Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

North Korea’s Missile Launches Were Failing Too Often

nytimes.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

51–60 of 102 posts

Re: North Korea’s Missile Launches Were Failing Too Often

#51

Post by yladiz »

ekianjo wrote: post #43
jeffdavis wrote: post #41

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The US and Russia have a special relationship because we've been to the brink and backed away respectfully. I hope that experience continues to instill mutual trust that we won't annihalate each other. No such trust exists with DPRK or Iran, which makes them dangerous. China doesn't seem particularly worried about nuclear attack, otherwise they would be more cooperative when it comes to DPRK. Disclaimer: I am not eve…

China is the main supporter of the DPRK regime. It acts as a buffer against the US sphere of influence in the region.

One possibility of what would happen if there were a war/conflict would be China would take over NK and create a buffer Chinese state, possibly another country in the Two System, One Country philosophy. China is becoming increasingly intolerant of DPRK's actions, as evident by their stopping importing of coal due to the killing of Kim Jong-nam (which will hurt DPRK's economy as it is a large part of their exports). My guess is that the buffer country would be a compromise, since SK doesn't want China directly at their door and vice versa, but SK wouldn't be able to really support NK's terrible economic situation as their economy is too small, and the US wouldn't want China's influence in the region to too much grow. I could see another part of that compromise would be to allow NK citizens to go to SK to be with family, be reeducated, etc, as well.

Re: North Korea’s Missile Launches Were Failing Too Often

#52

Post by misja111 »

khuey wrote: post #50
rl3 wrote: post #49

Note: The linked article basically chronicles how the story took shape. This appears to be the actual story here: https://www.nytimes.com/2017/03/04/world/asia/north-korea-mi... - In retrospect, invading North Korea in 2003 would have been a far better choice than Iraq. NK didn't have nukes back then, we'd have avoided destabilizing the Middle East, and the defense industry would still get its blood money. Not to men…

Eh, it could have easily started World War 3 with China. Nobody cares what happens to Iraq.

And, North Korea didn't have oil. If the US just wanted to invade a country to make the world a better place then there would have been plenty of easier countries to invade. How about Zimbabwe or Eritrea to mention just a few.

Re: North Korea’s Missile Launches Were Failing Too Often

#53

Post by ghughes »

Animats wrote: post #47

This might make sense if North Korea hasn't mastered onboard inertial guidance yet. Early US ICBMs, the Atlas, and (probably) the Titan, were radio guided from the ground. The Minuteman and Polaris were and are completely self-contained after launch. That took a lot of development, much of it done at MIT's Draper Labs. Today, you can buy fiber optic gyros on Alibaba. The accuracy might not be good enough for hitting…

NYT's original scoop hints that the missiles or the systems controlling them were compromised by malware similar to Stuxnet, which worked by tampering with parameters used to control industrial hardware. That kind of attack could work regardless of the accuracy of NK's guidance systems.

Re: North Korea’s Missile Launches Were Failing Too Often

#54

Post by [deleted] »

jacquesm wrote: post #45
vtange wrote: post #44

Earlier quoted context omitted.

You make it sound like we're the source of antagonism to the North. We're still technically at war and last I checked we're not the ones firing missiles and gloating about "setting Seoul or Los Angeles in flames. The thing about economically aiding dictatorships is that there's no guarantee you're actually helping the non-'crazy' innocent folks - the dictator is in control so you might just be enriching him and lengt…

That's nonsense, just as much nonsense as saying that economic sanctions against a dictatorship hurt that dictator more than it hurts the people there. Of course it doesn't. The guarantee is that the dictator will not eat one truffle less and that the people will suffer more. The best way to attack a dictatorship is to fund a middle class with something to lose.

[deleted]

Re: North Korea’s Missile Launches Were Failing Too Often

#55

Post by ptaipale »

misja111 wrote: post #52
khuey wrote: post #50

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Eh, it could have easily started World War 3 with China. Nobody cares what happens to Iraq.

And, North Korea didn't have oil. If the US just wanted to invade a country to make the world a better place then there would have been plenty of easier countries to invade. How about Zimbabwe or Eritrea to mention just a few.

