South Korea? Really?

 

2nd paragraph:

" The 3.8 ton missile has a range of 280 kilometers, and a 900 pound warhead.....

....Guidance is very accurate, using GPS, plus infrared homing for terminal guidance. The warhead will land within 30 feet of the aimpoint. "

 

Curious as to whether or not the South Koreans considered the ATACMS for their MLRS systems.

Depending on variant, the ATACMS can carry a cluster or unitary warhead (500-pound class) up to ranges of 300km.

Plus, an M270-series vehicle carries two ready rounds of ATACMS, as opposed to the SS-26 system only having a single round onboard.

 

Wonder what exactly would be the preferred target set that South Korea would use Iskanders for...?

 

(...and I'm curious that, with this level of international interest in the Iskander series,

maybe Lockheed Martin will further refine the ATACMS series into improved versions, as they're really the only western equivalent to Iskander, other than Israel's LORA, a similar diameter missile offering 400-600kg warheads, to ranges out near 300km also.

All sides have to watch as they build such systems approaching the 500km range,

wherein for their size, payload capabilities, and trajectory options

they can be considered in violation of land-based IRBM (intermediate range ballistic missiles) treaties...).

ROK has already purchased ATACMS from the US by 2004:  110 of them.  ATACMS has a range of 300km.  Before than, ROK promised not to develop ballistic missiles in excess of 180km range by US-ROK bilateral treaty.  (ROK missile and nuke program vis-á-vis the US:  A rocky history back in the '70s.)  ROK does have necessary technology to develop and build its own ballistic missiles ... its missile technological base should be at least as good as that of India and Taiwan.

 

ROK interested in Russian ballistic missiles would be interesting.  I have already read some articles about ROK purchasing Russian technologies behind S-300 SAMs.  (ROK also wants to have the technological basis to develop its own  long-range SAMs, although they have a handful of Patriots already.)

Personally, I do not see much point in spending much on ballistic missiles beyond SRBMs, unless ROK has issues with neighbors other than DPRK.

 

Off-topic:  ROK should have never signed NPT:  Why bother with NPT while it has an uncertain neighbor across the DMZ?  (DPRK used to be a signatory of NPT, but its actions within the last 10+ years have shown that NPT is a lousy piece of paper to those who really wants to develop nuclear capabilities.)

Oh boy... here we go again.

 

This could set off arms races, like not seen since the bi-polar days. 

 

Things could get crazy very fast imo, if Poland for example would for some reason want to buy ATACMS to counter Iskanders aimed at it, against a future anti-missile base!  Heck, Kremlin could just deploy S-400/500 on its border with Belarus while they're at it and call it even!  Sheesh..

Russia's not interested in being involved in an arms race - just profiting from selling weapons to those who are.

 

They don't care who they arm or what region they destabilize - until of course, their new friends become their new enemies.

Well the ROK does have issues with Japan, becuase of  island disputes which is why they are trying to become a naval power, by 2020, the DPRK and the ROK will not come to blows but Japan is another story, the old rattling of sabres has already began between the ROK and Japan. 

Oh, well!  I guess ... 'different strokes for different folks!'  In case of Russia, an easy way to distract popular opinion is by playing up the 'evil Americans' and the 'glories and the heroics of the Soviet Union'.  In case of Japan and ROK, keep on diggin' into each other's respective mythical histories and keep territorial disputes as current as possible.

 

A classic example of 'a toad that is inside a water well'.  (It is a Korean proverb, in which all the toad can see is whatever that is visible within the mouth of the well.  He certainly cannot see anything outside that narrow angle.)  What they conveniently leave out is the fact that Japan and ROK have become major trading partners.  (You can say the same thing about Japan and China, China and ROK.)  If one of them gets hurt, the others will get hurt, too, but apparently their chauvinistic compatriots do not care about such down-to-earth issues.