All Episodes
Previous Next
June 26, 2006 - Rush Limbaugh Program
38:27
June 26, 2006, Monday, Hour #2
| Copy link to current segment

Time Text
Thanks, Johnny Donovan.
It's a pleasure to be here.
Mike Mamon, running the controls, and H.R. Kit Carson, executive producer, is off today.
But Bo Snerdley is here at the Sagi East Coast branch of the Limbaugh Institute for Advanced Conservative Studies, where there is never a final exam, but we are tested every day.
And I am fellow student Paul W. Smith, merely a teaching assistant at this august institution.
Happy to tell you that Russia returns to this chair and Golden EIB microphone tomorrow.
The conversation continues.
Your calls, always very important to us at 1-800-282-2882.
That's 1-800-282-2882.
You can also go to rushlimbaugh.com for a variety of reasons, not the least of which would be to talk to us.
Happy to continue the education.
Professor Bill Goertz is with us.
He is defense and national security reporter for the Washington Times, and we are about to be schooled on all things national security-wise, whether it be on North Korea, Iraq, and Iran.
And it is a pleasure, Bill, Paul W. Smith, nice to have you on.
Hi, Paul.
Good to be with you.
Well, there's a lot going on.
In fact, we've got leaders of the Senate Foreign Relations Committee saying yesterday that the administration should talk one-on-one directly with North Korea as concerns grow over a possible test launch of a missile that could reach the U.S. Senators rejecting the idea by a former Defense Secretary that the U.S. make a preemptive strike against a North Korean missile or even shoot one down.
Today, there's a lot more going on, trying to use diplomacy to halt North Korea's apparent launch.
We've got Japan saying that all options would be considered, including oil and food sanctions, if the communist country tests that missile that could reach the U.S.
And we've got South Korea's foreign minister heading to China, key U.S. lawmakers calling for these direct talks, as I mentioned.
What do you say about all this, Bill?
Well, it's kind of a bubbling crisis with this pending missile test.
I've talked to people at the Pentagon who are pretty convinced that the North Koreans are going to go ahead and launch this tapodong at some point, probably over the next five to ten days, although the thinking among the policy people is that this is brinksmanship on the part of the North Korean to try to wrest some concessions like direct talks that some of the Democrats are calling for.
I don't think that's going to happen.
The U.S. position is, sure, we'll talk to North Korea, but it's got to be part of the six-party talks, which North Korea walked away from recently.
And this concern about doing one-on-one now to try to stave this off saying that the United States has a specific interest because we're talking about this missile being able to reach us holds no water with you.
Well, you know, I think we trumped him on that.
The activation of our missile defense system really was a signal to the North Koreans.
Hey, if you want to try to launch this missile, expect that it could be shot down in space.
Would you think that that's a good thing?
Do you think if they do launch a test, in fact, Bill Goertz, we should shoot it down?
Absolutely.
I think it would be a tremendous signal, not just to North Korea, but to countries like Iran and even China, that we now have the capability to defend our territory from a missile attack, which a lot of countries are investing huge amounts of money in long-range missiles in order to be able to reach out and hit the United States.
On the other hand, God forbid if we missed or failed, that really would send a message we don't want to send either.
Well, I would just point out that General Trey Obering, the head of the Missile Defense Agency, said last week he's highly confident.
I've studied our missile defense system in depth.
It is rudimentary.
It is in the early stages, but we have 11 interceptors, and I can tell you that we wouldn't need all of them to shoot down one of these North Korean Tapeodong warheads.
So you're not going to look for, first of all, you're not going to look for the Bush administration to talk directly with North Korea without our partners, without Japan, South Korea, Russia, China, et cetera.
And you would look for, if in fact, the missile launch, if the testing goes through, that we would shoot it out of the sky, any chance of shooting it off the launching pad?
Yeah, I don't think that's an option.
And the reason is because even though using the missile defense system is somewhat unusual, taking preemptive action on North Korean territory is a different story.
And the problem there is that you have this million-troop army of North Korea, most of its forces deployed within 60 miles of the demilitarized zone.
That's the kind of thing that could touch off another Korean war.
So that's very unlikely.
But if they were to shoot it, we have this system in place where first a satellite would detect it, then ships and other radar would track it.
And if they get this, they can tell right away where it's headed.
