Slashdot Mirror


North Korea Missile Launch Fails

An anonymous reader writes "Remember the Intercontinental Ballistic Missile launch by the North Koreans last night? You know, the one that went over Japan and supposedly put a 'communications satellite' into orbit. Well, according to the US Northern Command and NORAD it has been a complete and utter failure, with the second stage and payload 'falling in the Pacific.'"

25 of 609 comments (clear)

  1. ... lol. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Funny

    Fail.

    1. Re:... lol. by Wonko+the+Sane · · Score: 5, Insightful

      Unless the real goal was to prove that they can nuke Japan.

    2. Re:... lol. by bds1986 · · Score: 5, Informative

      What would the DPRK possibly benefit by nuking Japan

      Nothing. But that doesn't stop the DPRK from benefiting from having the capability to nuke Japan. The DPRK is heavily dependent on aid from the West, having a nuclear stick allows it to demand aid on far more favourable terms and remain relevant on the world stage.

      US-DPRK relations are an artifact of the cold war,

      They're like that because the DPRK still acts like the Cold War is on, with cross border skirmishes with the South every few years at least. Not to mention the fact that the Korean War never officially ended.

    3. Re:... lol. by Toonol · · Score: 5, Interesting

      They don't benefit from nuking Japan. But the benefit GREATLY by being ABLE to nuke Japan.

      Just like their ability to annihilate Seoul; it would be a suicide attack, but that doesn't stop it from keeping the entire civilized world at bay.

    4. Re:... lol. by osvenskan · · Score: 5, Insightful

      Why would any nation want to isolate itself the way the DPRK is isolated?

      Same reason they might start a war they couldn't possibly win -- because their leader is an unpredictable nutjob.

    5. Re:... lol. by timmarhy · · Score: 5, Insightful
      why would they want to indeed, the mistake is you think the DPRK are doing any analytical thinking of their own. i don't believe they would be stupid enough to attack japan. but don't make the mistake of thinking they are the victims of unfair treatment by the big bad USA just because they are communist. After all china is a communist state as well yet the USA and china have a comparitively hugs and kisses relationship.

      bottom line, is the world doesn't trust countries run by crackpot dictators, and rightly so.

      --
      If you mod me down, I will become more powerful than you can imagine....
    6. Re:... lol. by osu-neko · · Score: 5, Insightful

      Seriously, how about we stop eating the BS they feed us and doing a little analytical thinking for ourselves for a change? Anyone?

      Okay.

      Why would any nation want to isolate itself the way the DPRK is isolated?

      This question is nonsensical. It's the kind of rhetorical fodder to feed those who are incapable of actually engaging in logical analysis and thinking for themselves. Anyone who does so would immediately note that a nation cannot want anything, as it is a non-physical abstraction incapable of independent thought. Possibly you mean, "why would the leader of a nation want..." or "why would the party leadership want..." or "why would the man on the street want...", but of course the answers to all these questions are likely to be different. Making the question nonsensical forces the reader to rationalize it in their own manner, and thus causes the largest number of readers to act as if this is a sensible question, and treat what you're saying with a "yeah, man, you're right" attitude even when you're not saying anything. This is why questions like this one you're asking here are so powerful tools against people who don't actually analyze very well, they even repeat them without noticing they are contentless rhetorical tools.

      The real problem for you here is, if you actually make a sensible question out of this, no matter which way you go, it either has a sensible answer, or it's immediately obvious that it's not a relevant question. It's easy to come up with reasons why a dictator would want to isolate a country (and the DPRK is not the only example of this, see Burma, for example, or any number of isolationist regimes of many nations over the years). It's maybe not to easy to see why the man on the street would want it, but then it hardly matters what they want in a non-democratic country.

      US-DPRK relations are an artifact of the cold war,

      ...as is much of the current world power structure and even a number of nations, yes.

      ...and unlike the USSR, no state large enough to actually compete with the US emerged there, so the tiny country is being stomped on for no good reason other than for siding with the losing superpower from the twentieth century.

