Japan, U.S., S Korea reaffirm joint response to N Korean threat

Doesn't the USA military already have nuclear weaponry on the Korea peninsula ?

Short answer is NO the USA doesn’t have any nuclear weapons in Korea.

@Awa no Gaijin

If North Korea actually fired nuclear missiles at Japan or South Korea could they a be stopped ?

Against Korea, Yes.

Against Japan, Nope.

Korea, being a military superpower and a top four arms exporter in the world as of 2022, is currently building a triple layer missile defense system in which each incoming North Korean nuclear missile is intercepted by 3 different kind of missiles at different altitude. First two layers are deployed and operational, while the third one is currently going through interception tests for a target deployment of 2024.

Japan, having neglected its defense, basically has no missile defense of any kind and relies on US nuclear umbrella as its nuclear deterrence. Japan has only one shot at intercepting North Korean nuclear missiles, via AEGIS destroyers launching SM-3 missile against cruising North Korean nuclear missiles above 100 km. However, North Korea has developed evasive missiles that flies under the altitude of 100 km and are uninterceptable by Japan, so all Japan can rely on is the US nuclear counter strike against North Korea as deterrence at the moment.

The only reason there is any threat to Japan from NK, China or Russia is because of the occupational US forces stationed in Japan.

30 years ago I can understand Japan not being brazen enough to hit out against the occupiers as so much of Japan's trade was with the USA but nowadays, not the case. China is by far Japan's largest trading partner and Japan gets or can get most of the vital commodities it needs from Russia.

So of course that all means the brokeback regime will double down on joining the occupiers in provoking Japan's neighbors to ensure Japan remains on the front line.

Violence has been generating violence. The Russian coward aggression against Ukraine has incentive China to provoke Taiwan, North Korea also got excited to demonstrate power. Weak leaders need to create external problems to divert the internal public opinion on their domestic problems. Leaders of Japan, South Korea and Taiwan have to be very cautious and wise to avoid overreaction to the systematic provocation of Russia, China and North Korea. It is time to invest in actions of peace, to fight poverty, to combat hunger in the world. How wonderful it would be if the world in 2023 decide to invest to humanitarian aid for saving lifes instead of weapons and deaths.

I can’t understand who is threatening who? USA has nukes at their bases in SK and Japan, and nuclear armed submarines off NK coast. USA and SK regularly practice invading NK. All because NK won the Korean War and USA lost.

N Korean threat does not exist. it is just a scapegoat for military force and missile purchase increase finance with japanese debts

Are elephants REALLY afraid of mice? Are the countries BRISTLING with Thermonuclear weapons, or 'allied' (occupied by) to such, paid for at the expense of the welfare of their people, really afraid of one of the smallest and poorest countries on the planet? Does owning a couple of Hiroshima sized now Nuclear firecrackers make such a country a threat? Does "Nuclear deterrence" mean protection from Nuclear destruction or does owning or having based nearby Nuclear weapons almost GUARANTEE Nuclear destruction? Corollary question: Are people who believe that a tiny, poor country such as *Joseon**, (Bukhan) *could start or sustain a 'war', given the military power that is CONCENTRATED around them, mindless or just naive and believe the lies of the obvious warmongers who preach to them? A comment worth repeating:

indigoToday 09:19 am JST

N Korean threat does not exist. it is just a scapegoat for military force and missile purchase increase finance with japanese debts

Good!

"Japan, U.S., S Korea reaffirm joint response to N Korean threat."

China, Russia reaffirms their support of North Korea every time when the DPRK launching their ballistic missiles.

I've seen a S. Korean fictional movie where there are confronting of SK and NK on the sea. Ironically, a Japanese submarine is involved at the border. SK and NK communicating the same language, and Japan seems to be the enemy to idealize the script of "one" Korea. If diplomatically they become one it's acceptable, but military confrontation looks like Japan to be the foe.

Ah yes, the good ole "It's all the Americans' fault" argument.

Obviously, America forced Kim il Sung to invade the S.

The Americans forced the North to dig all those giant tunnels under the DMS to aid in an invasion, sorry - "Reunification" of the South.

The Americans forced the North to blow up KAL jets and attempt to assassinate the S. Korean Presidents on multiple occasions.

The Americans forced the North to develop weapons of mass destruction, not only Nuclear but bio and chem as well.

It was the Americans who blackmailed the North into building a nuclear reactor identical to Yong Byon in Syria to help them attain nuclear weapons status (Israel blew it up just before it was to receive it's fuel.)

The Americans FORCED the North to develop a Uranium program in secret and in violation of the 1994 accords. How dare W. call them out on that, eh?

And of course who can forget that it was the Japanese that just asked to be kidnapped by walking alone in rural areas of their homeland. Didn't they know they deserved what they got?