And if it's headed for Japan or for Hawaii or Alaska or the continental U.S., the President has about 20 minutes, 20 to 30 minutes to say, hey, let's take it out.
They can tell right away where it's headed.
That's amazing.
Yes.
The thing about these kind of ballistic missiles is they don't change course.
They don't have the capability to change course.
And if they do, they can still detect it.
Of course, the last stage is the most critical here.
That's the reentry vehicle.
And again, it's moving at a bullet speed.
And so you have interceptors that have to go just that fast, and they crash into it, and that's how they destroy it.
This is your excellent opportunity to speak directly with Bill Goertz, Defense and National Security Reporter for the Washington Times, 1-800-282-2882, 1-800-282-2882.
We'll get your calls here in just a moment.
Bill, also the author of a number of books, including Treachery, How America's Friends and Foes Are Secretly Arming Our Enemies.
What would be the list of our friends and foes that secretly helped North Korea get to this point?
Well, clearly, the Chinese have been covertly helping the North Koreans.
We know that, that they've provided missile technology.
The Russians have been doing that as well.
We also know that the AQCON network, that is the covert nuclear supplier group, the Pakistani group, has supplied uranium enrichment technology, which really touched off the whole standoff and led to the six-party talks.
Do either of those, since you mentioned the Chinese and the Russians, do either of them, have they said, oops, maybe we shouldn't have done that?
Are they regretting their moves now?
No, actually, my view is that those states are actually engaged in kind of a covert anti-U.S. policy, especially the Chinese.
They see helping America's enemies as a way to undermine the United States.
They don't like the idea that we're the only superpower.
And publicly, they like to trade.
They're all smiles and handshakes.
But behind the scenes, they're working to help our enemies.
Just two weeks ago, the State Department sanctioned China, a number of Chinese companies, for selling missile technology to Iran.
And so this is a huge problem.
And we haven't seen the Chinese government come out strongly to tell North Korea don't conduct this test.
And I think that was really very telling, showing where the Chinese government's true sympathies lie.
Before we move on to Iran and Iraq, let's let our listeners weigh in to the Rush Limbaugh Show.
And Paul in Hollywood, Florida, you're up first and to say hello to Bill Goertz of the Washington Times.
Paul?
Oh, hi, Paul.
Hi.
I'm calling to comment on the North Korean missile.
And it's kind of like the ⁇ I think the average man in the street would agree that here's a situation where we have a chance to flatten the bully.
We all know that you have to stand up to a bully to back him down.
So this guy is threatening us with the missile launched, the insane leader of North Korea.
Why don't we act like a superpower?
And I saw an expert on TV here the other night.
It would be like a dunk shot, a couple of Polaris missiles from the submarine, and that missile is out.
And we have a chance to back Iran down, because Iran is in there kind of double-teaming us with North Korea now.
Well, let's let Bill, I think he knows what you're talking about and what your feelings are about standing up to the bully.
Let's let Bill give his opinion on that.
The big problem here is South Korea.
South Korea is engaged in kind of a pro-North Korea engagement policy known as the Sunshine Policy.
And they're trying very hard to, it's almost borders on appeasement in many ways.
That has really complicated efforts to get tough with North Korea.
On the other hand, you have the Japanese, which are totally reliant, or not totally, but I'd say 90% reliant for their defense on the United States.
And they're very worried about North Korea.
I think there is a link with Iran.
The fact that the Europeans, with the acquiescence of the United States, made some concessions to Iran and basically agreed to talk to them.
And I think that that was quickly noticed by Kim Jong-il, the dictator in North Korea.
And he figures if those nations are willing to make concessions, that he can get some concessions out of the U.S. as well.
Let's do a quick check with Jeff in Warren, Michigan, my hometown area.
Jeff, welcome to the Rush Limbaugh Show.
Thank you, Paul.
Mega Detroit Tiger dittos to you.
How about them tigers, huh?
It's been a long time.
You know, my concern is everybody is all up in arms about a test firing of this missile.
Shouldn't we, in fact, be concerned that they have the missile in the first place?
Well, you know, that's what I was going to say to Paul in Hollywood, Florida.
But you make a very good point to Jeff.
All they're saying right now, all they're threatening right now is the testing of the missile, and they claim just like we have a right to test missiles, they have a right to test missiles.
But let's hear what Bill Goertz says.
Yeah, this is a very interesting question.