      ...as did a large number of countries at one time or another, which are not similarly isolated. This would indicate that the reasons for the isolation are more complex than this rather facile treatment. Without even going into details, it's apparent from even a cursory bit of logical analysis that most of what you've said here is wrong, incomplete, or meaningless (indeed, I would say the majority of what you posted was, in fact, "not even wrong").

      Reading and thinking analytically, it's actually pretty hard to form a rebuttal to what you said, since you in fact said almost nothing. You asked a bunch of questions that were mostly vague and nonsensical, but to the extent you did say or at least imply anything, it would appear to be poorly thought out or ill-informed.

      --
      "Convictions are more dangerous enemies of truth than lies."
    7. Re:... lol. by dragonturtle69 · · Score: 5, Informative

      Ummm, you're off by a decade or two if you think the kidnapping stuff comes from Bush.

      http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/North_Korean_abductions_of_Japanese

      There are lots of other hits too. And that isn't even beginning to touch what undercover reporter have exposed from within North Korea. Did ya know that human tastes like pork? How about opium being more profitable a crop than any grain while costing less in upkeep than the populace the grain would have fed. Ya don't think that the CIA was alone in exchanging drugs, guns, and cash, do you? How about these reporters?

      http://cbs13.com/local/north.korea.americans.2.963243.html

      Invading Iraq was a geo-polical move, possibly a bad one, but that won't be known for a few more years. North Korea, the country that invaded South Korea, is actual dangerous if you live in Japan or South Korea. Kim has successfully, and repeatedly, extorted aid and concessions by threatening his neighbors then backing off if he is just given what he demands. This was with both the Bush and Clinton administrations. Russia and China tolerate him, as he is their geo-political bishop piece.

      --
      "What luck for the rulers that men do not think." - Adolph Hitler
    8. Re:... lol. by michaelmuffin · · Score: 5, Interesting

      can you give a link that shows Japan as a protectorate of the United States of America?

      well there's the UN charter and appealing to the Security Council to take action, but more specifically there's the Treaty of Mutual Cooperation and Security

      http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Treaty_of_Mutual_Cooperation_and_Security_between_the_United_States_and_Japan:

      Under the treaty, both parties assumed an obligation to maintain and develop their capacities to resist armed attack in common and to assist each other in case of armed attack on territories under Japanese administration. It was understood, however, that Japan could not come to the defense of the United States because it was constitutionally forbidden to send armed forces overseas (Article 9).

    9. Re:... lol. by paul248 · · Score: 5, Funny

      What is it with people and nuking Japan? Isn't twice more than enough?

    10. Re:... lol. by PachmanP · · Score: 5, Funny

      Obviously not. We nuked them once, and they just came back with more tentacle porn.

      --
      You're thinking small. Why miniaturize the laser, when we could instead enlarge the sharks? -John Searle
  2. Opportunity by johnsonav · · Score: 5, Insightful

    This might be a great opportunity to see exactly how far advanced their missile/rocket program is, assuming we've got salvage vessels in place to pick up the pieces.

    --
    ... and that's when the C.H.U.D.'s came at me.
    1. Re:Opportunity by fuzzyfuzzyfungus · · Score: 5, Insightful

      Given that even contemporary western satellite launches, with a few decades of technology and refinement at their backs and with paying customers on the line, fail from time to time; I strongly suspect that there are a lot of people who would very much like to know if this launch was "the tech is utter shit, I'd be surprised if 1 in 100 actually perform as advertised" or "eh, probably ~10% chance of this happening on a given launch, bad luck for the first go".

      Might also be interesting to see what sort of "communications satellite" was heading for Tokyo and/or orbit.

    2. Re:Opportunity by ehintz · · Score: 5, Interesting

      Your estimate is almost certainly far too pessimistic.

