The W
Views: 95640386
Main | FAQ | Search: Y! / G | Color chart | Log in for more!
19.4.07 0702
The 7 - Current Events & Politics - North Korea Goes (Has Gone?) Nuclear Register and log in to post!
(645 newer) Next thread | Previous thread
User
Post (13 total)
spf
Scrapple
Level: 132

Posts: 2949/5393
EXP: 26536317
For next: 595687

Since: 2.1.02
From: The Las Vegas of Canada

Since last post: 1 day
Last activity: 14 hours
AIM:  
#1 Posted on 12.9.04 0415.34
Reposted on: 12.9.11 0415.37
Well, while our military resources are spent fighting off fifth-rate Shia clerics in southern Iraq and making sure we are safe from the Weapons of Mass Destruction that existed apparently only in Saddam's fevered mind, apparently our good friends in North Korea, the eternally paranoid ones who IIRC have said they would be more than willing to launch a pre-emptive nuclear strike on the United States if they thought we were going to attack, either have completed or are preparing to complete a nuclear bomb trial. But hey, let's not have THAT be a major issue, not when there are swift boats and National Guard planes to discuss. This whole fucking election is a sham at this point, the media along with the two happily compliant parties has decided to make the entire race about a war that ended in the mid-70's, and we've lost 1,000 of our soldiers while an avowed enemy is building weapons of REALLY HUGE MASS DESTRUCTION IN PLAIN SIGHT OF THE WORLD. Yes, I blame Bush's single-minded focus on Iraq for allowing this to continue, but hell, it's not like the Democrats have really made much of a stink about it either and heaven knows Clinton screwed the pooch on dealing with them as well. So now that both sides are complicit in this matter, maybe we can actually deal with it, instead of using it as a politcal football to prove how the other side hates America. Not very likely I guess. Oh well, I suppose if at some point L.A. goes up in a mushroom-cloud from a PDRK missile we'll be told they're working with the East Asian branch of Al-Qaeda and because of this we need 200,000 more troops to guard Iraq. Oh well

Here's a link to the article from the http://www.nytimes.com/2004/09/12/international/asia/12nuke.html?ei=5006&en=87e70c368a1790ca&ex=1095566400&partner=ALTAVISTA1&pagewanted=print&position= (New York Times (reg req.)). There's relevant links all over the web on this. A quote from the story:

    Originally posted by NYT
    Senior officials in South Korea and Japan did not appear to have been briefed about the new evidence, beyond what one called "a nonspecific warning of a growing problem" from American officials. But it is a measure of the extraordinary nervousness about the North's intentions that earlier this week, South Korean intelligence officials who saw evidence of an intense fire at a suspected nuclear location alerted their American counterparts that a small nuclear test might have already occurred. American officials reviewed seismic sensors and other data and concluded it was a false alarm, though the fire has yet to be explained.

    A huge explosion rocked an area in North Korea near the border with China on Thursday and appeared to be much bigger than a blast at the Ryongchon train station that killed 170 people in April, Reuters said, citing a report by the Yonhap news agency of South Korea. The United States "is showing a big interest because the blast was seen from satellites,'' Yonhap quoted an unidentified official in Beijing as saying.

    [The cause of the blast has not been determined, but the Beijing official said Washington was not ruling out the possibility that it may be linked to a nuclear test. Yonhap reported that a mushroom cloud up to 2.5 miles in diameter was spotted after the blast in remote Yanggang province in the far northeast.



(edited by spf2119 on 12.9.04 0419)
Promote this thread!
Grimis
Scrapple
Level: 123

Posts: 3919/4700
EXP: 21128927
For next: 102399

Since: 11.7.02
From: MD

Since last post: 1082 days
Last activity: 879 days
#2 Posted on 12.9.04 0738.45
Reposted on: 12.9.11 0740.55
I'm more worried about the PDRK sneaking a nuke to a terrorist group than I am about the PDRK attacking the West Coast. Any country that launches a nuclear weapon against the US with such a limited arsenal has signed their own death certificate.

That and the fact that I am willing to bet that Red China will take proactive steps to make sure the PDRK doesn't drag them in...
ges7184
Lap cheong
Level: 76

Posts: 1053/1492
EXP: 3859331
For next: 146748

Since: 7.1.02
From: Birmingham, AL

Since last post: 12 days
Last activity: 12 hours
#3 Posted on 12.9.04 0810.45
Reposted on: 12.9.11 0811.25
Once again, this demonstrates the flaw in the pre-emptive policy of the current administration. I agree that any nation would have signed their own death certificate if they nuke us. However, what if the said nation thinks the death certificate is already signed anyway. After all, North Korea was listed as part of the 'axis of evil'. And one out of three of those nations is now occupied by us. What if North Korea comes to a point where they think they have nothing to lose?
dMr
Andouille
Level: 89