You know, most nations with long-range missiles or even space launchers, when they conduct a test, they announce it well in advance, and they also issue what they call notice to mariners and notice to airmen.
Basically, it says don't travel in these areas during a certain time period.
The North Koreans didn't do that the last time they tested a missile in 1998 that went several thousand miles.
You add to that the fact that North Korea, on a daily basis, issues the most vitriolic rhetoric against the United States, threatening to turn countries into a sea of fire.
There's no way you can tell whether the missile is a test missile or an actual launch.
Excellent point.
That's an excellent point.
And Jeff, I'm glad you brought that up from Warren, Michigan.
That's an excellent point.
We'll continue that thought.
These excellent thoughts from Bill Goertz, Defense and National Security Reporter for The Washington Times here on the Rush Limbaugh program.
I'm Paul W. Smith.
Well, I'm enjoying our conversation with Bill Goertz, defense and national security reporter for the Washington Times.
He is an expert in all these areas.
Enemies, How America's Foes Steal Our Vital Secrets, a number of books that he's written, The China Threat, How the People's Republic Targets America, Breakdown, How America's Intelligence Failure Led to September 11th, Betrayal, How the Clinton Administration Undermined American Security.
So we get to learn a lot from a specialist like you, Bill, and I'm glad you're sharing your talents with our Rush Limbaugh listeners who are calling in at 1-800-282-2882, 1-800-282-2882 on this, their favorite radio station that gives them a chance to speak with luminaries such as Bill Goertz.
And that includes Victor in Silver Spring, Maryland.
Victor, welcome.
Thank you.
Mr. Goertz, my question to you is: how come the administration won't do anything about the liberal drive-by media, especially the New York Times, that constantly give our secrets away to our enemies?
The latest would be how the administration uses bank records to track our enemies.
They seem to really jump up and down for joy every time they give away one of our secrets.
If this had happened during World War II, we would have lost.
Well, you know that we spoke with Attorney General Alberto Gonzalez about this last hour and former U.S. Attorney General Ed Meese, and they have to be somewhat restrained in their opinions, but I don't think you have to be, Bill.
Sure.
Well, you know, I have an interesting view on this.
First of all, I'm no fan of the New York Times or the Washington Post, but I am a newspaper reporter.
And I do know that it's interesting that the Bush administration has a problem with the press.
They don't like the press.
They don't get good coverage.
And it's really a tough situation.
And I think that part of that ends up being that there's no cooperation when there needs to be on something like this financial operation as well as on the NSA.
That's just the nature of government-press relations.
You know, it's not good that it came out, but on the other hand, I would make the point, too, that having this financial program or even the NSA program is not going to stop the next al-Qaeda attack.
It really highlights the need for better human intelligence.
That is, spies who can get inside or get close to this group and its affiliates.
And we haven't been able to do that.
We're very good at the technical spying, very bad at the human spying.
As one intelligence official put it to me, you can sum up the CIA today in two words: no spies, at least no spies where we really need them.
So that's kind of my view on it.
And it kind of ties in with the next question I think that Tim has from North Bergen, New Jersey, who is joining us on the Rush Limbaugh program.
I'm Paul W. Smith, along with Bill Goertz of the Washington Times.
Is this kind of in line with what you're asking, Tim?
It seems to be, yes, I think so.
And that is.
The question is whether or not we know, or can we surmise, that the technology deployed in the North Korean missile, particularly in the garden systems, is a result of that Lorale flap from the Ron Brown Clinton administration.
I thought you were getting to the point of the fact that the CIA and all of our national security was decimated during the Clinton administration.
I'm sorry.
That's what I thought you were getting at.
Well, I mean, that's obviously a follow-up point.
But I guess more directly, I recall the Lorale flap, and there was technology that was moved from the purview of the Defense Department to Blacklist off to the Commerce Department.
And I wondered whether or not that's the technology that's in that missile that's sitting on the pad today.
Bill?
Well, the simple answer is we don't know.
Now, it probably is.
If you recall, the Laurel Hughes scandal was when during the Clinton administration, they really let down their guard on the transfer of sensitive technology.
And Chinese missiles were blowing up on the launch pad at a pretty good rate, and the U.S. was launching satellites on those boosters, and there weren't good controls, and as a result, they passed the most sensitive technology you can.
It was electrical-related, and it made sure that those Chinese rockets didn't blow up on the launch pad.