      The USN was doing skunkworks stuff during the cold war, with purpose-outfitted subs, finding interesting bits of Soviet hardware in some crazy deep waters. I seriously doubt that they've forgotten how to do it. My money would be that they've continue to develop the capability, but even if all it's done is stagnate they've already proven very competent at finding Soviet needles in oceanic haystacks. And NORAD will have some very accurate tracking to help them start the search. Hell, I'd bet even money they've already got something out in the Pacific somewhere waiting for just such an opportunity. Or there's a lot of crewmen who just went off leave all of a sudden.

      Have a read of "Blind Man's Bluff" sometime, there's some rather fascinating escapades in there.

      --
      ehintz
    3. Re:Opportunity by palegray.net · · Score: 5, Interesting

      Speaking as an ex-submariner, I pretty certain you're right on target.

    4. Re:Opportunity by bitrex · · Score: 5, Interesting

      North Korea's entire ballistic missile program has essentially based on cobbling together different variations of Soviet Scud missiles, a design which the essentials of are approaching 60 years old. The major advance for the Taepodong-2 would be the use of the R-27 first stage, which I believe actually has gimbaled main engines instead of graphite fins for thrust vectoring. If it's true that the failure occurred at second stage ignition instead of with the first stage only a few seconds after launch (as has been the case in the past) then they've overcome a major hurdle, as a gimbaled first stage is essential to get good efficiency for long ranges. The Nodong based second stage appears to be a proven design, so if the problem is just the interfacing my somewhat-educated guess is that they're 90% of the way there. Of course the second stage probably is still using fins for thrust vectoring so the CEP of the unholy combination would probably something laughable by modern standards like 10 miles, but obviously one gets the feeling that range is their big concern right now, not accuracy.

  3. Wrong by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Insightful

    The US government and the popular media have been spouting this nonsense that it was a "failure."

    BS.

    I guarantee you the NK engineers learned from this "failure." Tests aren't failures as long as you learn from them. Since we don't know whether or what NK learned from this, calling the test a "failure" is pure speculation.

  4. Re:Silly Koreans by MacColossus · · Score: 5, Funny

    Not to be confused with ICBM's. :-)

  5. Failure in what sense? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Insightful

    How is this a failure? They launched an ICBM that cleared Japan before hitting the water, thus proving they now have the capability to deliver a nuclear strike against Japan.

    If this was a test to see what the effective range was of the missile, then they absolutely determined that and there was no failure. While I dislike the way North Korea interacts with the rest of the world, I find the highly suggestive wording of the write-up to be misleading and inaccurate.

    I think we all knew the 'satellite' story was BS, so we can't evaluate the launch in terms of whether they put something in orbit or not. That part is irrelevant.

    1. Re:Failure in what sense? by S-100 · · Score: 5, Funny

      Then maybe Japan should change its flag so that it looks less like a bullseye.

  6. Re:How long is this gonna go on? by Wonko+the+Sane · · Score: 5, Funny

    I wonder how many years this regime has left in it. I mean, it can't last forever. They're pissing away all their money on that massive army, and living on handouts from the likes of China.

    Are you talking about North Korea, or the USA?

  7. Re:north korea is a troll by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Informative

    I live in Seoul, you insensitive clod!

    I am serious.

    And since you are an insensitive clod and most likely an American, consider this. Tens of thousands of American soldiers and civilians live in or near Seoul. Right now. That means they are within artillery range of North Korea. (No, I'm not kidding.)

    Feel better?

    It's so easy to make bold assertions when you don't know or care about the consequences...

  8. Glorious Success! by Auzzie · · Score: 5, Funny

    Far from a failure. North Korean Scientists put their satellite in an extremely low geosynchronous orbit!

    A bit wetter than they thought it would be though.

  9. North Korea by Idiomatick · · Score: 5, Insightful

    An alternate hypothesis.