North Korea is China's laboratory for orthodox communism. They need it to remind party faithfuls what it would mean to return to the iron rice bowl (which sometimes lacks both rice and iron). Having some 25 million people occasionally suffer from hunger is preferable to losing stability in a country of 1400 million.

North Korea would collapse very quickly without China's support in fuels and food.

Re: North Korea’s Missile Launches Were Failing Too Often

#56

Post by ptaipale »

sigmar wrote: post #39
ra wrote: post #24

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Are we not inviting other major powers to play around in our nuclear systems? Not really. We're just acknowledging the fact that they can and will. I don't believe the US has the most advanced "cyberwarfare" military apparatus at this time... but that's another topic.

Who do you believe to have a more advanced cyberwarfare military apparatus?

Probably the one who manufactures most of the computing and telecom equipment in the world.

Re: North Korea’s Missile Launches Were Failing Too Often

#57

Post by lisper »

ptaipale wrote: post #55
misja111 wrote: post #52

Earlier quoted context omitted.

And, North Korea didn't have oil. If the US just wanted to invade a country to make the world a better place then there would have been plenty of easier countries to invade. How about Zimbabwe or Eritrea to mention just a few.

North Korea is China's laboratory for orthodox communism. They need it to remind party faithfuls what it would mean to return to the iron rice bowl (which sometimes lacks both rice and iron). Having some 25 million people occasionally suffer from hunger is preferable to losing stability in a country of 1400 million. North Korea would collapse very quickly without China's support in fuels and food.

So why don't the Chinese reel them in a little more? They can't be happy that NK has nukes.

Re: North Korea’s Missile Launches Were Failing Too Often

#58

Post by ptaipale »

lisper wrote: post #57
ptaipale wrote: post #55

Earlier quoted context omitted.

North Korea is China's laboratory for orthodox communism. They need it to remind party faithfuls what it would mean to return to the iron rice bowl (which sometimes lacks both rice and iron). Having some 25 million people occasionally suffer from hunger is preferable to losing stability in a country of 1400 million. North Korea would collapse very quickly without China's support in fuels and food.

So why don't the Chinese reel them in a little more? They can't be happy that NK has nukes.

They do, actually. But them having nukes seems to be not much of a problem to China. If China wanted them to not have nukes, they wouldn't have.

Re: North Korea’s Missile Launches Were Failing Too Often

#59

Post by ry_ry »

Athas wrote: post #38
nonbel wrote: post #37

I hope someone has said this: "Perhaps it is a biased sample? Defective missiles are being sent to the "known" sites to make you underestimate their capabilities."

This makes no sense if you want the missiles to work as a deterrent. I'm quite sure North Korea isn't actually planning on going to war (and winning it); they just want to give the impression that going to war would be too costly for their enemies. Giving the impression that their missiles don't work is counter-productive in this context.

"Of course, the whole point of a Doomsday Machine is lost, if you keep it a secret! Why didn't you tell the world, EH?"

Re: North Korea’s Missile Launches Were Failing Too Often

#60

Post by nl »

ptaipale wrote: post #58
lisper wrote: post #57

Earlier quoted context omitted.

So why don't the Chinese reel them in a little more? They can't be happy that NK has nukes.

They do, actually. But them having nukes seems to be not much of a problem to China. If China wanted them to not have nukes, they wouldn't have.

Speaking in absolutes ("If China wanted them to not have nukes, they wouldn't have") is usually a mistake in geopolitics.

China currently won't accept a unified Korea under South Korean rule (which they view as a US proxy). China also doesn't want a destabilized North Korea on its border. But it is likely that many outside China and the Koreas view China's influence as a lot more than it is.

China had Kim Jong Un half-brother under their protection as a way of providing a credible threat of threatening regime change. That isn't an option anymore.

I'd note this quote from a well-sourced FT article from last year:

Beijing has often talked up its influence over its recalcitrant neighbour in its discussions with Washington, but when Pyongyang claimed to have tested a hydrogen bomb this year, Beijing had no idea it was coming, according to several people with knowledge of the matter.

and this:

It may seem ludicrous to outsiders, but several close observers of North Korea told the FT that, given the choice, Mr Kim would prefer an alliance with America, the far-off superpower, than China, the ancient oppressor and emerging superpower.

https://www.ft.com/content/551bb080-1c3c-11e6-a7bc-ee846770e...

Post reply on HN