Posts: 1446/2203
EXP: 6689748
For next: 226180

Since: 2.11.02
From: Edinburgh, Scotland

Since last post: 11 days
Last activity: 13 hours
#4 Posted on 12.9.04 0839.43
Reposted on: 12.9.11 0840.00
For what its worth, South Korea now says mibees no (news.bbc.co.uk)
redsoxnation
Scrapple
Level: 151

Posts: 4156/7534
EXP: 42816222
For next: 480354

Since: 24.7.02

Since last post: 292 days
Last activity: 292 days
#5 Posted on 12.9.04 0958.55
Reposted on: 12.9.11 0959.01
Hindsight being 20/20, perhaps Truman should have let McArthur go past the 38th parallel.
The North Korean government is nuts. That the Clinton administration let Jimmy Carter negotiate a deal with them in the 90's was stupidity, and in the grand scheme of things was the worst move by the administration. Did anyone actually think the North Korean government was going to hold up their end of the deal? Except for naive Jimmy, no one should have believed it.
The current administration has done a piss poor job with North Korea. Unless we were going to act against them, Bush should have not mentioned them in the State of the Union, as it only increases their paranoia.
Over/Under on Japan having a nuke is 2007.
If there is a bright side to all of this, perhaps it is Beijing deciding to cut a deal with Washington to get rid of the nutcases of North Korea before they nuke Beijing out of boredom/anger at Beijing having business dealings with the capitalists.
The media is a joke, was a joke, and always will be a joke. The only thing that changes is they become even greater sanctimonious jackasses as time passes.
And, slightly off topic, but with spf taking shots at Clinton, I have to wonder if this is due to being in shock that the defending World Series Champions will be hosting games at Comiskey, an event that hasn't happened since the beloved Kaiser.
Malarky
Bauerwurst
Level: 23

Posts: 47/104
EXP: 63012
For next: 4712

Since: 19.8.04

Since last post: 3479 days
Last activity: 3476 days
#6 Posted on 12.9.04 1055.33
Reposted on: 12.9.11 1056.16
It's quickly becoming inevitable that both Iran and the DPRK will be nuclear armed by mid 2005. Yes, these two regimes having access to mankind's worst weapons is bad enough, but the knock-on effect will be even more worrisome for the world, in the long run; How long can Saudi Arabia wait after Iran goes nuclear before they feel the need for their own nuclear deterrent? Ditto for South Korea and Japan after lil' Kim gets his hands on his new toy. Even Australia may feel the need to defend themselves from this new nuclear threat in kind.

Proliferation breeds proliferation, and over time the chances of a genocidal/homicidal/extremist regime gaining control of a country armed with nukes goes up as more and more countries are forced to go nuclear in response to the advances of their neighbours. Just look at India/Pakistan.
LionJeetSingh
Chourico
Level: 36

Posts: 164/282
EXP: 301908
For next: 6205

Since: 3.3.03

Since last post: 3118 days
Last activity: 2945 days
#7 Posted on 12.9.04 1144.53
Reposted on: 12.9.11 1144.58
Why is it that only select countries should be nuclear powers? Who gives someone the authority to state that another cannot build a nuclear arsenal.

On one hand, the US Constitution states that all have the right to bear arms, yet when unfavourable nations start developing their own WMD, there's a problem.

Double standard.
Malarky
Bauerwurst
Level: 23

Posts: 48/104
EXP: 63012
For next: 4712

Since: 19.8.04

Since last post: 3479 days
Last activity: 3476 days
#8 Posted on 12.9.04 1342.30
Reposted on: 12.9.11 1343.17
In the case of nukes the double standard works just fine.

The less countries that have these weapons the better, as the need for them only increases when the number of states possessing them increases.

Of course, we'd all like a world where nukes were abolished once and for all and scofflaw states who insisted on holding onto them were dealt with harshly, but that would require some real leadership.
The Vile1
Lap cheong
Level: 79

Posts: 746/1694
EXP: 4542320
For next: 37167

Since: 4.9.02
From: California

Since last post: 1825 days
Last activity: 1557 days
#9 Posted on 12.9.04 1732.38
Reposted on: 12.9.11 1735.40
Well then, I guess we should hope the Kim Jong Il puppet in Team America: World Police doesn't piss him off too much.

"Soon evwey cuntwey will be in compwete chaos!"

