New York Times on the Web Forums Science

Missile Defense

Russian military leaders have expressed concern about US plans for a national missile defense system. Will defense technology be limited by possibilities for a strategic imbalance? Is this just SDI all over again?

rshowalter - 12:14pm Jul 10, 2001 EST (#6845 of 6861)
Robert Showalter showalte@macc.wisc.edu

""North Korea has a very modest facility ... more of a missile proving ground, like White Sands out of 1946, not Vandenberg [Air Force Base] or the Kennedy Space Center," said Tim Brown, senior analyst for Globalsecurity.org. The White Sands Proving Ground was established in New Mexico at the tail end of World War II by the U.S. military to test new weapons' systems.

Short-Range Weapons

No other nation on the "rogue" list has fielded a missile with a range greater than 900 miles, according to U.S. officials.

Pakistan has the Ghauri missile, which it bought from North Korea and renamed for a Muslim king who invaded Pakistan's archrival India. Iran has yet to test any missile with a range greater than 600 miles.

Libya has only Scud-B missiles with ranges of 180 miles, and Iraq is limited by U.N. sanctions to missiles with ranges no greater than 90 miles.

Although Baghdad is believed to have hid Scud missiles from weapons inspectors, none have ranges greater than 540 miles. Development programs in each of those states is aimed at incremental increases in range, officials say.

"Two of the missiles - the Pakistani Ghauri and the Iranian Shehab - are derivatives of North Korea's No-Dong missiles, which Pyongyang has sold and transported by both ship and cargo aircraft to buyer nations.

""One question is how reliable these systems would be," said Globalsecurity's Brown. "Putting a crude rudimentary system in operation without doing a lot of testing is risky. Military generals want a lot of testing. The question is, is this a serious military program or a terrorist program where you wouldn't necessarily have a lot of testing?"

"The United States fears that North Korea could ultimately sell the longer range missiles it has under development as well. Still, because of geography, even if the Pakistanis or Iranians bought a North Korean missile and wanted to aim at the United States instead of one of their neighbors, neither is close enough to to strike even Alaska.

'Rogue' threat? -- Missile ranges fall short of U.S. shores

Iran Scud C: 300 miles, Status-deployed Shehab-3: 600 miles, Status-tested Shehab-4: 900 miles, Status-in development Distance to US -- 5,400 miles (Alaska), 7,200 miles (Mainland)

Libya Scud B: 180 miles, Status-deployed Distance to US -- 7,200 miles (Alaska), 9,000 miles (Mainland)

Iraq Ababil-100: 60 miles, Status-deployed al-Samoud: 90 miles, Status-tested al-Hussein: 360 miles, Status-forbidden, possibly hidden al-Abbas: 540 miles, Status-forbidden, possibly hidden "Distance to US from Iraq -- 5,400 miles (Alaska), 7,800 miles (Mainland)

North Korea

Scud B: 180 miles, Status-deployed Scud C: 300 miles, Status-deployed No Dong: 600 miles, Status-tested Taepo Dong 1: 900+ miles, Status-tested Taepo Dong2: 3,600 miles, Status-in development Distance to US -- 2,400 miles (Alaska), 4,800 miles (Mainland) Pakistan Shaheen: 180 miles, Status-deployed Tarmuk: 180 miles, Status-deployed Ghauri: 900 miles, Status-deployed Distance to US from N. Korea-- 4,800 miles (Alaska), 6,600 miles (Mainland)

"Note: Distances to the US are calculated over the pole or west to east. Flying east to west, even though shorter in some cases, is inefficient since the missiles would be flying against the rotation of the earth, lengthening the flight.

Robert Windrem is an investigative producer for NBC News.

(thanks Carl Page: MD64

rshowalter - 12:27pm Jul 10, 2001 EST (#6846 of 6861)
Robert Showalter showalte@macc.wisc.edu

(thanks Carl Page: MD6404 carlp 7/2/01 1:59pm .. )

How many members of the general public would understand the now very moderate or nonexistent nature of the "rogue threat" ?

Are these countries beyond conventional deterrance? Have we no other ways of dealing, by diplomatic means, or by military means coordinated with responsible nations, with these threats? That's a question that was pointedly asked of Secretary Rumsfeld -- without any sensible response, by Senator Jack Reed of Rhode Island ... Skeptical Senators Question Rumsfeld on Missile Defense by JAMES DAO http://www.nytimes.com/2001/06/22/politics/22MILI.html

MD6764 smartalix 7/8/01 10:48am is exactly on target -- and raises a key question -- as he has again and again, that gisterme has ignored, for want, I suspect, of any reasonable answer.

(15 following messages)

New York Times on the Web Forums Science Missile Defense