Forum Settings
       
Reply To Thread

North Korea tested a nukeFollow

#52 Oct 09 2006 at 8:42 AM Rating: Excellent
Liberal Conspiracy
*******
TILT
xtremereign wrote:
This pisses me off more than Paris Hilton.
You have a bizarre standard for "pissed off-edness"
Quote:
No more wheeling and dealing, just let them starve while spending all of their available resources on nuclear testing, and enjoy the show.
I don't think any nation with the ability to trade nuclear weapon science is going to 'starve'.
____________________________
Belkira wrote:
Wow. Regular ol' Joph fan club in here.
#53 Oct 09 2006 at 8:44 AM Rating: Good
Scholar
****
5,677 posts
It seems that maybe instead of focusing so intently on North Korea and Iran, we should first be focusing on Russia and China. We need to get those two powerhouses firmly on board with us (and with most of the UN), and we should not do it through diplomatic coercion. We need to be their buddies. Smiley: tongue

Then we can bring their considerable weight to bear on these unstable "rogue" nations.

Of course, I have no idea how to do that (especially with China). Damn communists..... Smiley: confused



I suddenly have an urge to play Risk....
#54 Oct 09 2006 at 8:45 AM Rating: Excellent
Liberal Conspiracy
*******
TILT
RedPhoenixxxxxx wrote:
Second, I agree that Joph's idea or bringing N.Korea into the fold of civilised nation is a good one. But it will be hard, and will require China, S.Korea, and Japan's total comittment to the cause. Not impossible, though.
I'm no so sure that it's a "good" one or even a practical one. But it seems the only option beyond crippling the nation. If anyone has a Plan (C), pipe up with it.
____________________________
Belkira wrote:
Wow. Regular ol' Joph fan club in here.
#55 Oct 09 2006 at 8:47 AM Rating: Default
xtremereign wrote:
Besides the potential arms race scenario, anyone else see why testing a nuke would cause a problem? I mean, they're just irradiating their country, and we care why?

N.K.: We tested a nuke! Give us monies!

Sane World: No. Test 100 more and then maybe we'll take you seriously.

N.K.: Fine! We'll test 100 at one time!

Sane World: Yeah, you do that. Bye.


If a nuke detonates on American, European, Canadian, hell Anyan soil in the next few months, we all know where to point our missles. Problem solved. Sure it might take some loss of life on our side, but apparently pre-emption makes everyone hate you. So we just wait for a major city to explode, then end their existence. Game, set, match.

They shouldn't get a dime from us though...not a single dime. We already helped them build the weapons with which they now threaten us. This pisses me off more than Paris Hilton. No more wheeling and dealing, just let them starve while spending all of their available resources on nuclear testing, and enjoy the show.


You're not serious are you? I wouldn't not expect "some loss of life" on our part. Or anyones part. This is some very serious (IMO) shit, we are talking world-ender here. We can't just point a missle at N. Korea and hope for the best. This isn't a run and gun situation Dubbya, The Halo generation and you want.

Edited, Oct 9th 2006 at 9:50am PDT by Kaelesh
#56 Oct 09 2006 at 8:48 AM Rating: Good
Drama Nerdvana
******
20,674 posts
Of course their testing of long range missles and successfully testing a nuclear weapon are fun.

That along with the fact that NK's propaganda machine is spouting lines like "Kim Il Jong the greatest of our National Heroes has finally formed a military capable of bringing war to our enemies'. Since they have a history of getting their *** kicked at home.

Oh well THAAD had a successful intercept in July and NK still seems a long way before they have anything that could hit something other than Alaska. Here's to hoping whoever gets elected in 2008 is a more accomplished statesman and has a firmer grip on global politics.
____________________________
Bode - 100 Holy Paladin - Lightbringer
#57 Oct 09 2006 at 8:53 AM Rating: Default
Jophiel wrote:
xtremereign wrote:
This pisses me off more than Paris Hilton.
You have a bizarre standard for "pissed off-edness"


I compare the two because they are both obviously self-declared elites whom think they deserve everything for nothing. And while I would have sex with one, that doesn't make it right. Besides I don't think Kim Jong likes men.

Quote:
No more wheeling and dealing, just let them starve while spending all of their available resources on nuclear testing, and enjoy the show.