What these companies failed to realize, and they were fined millions of dollars later, was that the same technology that improves space launchers is also used to improve their long-range ballistic missiles.
In the case of North Korea, we've got a liquid-fueled missile.
The interesting thing is liquid-fueled missiles, and China has those as well, but they're moving to solid fuel.
With a liquid-fueled missile, it takes several days to get the fuel into the fuel tanks of these missiles, so it gives you some warning time.
With solid fuel, they're ready to go at really a moment's notice.
The last time North Korea tested a missile was August 1998.
We know from intelligence that they have been continuing to develop that Taipodong missile.
They've had eight years, so we really don't know how much better, how much of a longer range, how much more accurate this latest missile is.
You know, it occurs to me when you say that, and Tim, good question.
You're mentioning Chinese rockets blowing up on the launch pad.
When you said earlier, Bill Goertz, that last time they did a test, 1998, North Korea did a test, they gave no warning.
I'm thinking they gave no warning because they had no idea what might happen.
And if they didn't announce it and then fail, it wouldn't look like they failed.
That is true, yes.
And the analysis, the intelligence analysis of that original Taipodong launch was that they demonstrated some fundamental long-range missile capabilities, namely the ability to put several boosters together and have those boosters separate.
That's really one of the key elements of a long-range missile.
The next step after that is you've got to be able to put a heavy enough warhead on it.
In the case of North Korea, the obvious need there is that they want a nuclear warhead.
And we do know from the Libyan disarmament that China supplied Pakistan with design information on how to make a small warhead.
And documents on that turned up in Libya.
And the question then is, did Iran and North Korea, who were both recipients of the AQCon network, get the same data?
And the thinking is yes.
So that's really the question.
Not just can they launch a long-range missile and have it travel, but can they match it up with a nuclear warhead, which North Korea claims that they already have a small number of nuclear weapons.
Dennis is listening to the Rush Limbaugh Show on his favorite station here in St. Louis.
Dennis, say hi to Bill Goertz.
Hey, Bill, how are you?
Thanks for taking my call.
My question to you, Bill, is how far do you think Israel will let Iran go before they take some type of preemptive against their nuclear capabilities if the U.S. isn't willing to take any action against them?
Do you think Israel will act alone?
And how do you see that whole scenario playing out?
And one quick question, maybe, I don't know if I've ever heard you address this before.
Do you think there is any credibility to the nuclear suitcases that you hear that are spread out throughout the world or in the United States?
Maybe if you have a second, you can touch on that.
I'll hang up and listen to your answer.
Okay, sure.
On the first part, the Israelis have a very good capability, airstrike capability, but I think that Iran and the Iranian nuclear facilities are probably outside of their basically aircraft range.
Now, they could do it if the U.S. were to help them with landing and so forth, but the U.S. doesn't want to do that.
Right now, we're in the diplomacy mode.
The Israelis, again, are very, very worried about the Iranian nuclear capability.
We know they have 620-mile-range Shahab-3 missiles, and they're working on getting a warhead for that.
Again, the small warhead design information found in Libya probably went to Iran.
So that's a big concern.
But I don't think they have the legs to be able to conduct something unilaterally.
So it'll be a while.
Plus, the Israelis also believe that it's going to be probably another few years before the Iranians actually have a bomb, probably 2009.
From North Korea to Iraq and Iran, he's an expert in all of these areas, and he's sharing his expertise with us, Bill Goertz of the Washington Times, as we continue on the Rush Limbaugh program.
I'm Paul W. Smith.
It's the Rush Limbaugh program.
I'm Paul W. Smith.
Rush back in the chair tomorrow.
1-800-282-2882.
1-800-282-2882.
If you'd like to speak with Bill Goertz, defense and national security reporter for the Washington Times, based on some of the things we've been talking about, I think many of you would be interested in the specific book, Betrayal: How the Clinton Administration Undermined American Security.
But all of his books are very good.
And his columns also in The Washington Times.
And taking your calls and getting his opinion on some of your thoughts and your opinions as well.
Mike is on the line, and Mike is checking in with Bill Goertz right now.
Hello, Mike.
Hi, Colling from El Segundo, California.
Thank you very much, gentlemen.
I'd like to first thank Bill for his excellent books and Washington Times articles.
And it's unfortunate that most of the news media is too incompetent to provide us with the excellent information that you, Bill, and the Washington Times do provide us with.
Okay, on to my question.
