• Military

• WMD Menu                           

• Introduction
• Systems
• Facilities
• Agencies
• Operations
• Countries
• Hot Documents
• News
• Reports
• Policy
• Budget
• Congress
• Links

• Intelligence
• Homeland Security
• Space

DoD News Briefing

..........

Q: Hopefully this question might inspire a threat briefing at some point, but this morning Sandy Berger said that North Korea has no missiles that can hit the continental United States. Earlier, Robert Walpole was quoted, a national intelligence officer, as saying that North Korean missiles indeed could hit the continental United States. What is the threat as best you know it?

A: First of all, my understanding is that Robert Walpole of the Central Intelligence Agency was talking about the Taepo Dong II missile. I don't believe the Taepo Dong II missile has been tested yet. They have tested, as you know, a Taepo Dong I missile, but not a Taepo Dong II missile. So I believe, and I have not read his complete remarks, although I will, prompted by this question, but I believe he was talking about the possibility of a future threat. I think I'll let him comment on his own remarks about future threats.

Q: You are right, he was talking about that missile. He said "could soon threaten the continental United States." My question to you is, as of this moment, does North Korea have a missile that could hit Alaska, Hawaii, or the continental United States?

A: The fear we have about North Korea is that it's working on such a missile. Without getting into specifics, our fear is primarily of the future, not of today.

Q: But certainly North Korea now has the capability of hitting any place in Japan, Okinawa, any of the U.S. bases there, correct?

A: North Korea does have a significant missile capability, and our primary response to a missile capability is called deterrence. It's served us well for nearly 50 years, and we continue to maintain a very, very significant deterrence. Anybody who would use long-range missiles or weapons of mass destruction against us or our forces or our allies would have to expect a very significant response from us.

Q: Is that the principal or only deterrent? Is deterrence the principal or only means of defense against North Korea's missiles?

A: I guess I don't understand the question.

Q: As far as Japan is concerned, is deterrence the only means of keeping North Korea from firing missiles into Japan?

A: I don't anticipate North Korea is going to fire missiles any place. I don't... It's something we have to worry about in theory, but I don't think we're worrying about it in fact right now. We don't anticipate that. We maintain a very significant deterrence that could be invoked against anybody who attacks us, our forces or our neighbors or our allies.

...............

http://www.defenselink.mil/news/Jan1999/t01261999_t0126asd.html