"And so you see, the new wowld is inevitbwe."
"It's what?"
"Inevi-inevitabwe."
"One more time."
"INEVITABLE! THINGS ARE INEVITABWEEE GOING TO CHANGE!"
DrDirt
Banger
Level: 95

Posts: 1214/2683
EXP: 8618457
For next: 50181

Since: 8.10.03
From: flyover country

Since last post: 8 days
Last activity: 17 hours
#10 Posted on 12.9.04 2139.32
Reposted on: 12.9.11 2141.55
    Originally posted by LionJeetSingh
    Why is it that only select countries should be nuclear powers? Who gives someone the authority to state that another cannot build a nuclear arsenal.

    On one hand, the US Constitution states that all have the right to bear arms, yet when unfavourable nations start developing their own WMD, there's a problem.

    Double standard.


Things like nonproliferation treaties for one and agreements countries sign. And not to sound holier than thou but here is a huge difference between what the USSR and the US did and this.
The Thrill
Banger
Level: 99

Posts: 1331/2781
EXP: 9712921
For next: 287114

Since: 16.4.02
From: Green Bay, WI

Since last post: 2 days
Last activity: 2 days
#11 Posted on 13.9.04 0801.18
Reposted on: 13.9.11 0817.07
This ABC News article says North Korea claims the blast was planned demolition: blasting away a mountain for a hydroelectric power project.

It also says Sec. of State Colin Powell believes the blast wasn't a nuke, but wants North Korean verification. However, Powell says there has been unusual activity at known North Korean nuclear sites lately...
Malarky
Bauerwurst
Level: 23

Posts: 51/104
EXP: 63012
For next: 4712

Since: 19.8.04

Since last post: 3479 days
Last activity: 3476 days
#12 Posted on 13.9.04 1141.53
Reposted on: 13.9.11 1141.55
    Originally posted by The Vile1
    Well then, I guess we should hope the Kim Jong Il puppet in Team America: World Police doesn't piss him off too much.

    "Soon evwey cuntwey will be in compwete chaos!"

    "And so you see, the new wowld is inevitbwe."
    "It's what?"
    "Inevi-inevitabwe."
    "One more time."
    "INEVITABLE! THINGS ARE INEVITABWEEE GOING TO CHANGE!"



Hehe. Saw the preview, it looks like a riot.
policus
Loukanika
Level: 8

Posts: 2/9
EXP: 1604
For next: 583

Since: 17.8.04

Since last post: 3252 days
Last activity: 3229 days
#13 Posted on 13.9.04 1214.12
Reposted on: 13.9.11 1217.00
Although North Korea can be viewed as a nuclear threat, the current administration has handled this issue very well. Just because the media doesn't talk about it all the time like they do with Iraq, doesn't mean that the current administration isn't paying any attention to it. North Korea by themselves could not possibly launch an attack on the united states. They simply don't have the rocket technology to do so. Thus, they need to get the nuclear device outside of their own boarders. Not an easy task if you ask me. To the south is South Korea and 35,000 US troops and a 3 mile DMZ. To the North is China another well controlled boarder and there's no way Kora would want to get caught trying to sneak a nuclear device into China. China has the biggest army in the world and just needs and excuse to use it. So now you're left with the East and West ocean boarders. This might seem easy just put the device in a boat and take it somewhere. WRONG!. The US owns the seas around the world. We have military ships all over the pacific and I believe we a decent part of the pacific fleet mobilized around North Korea. I don't think it's probable for any freighter to leave north Korea without having the US navy take a good hard look at it. Your only other option now is to fly it somewhere. putting a nuclear device on an airplane is not an easy thing. Nuclear devices give off radiation signatures that satellites and surveillance planes can detect. You could shield the device with lead but you'll need about 20 tons of lead to protect it. Not many planes can Carry that kind of payload without looking suspicious. North Korea is not a realistic threat to engage a nuclear strike against the US.

Iran on the other hand maybe more of a problem. I believe Iran is damn close to having a nuclear bomb. If you read between the lines about Iraq in the news you'll see Iran is separating itself from the UN and the IAEA. I think in the next few months and especially after the US election a lot of political pressure from the UN and the world community for Iran to come forward about their nuclear program, regardless of who wins the election

I've heard blips in the news that the US is positioning its navy for a blockade of Iran and North Korea in the upcoming months to resolve these issues. I think the current administration is handling the issue of North Korea well and that you don't hear about it much because when things go right or well it doesn't make a good news story. "You never hear a story about a bank that doesn't get robbed"
ALL ORIGINAL POSTS IN THIS THREAD ARE NOW AVAILABLE
Thread ahead: Pres. Bush's base?
Next thread: Ayman al-Zawahri
Previous thread: DNC Fundrasing Letter feat. James Carville
(645 newer) Next thread | Previous thread
The 7 - Current Events & Politics - North Korea Goes (Has Gone?) NuclearRegister and log in to post!

The W™ message board - 7 year recycle

ZimBoard
©2001-2014 Brothers Zim
This old hunk of junk rendered your page in 0.302 seconds.