Bill, do you think it's possible or probable that North Korea is now threatening to launch this missile, acting as a surrogate for China, hoping that we will try to knock it down with our missile defense system so China can collect valuable radar frequency and performance data to try to use to overcome our missile defense system?
Wow, what another good, excellent question.
These Limbaugh listeners, Bill, as you know, are top-notch.
That is a good question.
Unfortunately, Chinese intelligence gathering has been so successful that I'm sure that they have a pretty good understanding of our current ground-based interceptor missile defense system.
So I don't think that they really needed this would be a real-world test of our missile defense system, which is a little different than some of the organized tests that we have.
The Chinese do not like missile defense because they've made a huge investment in long-range ballistic missiles.
The latest Pentagon report on the Chinese military highlights this.
They have three new long-range missiles that are being deployed within the next few years, including at least two that can hit the United States.
One of them is a submarine-launched missile.
And they have been very loudly agitating, along with the Russians, against missile defenses, which is kind of unusual when you think about it because a missile defense system is purely defensive.
And yet they make kind of a tortured argument that missile defense is merely going to enhance U.S. offensive missile capabilities, which really haven't developed much since the Cold War.
How many Chinese spies do you think there are in the U.S.?
I read that there are supposedly about 2,000 in Canada alone.
There are a huge number.
And in fact, just on Friday, I reported exclusively in the Times that a former Defense Intelligence Agency analyst pleaded guilty to one count of illegally withholding documents.
Ronald Montaperto?
Yes.
And as part of the plea agreement, he admitted passing both secret-level and top-secret level classified information to Chinese intelligence agents.
The amazing thing to me is that there hasn't been almost any other press that's reported this.
And this was a published court case.
Good questions, Mike and El Segundo.
Thanks for checking in.
Wally is in Lubbock, Texas on the Rush Limbaugh Show.
Wally?
Yes, sir.
My question for you all was: I know y'all said chances of us missing are slim to none, but what happens if we do miss?
What kind of message will that send to everybody else?
Well, you know, it's possible, sure, that it couldn't work, but like I say, we have 11 interceptors and probably I'd say, you know, 90% of them have been put on operational mode.
And, you know, we could hit it with one.
It might take two or it might take three.
But the fact that we would miss, I don't think we would miss because that being the case, it would send a message.
That said, the Pentagon has made no bones about the fact that it's a very fundamental and it's in the early stages of deployment and it's going to get better and better.
In fact, they're negotiating right now to put a third interceptor site in Europe, either in Poland or Britain or Romania, and that would provide the continent with protection against Iranian missiles.
All right.
Wally, thanks.
Ben is in Madison, Wisconsin on the Rush Limbaugh Show with Bill Goertz, Defense and National Security Reporter for the Washington Times.
I'm Paul W. Smith in for Rush.
What's on your mind, Ben?
Hi, gentlemen.
I've always been intrigued with the E-bomb.
We didn't use it in the last Gulf War, but wouldn't that have the capability of frying the avionics of an ICBM either in its silo or out and therefore be a non-lethal form of interdiction other than a couple of pacemakers?
That's a good question.
You're referring to electromagnetic pulse weapons, which are kind of on the drawing board at this point, is my understanding.
I know we've used some of them.
We have used them in past conflicts, more tactical devices, things that spread chaff and can disrupt communications and electronics.
I'm not sure that they have an electromagnetic pulse weapon that could knock out a missile.
Because once the thing's launched, again, it becomes...
I was looking on the ground.
Excuse me?
I was thinking while it was still on the ground.
Well, we did discuss earlier, Ben, maybe you didn't hear, how that would not be a particularly good idea right now.
Yeah, but even that might, yeah, that might work if we had it.
We have a number of ways of getting it while it's still on the ground.
Sure, they could use JDAMs for that matter.
But again, that's just a little bit beyond the threshold of the risk they want to take in terms of the standoff between North and South Korea.
Appreciate the call, Ben.
And Bill Goertz wrote in his Washington Times story just the other day that the Pentagon, of course, as we've been talking about, activated the new U.S. ground-based interceptor missile defense system.
But that the intelligence officials say preparations have advanced there in North Korea to the point where a launch, in fact, could take place within several days to a month.
What's your best guess?
Well, it's hard to say.
You know, someone mentioned to me that there is a precedent where the North Koreans had actually fueled up a missile and then defueled it and basically stood down from the test.