SMH.

There is a security problem in NE Asia because a family of sociopaths have decided to make it so.

As for the South, I see someone finally got the memo that the North is actually a real threat and that Japan is more valuable as an ally than a whipping boy to be used domestically.

The United States removed all nuclear weapons from South Korea by 1991. Some people need to learn how to use Gooogle.

"The United States had previously stationed tactical nuclear weapons, or non-strategic nuclear weapons, in South Korea between 1958 and 1991 to counter a potential renewed invasion by North Korea. At its height, the U.S. nuclear arsenal in South Korea comprised eight weapons systems consisting of 950 nuclear warheads. Since the United States withdrew its nuclear weapons due to U.S. President George H.W. Bush’s global initiative that removed most overseas U.S. tactical nuclear weapons, there have been periodic South Korean calls for their redeployment that have intensified in response to North Korea’s steady progress in nuclear development."

https://www.cfr.org/blog/evolution-south-koreas-nuclear-weapons-policy-debate

Sorry but i just don't believe you

Google is a hell of a thing.

can’t understand who is threatening who? USA has nukes at their bases in SK and Japan, and nuclear armed submarines off NK coast. USA and SK regularly practice invading NK. All because NK won the Korean War and USA lost.

Once again check out Google. Stay off state ran web sites and media companies. The UN didn’t exactly lose the Korean War. If they did there would be no South Korea.

@Ossan LOLOL so you believe what you read or what you are told to believe?

The United States removed all nuclear weapons from South Korea by 1991. Some people need to learn how to use Gooogle.

"The United States had previously stationed tactical nuclear weapons, or non-strategic nuclear weapons, in South Korea between 1958 and 1991 to counter a potential renewed invasion by North Korea. At its height, the U.S. nuclear arsenal in South Korea comprised eight weapons systems consisting of 950 nuclear warheads. Since the United States withdrew its nuclear weapons due to U.S. President George H.W. Bush’s global initiative that removed most overseas U.S. tactical nuclear weapons, there have been periodic South Korean calls for their redeployment that have intensified in response to North Korea’s steady progress in nuclear development."

https://www.cfr.org/blog/evolution-south-koreas-nuclear-weapons-policy-debate

However North Korea is so close there's no way to stop the nuclear missiles without atmospheric detonation ?

Perhaps someone can clarify my question?

To achieve a nuclear detonation a whole bunch of events have to happen inside the weapon in a very precise and rapid order. If any one of those events do not happen, or occur out of order, there is no nuclear detonation.

Weapons like THAAD and PAC 3 use hit to kill technology. Older less accurate missiles were designed to get really close to the target and then detonate a warhead filled with tungsten rods to shred the enemy aircraft or missile and thus shoot it down. Some of the older Soviet systems were so inaccurate they had to have huge warheads to create enough of an explosion to guarantee a shoot down. Systems like THAAD and PAC-3 have no warhead. Their interceptors are accurate enough to hit the incoming missile directly. The kinetic energy of the collision of the THAAD or PAC-3 interceptor with the incoming ballistic missile shatters the nose of the missile and basically scatters the warhead. No nuclear detonation.

@Ossan LOLOL so you believe what you read or what you are told to believe?

It's the truth. With the collapse of the USSR the US removed nuclear weapons from abroad with the exception of NATO. They also removed nuclear weapons from surface ships and submarines with the exception of the Trident missiles in the Fleet Ballistic Missile subs. A great many former nuclear weapons storage facilities were shut down and this is easily verified using Google Earth if you know what you are looking at. Some I am familiar with in the US are definitely closed. Nuclear weapons storage was consolidated into a few sites in the US.

Nukes are expensive to own. They require very high security and that does not come cheap. Closing those nuclear storage sites and removing weapons from surface ships freed up a metric buttload of Marines formerly guarding those weapons (yep, Marines were on the ships guarding them) for other duties. They also require a lot of expensive, detailed and sometimes hazardous maintenance. Decommissioning some of those weapons like the nuclear Tomahawks and nuclear ASROCs saved a lot of money for other missions.

Once again check out Google. Stay off state ran web sites and media companies. The UN didn’t exactly lose the Korean War. If they did there would be no South Korea.

Truth.

The USA anti missile system is designed to stop nuclear missiles above the earth .

It depends on the system. PAC-3 is a point defense system. It doesn't have the range for an exoatmospheric kill. It hits warheads at short range on their way in to nearby targets. THAAD and especially SM-3 are used for the high altitude long range exoatmospheric kills. SM-3 Block 2 can apparently get high enough to hit an ICBM as it has successfully nailed an ICBM surrogate in tests. SM-6 can also be used for shorter range ballistic missile defense of naval forces (think DF-21 and DF-26), assuming any get past SM-3.