragmens if hit by our assets), and d) if you have this ABM system, a guarded exclusion area to prevent local anti-arms groups from interfering with unit activities during an emergency (if you think BC groups were bad before, wait until you install an ABM unit!).  

 

[Centurian1985]

Oh and umm 1950's we did help stop their invasion of South Korea, and I'm sure Kim Jong IL has very good history teachers even if that history is skewed. I'm pretty sure he may not have uttered an open threat but I highly doubt were not on his hit list. 

Yes, I know we were there, the most prominent reminder is the PPCLI Kapyong battle honor.  However, the NK's are fixated on who's there now, which is the US. 

Kinda like "well if I miss the US and I hit Canada meh samething they screwed us too!" 

Yes, I agree with that!

 

[Armymatters]

I am actually wondering about the flight characteristics of the North Korean long range ICBMs. If they fly in any way how a Scud does (erratically), it may be very difficult, if not impossible to even track the missile, let alone aim another missile at it. The Americans are testing their ABM on decommed ICBMs of their own design, which have excellent flight characteristics and are stable aerodynamically. I wonder about the efficacy of the ABM against such less aerodynamically stable missiles. Food for thought.

 

[tamouh]

Looking at the results of N.K missile tests, I find the whole argument unnecessary.

Is N.K. a threat to Canada? No

Could N.K. become a potential threat to Canada? Possibly if China and Russia provides them with the technology and material to manufacture long range missiles.

The fact their "new" and "long-range" missile fell off after 30 secs shows how ill designed and poorly constructed the missile.

I'm more concerned about China and Russia providing more advanced weaponry technology to bully the west than anything else. But the whole concept of N.K. hitting Canada/USA with its current weapon system is impossible (unless they aim for the moon and the rocket left overs fall over Canada).

The old say goes.....hope for peace and prepare for war!

 

[Armymatters]

Looking at the results of N.K missile tests, I find the whole argument unnecessary.

Is N.K. a threat to Canada? No

Could N.K. become a potential threat to Canada? Possibly if China and Russia provides them with the technology and material to manufacture long range missiles.

The fact their "new" and "long-range" missile fell off after 30 secs shows how ill designed and poorly constructed the missile.

I'm more concerned about China and Russia providing more advanced weaponry technology to bully the west than anything else. But the whole concept of N.K. hitting Canada/USA with its current weapon system is impossible (unless they aim for the moon and the rocket left overs fall over Canada).

The old say goes.....hope for peace and prepare for war!

I don't think we have to worry about the Chinese in this matter. In fact, their patience with North Korea is wearing thin, and they want the issue resolved as soon as possible to get back to normal. The Chinese know that a lot more stakes are involved than when they initially got involved in the Korean War, as the North Koreans can turn on THEM. That is why they are party to the Six-Party talks, they don't want the North Koreans in possession of nuclear weapons, as it threatens them as well. They also have already stated that if Korean War II breaks out, they will not get involved.

 

[FormerHorseGuard]

The North Korean missiles are not exactly perfected to launch and hit a single target with any certainly of hitting intended target. Sort of reminds me of the V1 and V2 rockets of the Germans during WW 2 . They knew they could hit England with some certainly, but could not pinpoint where the rockets were going to hit, city, block, or even the right city, just knew it would hit some where on English Soil, that was enough to scare some people who lived on the soil that  might be targeted or just hit by accident or luck ( bad luck is still luck.

During the Cold War we all knew if the Russian launched the missiles at the USA some of the missiles were going to come down on Canadian  soil. Slim to none chances that  all Missiles launched at the USA would make it that far. Even today  with GPS and other targetting software there are still some misses.  Does anyone think that missile aimed at Washington State or Alaska might not fall short or just end up flying a few 100 Km north or south depending on target and hit Canada?

I am not too worried that the people in power in North Korea will launch a missile at Canada but they  might launch one at the USA and miss the intended target, fall short or go long depending how good of a target software they are running. Crazy people with missiles who are in need of goods and service, hard cash and other items just might trade with people who have the hard cash, the goods and services required by the first crazy person. Then more crazy people have missiles that is the scary part to me.

Money Talks and Missiles Walks? Do not have to hit intended targets just have to be there.  How many  countries already have North Korean weapons and goods? What else would North Korea supply  for cash and goods to the wrong buyers? They are working on the BOMB, if they have the people to create that, a good missile is not too far away afterwards.