The problem is to defuel a missile is a very complicated and hazardous thing, and you really can't do it without basically ruining the entire missile.
So if they don't have a lot of these tapodonks lying around in caves up there, and there's a good chance they may, they're not going to want to risk defueling it.
So the thinking is they could test launch it.
Like I say, people at the Pentagon think that this is part of brinksmanship by the North Koreans and that they may in fact go ahead with a launch.
A nuclear game of chicken, potentially.
Steve is in Toms River, New Jersey, and on the Rush Limbaugh Show.
Steve.
Alo.
I want to ask if there's any known or suspected connection between the Iranian government and the insurgency that is giving so much trouble in Iraq.
And secondly, I've heard that our government has the ability to detect these spinning centrifuges for enriching uranium from space, but the Iranians, I want to know if the Iranians are working on a way to protect themselves from being heard.
Okay.
On the first point, it's very clear to U.S. intelligence that the Iranian government, through its Ministry of Intelligence and Security, known as MOIS, and its Islamic Revolutionary Guards Corps, the IRGC, and they have a special division.
They are very, very active in the tens to scores of agents providing direction, providing money, mainly to the Shiites who are part of the insurgency there.
They have a vested interest in trying to keep Iraq unstable, and that's a big problem.
And the Bush administration really hasn't come to grips with that.
They've kind of issued kind of threats to the Iranians, but not much is being done.
On the centrifuge issue, I'm not aware that they can detect centrifuges with satellites.
There may be some other technical means of doing that, but the big problem with the centrifuges in both Iran and suspected in North Korea is that all of these things are being done in underground facilities.
Now, they've located and identified probably seven or eight of the main Iranian nuclear facilities, and they have obviously have gun sites or missile sites or bomb sites on those targets, but the Iranians haven't been fully cooperating with what they have.
Bill, can you stick around just a little longer?
A lot of people want to speak with you.
Sure.
We'd love that.
Bill Goertz, Defense and National Security Reporter for The Washington Times.
Don't forget to visit Russia's website, rushlimbaugh.com.
You can watch the video of the blockbuster panel discussion with the creators and cast of 24 and the Homeland Security Chief Michael Chertoff on America's Image in Fighting Terrorism.
The video link is right at the top of the homepage.
Just click and watch.
While you're there, take advantage of the Limbaugh letter.
The July issue features Russia's interview with Newt Gingrich discussing the needs for strong conservative leadership on issues like immigration, among others.
And you can sign up for the letter right there at rushlimbaugh.com.
You can be connected to us right now here at 1-800-282-2882, 1-800-282-2882 as we continue the Rush Limbaugh Show.
I'm Paul W. Smith.
You know, all of us of a certain age remember the air raid drills where we used to get under our desks in our classrooms or in the lunchroom.
I remember at St. Mary's Grade School or Catholic Central, now St. Mary's Catholic Central in Monroe, Michigan.
I think we got under the tables in the lunchroom as if that was going to help us if hellfire came raining down from the sky.
But I want to ask Bill Goertz, because he's the expert, defense and national security reporter for the Washington Times, what is our worst case scenario here?
Are we going back to those times when we have real fears, or at times they were imagined, but real fears of a real Holocaust with these missiles coming down?
Yes, it's certainly an interesting phenomenon, the fact that a country like North Korea that's a totalitarian communist dictatorship that starved its people and yet has managed to produce and test in the past a long-range missile that can hit the United States.
It has a certain chilling effect and focusing the mind on the problem of long-range missiles.
And if there's anything good to come out of it, I think that's it.
But yeah, my brother who lives on the West Coast called me and he said, hey, can this thing hit the West Coast?
And I said, well, you know, it can, but the question is what kind of warhead is on there.
They've done analyses at the Defense Intelligence Agency that say that if you put a small enough warhead, say, with some kind of biological or chemical weapon, you could reach the continental United States with this tapodong.
And, you know, of course, you couldn't do perhaps widespread damage, but again, there's a lot of unknown questions about North Korea's weapons capabilities.
So it's definitely raising the question of a new kind of Cold War long-range missile threat.
Something to definitely take very seriously.
Matt is in Freeport, Maine, on the Rush Limbaugh Show with Bill Goertz.
Hi, Mr. Goertz, and hi, Paul.
Hi.
Very interesting topic.