    First off, we know that NK does NOT have nuclear weapons. So please be quiet about them nuking everything.
    Secondly, it would make no sense at all for NK to shoot anything. They are isolated, NK might make poor decisions but they won't choose to get every cubic meter of NK bombed.
    We also know Kim is full of himself. If he lived 5000years ago we would have people building him giant pyramids as monuments to his greatness. At the moment, the greatest achievement a country can make is space travel. Sure the US did it first so what? Right now china, japan and india have space programs and hope to stick a man on the moon. Space Race Asian Edition. Many countries think NK is a crazy backwards land that can't do anything since they are under a horrible tyrannical rule. If anyone felt that way about you wouldn't you want to prove them wrong? Show them how awesome and advanced you are by making it into space.

    NK is a bit nutty and isolated from the world. Clearly they must be assholes. But lets look at both sides. The korean war 'ended' poorly sure. Remember the end of WW1 where the global community basically fucked Germany in the ass after winning? Which lead to the bitchiness allowing/causing WW2. A mistake we did not repeat after WW2. So we decide to not trade with NK. Even put up trade barriers/embargoes internationally. Many thousands of people starve in North Korea while the world at large says, give up tyranny and we'll help you eat. (how well does that work?). North Korea is stuck on an island with enemies to the south. Enemies that are much better funded and better armed. They are also probably jealous of the fact and maybe a little pissed that their neighbors are doing so well. They need a bargaining chip. NK starts developing nuclear technology in the early 90s. Out of fear the US promises to provide electricity and normalized trade in exchange NK would disassemble their nuclear plants and join the NNPT. Korea agrees! They take apart their factories. The US changes to the republican party. They do not provide electricity, they do not normalize trade, they spit in NKs face. Bush calls NK part of the axis of evil and lists them as elligable for preemptive nuclear strikes. How the fuck the north koreans are the badguys in this one is beyond me. They were willing to normalize international relations given the chance and it was thrown in their face. So of course they will begin work on nuclear weapons again, they need a bargaining chip.

    Clearly NK does not have a good human rights record. Clearly it is terrible that people are starving. But the US policy of Good vs Evil is NOT helpful. Isolating a country, not letting them trade with you, threatening them, hating them does not help. I don't understand the idea that we can fix the problem by giving them an ultimatum they cannot possibly accept then never talking. It is like the 'hard on crime' laws that never seem to help either. Maybe if we offered a hand to NK that we dont use to stab them with they'll be a bit more trusting. Maybe with more money and education, a link to the rest of the world they can join us. A country cannot be evil it isn't a demon or even a person. If we keep going as we have how can you EVER expect countries like North Korea and Cuba to rejoin the rest of us, or maybe the truth is you don't really care.

    (man this went longer than I intended, sorry /.

  10. Re:rational = predictable by cyberchondriac · · Score: 5, Interesting

    Yeah but what cayenne8 is saying is that Saddam acted like he had weapons he was hiding, and because Saddam used stalling tactics on Blix's crew time and time again, giving the illusion (if not for real)that he was cleaning up areas and moving weapons before the UN could get there to inspect. IIRC, Saddam flatly denied access to many areas in some cases (even if he rescinded later) which still bought him time. How could Blix have known if there were weapons there or not with all that going on? Forensic testing? Is that 100% foolproof? So the UN report's credibility was questioned - whether it was right or wrong, there was too much uncertainty. When cops do a drug raid on a house they don't announce their intent 2 days prior - they'd never find anything either.
    I guess the big question is, how many UN inspections did they manage to pull off without prior notice being given (or tipped) to the Iraqi government, and without the ever present Iraqi "minders"? We still don't know if any weapons were smuggled to Syria, but that's still a possibility too. We may never know.
    There was good reason for suspicion; Saddam had bio weapons scant years earlier, so there was definitely a precedent there - it was not just a fairy tale made up out of thin air. The guy had made and used bio weapons before, that much was solid fact. Considering Saddam's behavior and actions during the inspections, even if just a bluff, he was sending the wrong signals.

    --

    Look back up at my post, now look back down, you're on the Internet. Now look back up. I'm a signature.