That’s a long time for a missile to be in flight, isn’t it?December 16, 2017 Tim WorstallNewspaper Watch22 CommentsBoris Johnson warns Kim Jong-un’s North Korean nukes could be powerful enough to reach Britain within just six months previousSo, these homeless peoplenextThis is an interesting definition 22 thoughts on “That’s a long time for a missile to be in flight, isn’t it?” Mr Yan December 16, 2017 at 1:26 pm Like Saddam’s weapons of mass destruction hey Boris. Tim Newman December 16, 2017 at 1:34 pm War in the spring. Chinese agree to partition the north with the US. You read it here first. The Unused Testicle December 16, 2017 at 1:54 pm That’s because it’s 259,200 times more powerful than the old US Minute Man missile. The Meissen Bison December 16, 2017 at 2:40 pm It takes a while to penetrate the wall of hastags deployed by the Twitter army. Surreptitious Evil December 16, 2017 at 2:47 pm Not if it has to hitch west of the Urals first? dearieme December 16, 2017 at 3:35 pm It does a few loop-the-loops. Kevin Lohse December 16, 2017 at 4:09 pm It’s an environmentally-freindly delivery system. A balloon delivery vehicle uses upper atmospheric currents to carry a bucket of sunshine round the globe, then POW! BlokeInTejas December 16, 2017 at 4:21 pm It comes by sea in parcel post. And is probably mis-delivered. bloke in spain December 16, 2017 at 4:49 pm Well yes. And provoke one of the few nations capable of delivering a retaliatory strike would turn N.Korea into one big crater. For what reason? His chosen favourite didn’t win X-Factor? If he can target the UK he can target Uncle Sam on his home turf in the west of the USA. He still ends up ruling a big crater but at least he’s got something to gloat over for the last 10 minutes of his existence. Sorry Boris, but Brenda’s miserable little Realm isn’t worth the candle. bloke in spain December 16, 2017 at 4:57 pm Oh, and of course, orbital mechanics. A partial orbit lob’s much easier to achieve with an easterly trajectory.. Geoff Taylor December 16, 2017 at 5:11 pm I may be immature but I cannot think about the North Korean threat without conjuring images of Team America. “Hans Bwix? Oh no!” Mohave Greenie December 16, 2017 at 6:04 pm Sounds about right for the 40’x8’x8′ delivery system coming from NK. Not sure he gets playing deniability out of it though. Jonathan December 16, 2017 at 6:09 pm London would make a great, big, target. Just saying. Mr Ecks December 16, 2017 at 7:11 pm Not very charitable Jonathon. Lots of history and historic sights there. And there must be a few hundred thousand Londoners who are decent folk. Not imported rapey replacements or well-off, MC/CM, Bubblers and ReMainiacs. Silverite December 16, 2017 at 9:08 pm Have you seen where they’ve labelled Pyongyang on the map on that article? In south China, roughly where Hong Kong is. It’s a wonder sometimes that Mail journalists remember to breathe. Bloke in North Dorset December 16, 2017 at 9:11 pm Much as we Brits like to feel important on the global stage, we really aren’t the target of their nukes, and nor is the USA in the direct sense. In their thinking NK’s nukes that can hit the USA take the USA out of the game in NK’s strategic aim of unification of the peninsula under their regime. Their calculation is that the USA wouldn’t get involved if /when they invade the South if the USA knows they could be nuked. This might have worked with some Presidents, Hi Obama, but they must be wondering about Trump. The question is whether or not China would see a united Korea under the North and a humiliated USA as a good outcome for their long term strategy. Lets hope they don’t. Pcar December 16, 2017 at 9:41 pm @Tim Newman, December 16, 2017 at 1:34 pm War in the spring. Chinese agree to partition the north with the US. You read it here first. More or less what I’ve been saying, maybe some Russian involvement too. China & Russia don’t want a border with South Korea/USA and vice versa. I think DMZ will remain. Edward Lud December 16, 2017 at 11:17 pm Tim Newman: what? Tim Newman December 17, 2017 at 8:04 am Edward Lud, I got a tip from a well-placed source. I’m mentioning it now so, if it comes to pass, I seem clairvoyant. Edward Lud December 17, 2017 at 9:09 am Tim N, yes I realised that. I was hoping you divulge a little more … Chris Miller December 17, 2017 at 10:03 am It comes by sea in parcel post. If a nuclear device is ever used again in anger, much the most likely delivery vehicle is a shipping container. Interested December 17, 2017 at 10:19 am There won’t be a war. Kim will be removed. My theory only! Leave a Reply Cancel replyYour email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *Comment Name * Email * Website Save my name, email, and website in this browser for the next time I comment.