It's something I haven't thought about in a great deal since I was a teenager.
But something that has occurred to me, and you almost got on the topic, was submarine launches.
What would happen if Korea was helped by China, for example, to get a submarine close to the shore and then launch a short-range missile or even a long-range missile?
Would our interceptors catch it then?
Good question.
At this point, it doesn't look like North Korea has a ballistic missile, submarine ballistic missile capability.
The Chinese do.
They have one what they call a Shia-class submarine.
It's kind of outdated and it hasn't left port for a long time.
They are building a brand new submarine-launched missile and a new submarine to carry that.
So they have that.
But the North Koreans don't.
That said, there is a real concern that they could, say, take a freighter and put one of their Scud missiles on it, keep it wrapped up or disguise it as some kind of freight on a ship and get close to U.S. shores and then fire one off.
And that is a real danger.
In fact, there is intelligence that Iran's government has done that, that they've actually test-fired a Scud-type, that is a 300-mile-range ballistic missile, from the deck of a merchant vessel.
Very quickly to Bruce in Greensboro, North Carolina.
Bruce, you're with Bill Goertz.
Thank you so much for taking the call.
Sitting here listening to your discussions of the Korean motivations and the way they go about things, I was very concerned or curious about your impression as to whether the Koreans might have in the back of their mind that they might destroy the missile themselves on the site in a fake launch and claim we did it in order to provoke some type of confrontation.
Or if the missile were to fail upon launch, they would also claim that we had destroyed it.
Wow.
That's entirely possible.
The North Koreans are very good at deception and those kind of strategic deception operations.
In fact, when they did the 1998 Tapodong launch, the last stage of it failed to enter orbit, which is what they claimed was a satellite, that they were actually trying to launch a satellite.
And there is a strong belief that if they conducted a missile test this time, that they could try to disguise it as some kind of a commercial space launch or a satellite launch.
But nothing, you can't really figure out the North Korean regime.
There's a lot of dynamics going on there that we don't fully understand.
There's a military that's really hardline left over from the Kim Il-sung era.
That's Kim Jong-il's father.
We know that their economic system is in a total shambles, but yet they have an incredible internal security system.
The real solution to North Korea is quite simply regime change.
They've got to change the regime and get some kind of a democratic regime in there.
Quick question from Bruce in Greensboro, North Carolina.
Bruce, you there?
I'm sorry.
I'm sorry.
Terry.
Terry in Cincinnati, Ohio.
Sorry, Bruce.
Yes, Terry, real quick.
Yeah, I've got a question.
Don't we have a responsibility to let China and the other world leaders know that if Korea sends this missile towards our country, we don't know where it's going, we don't know how far it goes, we don't know what's on it, and our missiles cannot shoot it down.
And it does strike the United States, shouldn't we have a submarine positioned off Korea?
If it has a nuclear warhead on it, then we have to strike back.
We don't know how many more they're going to be sending.
Don't we have a responsibility to tell the Chinese and the other world leaders, hey, we may be gone to DEF CON 1 if these guys shoot and hit us.
And we're going to be launching back.
That's a very interesting question.
And I'm sure that they have a number of military scenarios, and that would be done at the U.S. Pacific Command based in Hawaii.
And they have all kinds of scenarios for this, for Korean conflict or Chinese conflict.
In fact, there just recently were some disclosures about plans for defending Taiwan.
But that would be kind of down the road, I think.
And I think the U.S. in response would really have a conventional response.
And we do have submarines.
We have submarines deployed in Hawaii.
We have them at Guam.
And we have them basically in the Western Pacific that have missiles.
In fact, we're past our breakdown.
I hate to interrupt you.
I could listen to you on these issues all day, and we're well past our breakdown.
But I still have to ask you the question, even if Mike Mamon is going to throw things through the window at me.
How much warning time would we have if a missile were coming our way?
How much time would we have to do whatever we had to do?
I'd say 20 to 30 minutes.
Okay.
Thanks for being with us, Bill.
We appreciate it, and always look for you online and all your books.
Bill Gertz, Defense and National Security Reporter for the Washington Times on the Rush Limbaugh Show.
Our next guest is concerned that we're going to have a terrified America.
That is, the Democrats are advocating all the policies that have brought Europe to the brink of collapse and bankruptcy.
He is from the Chicago Sun-Times, Mark Stein, and I think you'll like him a lot.
▲
Export Selection