 

[paracowboy]

tamouh,
I'm curious. Is there ANY tyrannical government or terrorist organization you aren't willing to apologize for, or offer appeasement to?

 

[tamouh]

I'm curious. Is there ANY tyrannical government or terrorist organization you aren't willing to apologize for, or offer appeasement to?

Seriously I'm not. I despise tyrannical regimes. Yet, I see things from a different view than many on this forum. I'm not a fan of wars and sanctions simply because it only affects the working class. Tyrants careless about their people. isn't that why they are tyrants in the first place ? On the other view, you've to make sacrifices to achieve your objective. So it is a double edged sword.

back to NK, my humble opinion says , the US should have let Gen. McArthur finish that war and save us all the headaches. Yet, you may never know how the North Koreans and their communist neighbours would have influenced the new N.K. afterwards.

 

[George Wallace]

Looking at the results of N.K missile tests, I find the whole argument unnecessary.

Is N.K. a threat to Canada? No

Could N.K. become a potential threat to Canada? Possibly if China and Russia provides them with the technology and material to manufacture long range missiles.

The fact their "new" and "long-range" missile fell off after 30 secs shows how ill designed and poorly constructed the missile.

I have to question your logic on this.  Is N.K. a threat to Canada?  Of course it is!  If we follow your argument that these are ill designed and poorly constructed missiles, then even more so.  The shortest distance to the US would be over the Arctic and Canada.  If these missiles are so poor in quality, you can rest assured they are likely to land in parts of Canada.  What payloads will they carry?  Nuclear?  Biological?  Chemical?  Any of which is still a threat.

As too those missiles falling off after 30 seconds, don't be an idiot.  They may have planned it that way, after gaining all the data they needed in the first 30 seconds of flight.  Do you honestly think that they would have tested these missiles by actually have them impact in continental North America?  As Korea has a very limited 'Air Space', they can not reasonably 'invade' another nation's 'Air Space'.

 

[tamouh]

As too those missiles falling off after 30 seconds, don't be an idiot.  They may have planned it that way, after gaining all the data they needed in the first 30 seconds of flight.  Do you honestly think that they would have tested these missiles by actually have them impact in continental North America?  As Korea has a very limited 'Air Space', they can not reasonably 'invade' another nation's 'Air Space'.

They already do invade other nations air space, what do you think the Japanese are complaining about ? These are flying over Japan and landing in the sea. I also largely doubt NK intentionally crashed their missile after 30s, that means the missile have travelled shorter distance than any of their other short-range missiles.

 

[Kat Stevens]

30 secs of real time telemetry from a missile in flight is a hunormous amount of useful data for rocket surgeons to use in further research.

 

[George Wallace]

They already do invade other nations air space, what do you think the Japanese are complaining about ? These are flying over Japan and landing in the sea. I also largely doubt NK intentionally crashed their missile after 30s, that means the missile have travelled shorter distance than any of their other short-range missiles.

???

They have short-range missiles that travel farther?

"Intentionally crashed"?  Were they supposed to be landed somewhere?  Were they supposed to remain in orbit?  Were they supposed to be retrieved by the Space Patrol?  What do you mean by "Intentionally crashed"?  What do you expect that a missile would do?

They test fired several missiles.  They got lots of telemetry.  As you pointed out, they flew these over Japan.  They are a threat.

 

[tamouh]

They test fired several missiles.  They got lots of telemetry.  As you pointed out, they flew these over Japan.  They are a threat.

I see your point...

 

[GAP]

Just so we are talking about the right missiles...here is a pic of NK's & Irans missile compliment found at:
http://www.globalsecurity.org/wmd/world/dprk/missile.htm

 

[Enzo]

Let's just invest in a few Boeing 747-400F Airborne LASER systems, keep one in the air at all times on the west coast with another on :30 alert and a third in maintenance rotation.

Should prove effective against one incoming ICBM. Anyone have any idea as to the costs associated with this program?

Or, we could continue diplomatic pressure on the NK regime from one side; encouraging political, economical and social incentives on the other.

 

[HDE]

I'd imagine the cost to Canada of siding with the U.S. on some sort of missile defence program, at least in monetary terms,  would be pretty minimal; they'll spend whatever is required.  What the U.S. is likely after is some sort of co-operation in terms of basing, research, etc. and, more importantly, a show of solidarity.  The Chretien/Martin Liberals made it a point of sniping constantly at the U.S. administration and I believe that fostered considerable concern over just how reliable an ally we'd become, at least at the political level.