I don't think any nation with the ability to trade nuclear weapon science is going to 'starve'.


Well the apparently you would think wrong.

http://www.usip.org/pubs/specialreports/sr990802.html
http://www.atimes.com/koreas/DC16Dg01.html
http://freekorea.blogspot.com/2005/05/one-kwangju-per-day-for-six-years.html





Edited, Oct 9th 2006 at 10:03am PDT by xtremereign
#58 Oct 09 2006 at 8:54 AM Rating: Excellent
Liberal Conspiracy
*******
TILT
I'd be curious to see if this will change anything over on the island of Japan. According to the smart guys at FAS.org
Quote:
During the Sato cabinet in the 1960's, it is reported that Japan secretly studied the development of nuclear weapons. On 17 June 1974, Japanese Prime Minister Tsutomu Hata told reporters that "it's certainly the case that Japan has the capability to possess nuclear weapons but has not made them." This remark aroused widespread concern in the international media at that time.

Japan's nuclear power program based on reprocessed plutonium has aroused widespread suspicion that Japan is secretly planning to develop nuclear weapons. Japan's nuclear technology and ambiguous nuclear inclinations have provided a considerable nuclear potential, becoming a "paranuclear state." Japan would not have material or technological difficulties in making nuclear weapons. Japan has the raw materials, technology, and capital for developing nuclear weapons. Japan could possibly produce functional nuclear weapons in as little as a year's time. On the strength of its nuclear industry, and its stockpile of weapons-useable plutonium, Japan in some respects considers itself, and is treated by others as, as a virtual nuclear weapons state.
Linkage but the bolding is mine.

I know Japan has made a big show of declaring itself nuclear arms free and only having a defensive military, etc but this might change their stance a bit, especially with the Korean missile tests.
____________________________
Belkira wrote:
Wow. Regular ol' Joph fan club in here.
#59 Oct 09 2006 at 8:57 AM Rating: Decent
Jophiel wrote:
RedPhoenixxxxxx wrote:
Second, I agree that Joph's idea or bringing N.Korea into the fold of civilised nation is a good one. But it will be hard, and will require China, S.Korea, and Japan's total comittment to the cause. Not impossible, though.
I'm no so sure that it's a "good" one or even a practical one. But it's the only option beyond crippling the nation.


Well "good" is always relative.

But you cant "cripple" NK anymore than it already is. No one is legally trading nuclear technology with them. They got their nuclear tech thanks to Khan, the father of the A-Bomb in Pakistan through illegal sales. NK's population is starving. They have nothing. They dont even "trade" since they have nothing to trade. They receive aid from SK and China.

So yeah, you could cut that off. Big deal. All it will mean is that the local population will go even more hungry. That has never been a problem for NK's leader.

Quote:
If anyone has a Plan (C), pipe up with it.


Quote:
It seems that maybe instead of focusing so intently on North Korea and Iran, we should first be focusing on Russia and China. We need to get those two powerhouses firmly on board with us (and with most of the UN), and we should not do it through diplomatic coercion. We need to be their buddies


This should obviously be the first step. And its not so hard.

Second, NK having a bomb in itself is not the issue. They've had it for years. The only difference is they've allegedly tested it. Underground. They dont even the capabilities to send one as a missile yet.

So the realy issue, is how to get rid of that crazy dictator.

Well, targeted assassination is one way. Their regime is a "communist-monarchy". This dude only has power because he is the son of his dad was in power. They have a "divine" right to rule over NK. And yet, somehow, its "communist". Go figure. Its complete bs.

So his "power" is one of "personality". Once he is gone, the whole dynamics inside NK will change.

Otherwise, promoting trade, peaceful technology (such as internte, radio, simple communication tools) would be great. They live in a compltetly enclosed society. They have 0 idea about what goes on in the outside world, and are constantly bombarded with propaganda about how they're gonna get nuked by teh US any second now. Read on it.

Once the people see the outside world is nothing like that, something will change internally.

Though doing all this without him deciding to go down in flames and using it, is of course tricky.
____________________________
My politics blog and stuff - Refractory
#60 Oct 09 2006 at 9:03 AM Rating: Excellent
***
3,339 posts
xtremereign wrote:
Besides the potential arms race scenario, anyone else see why testing a nuke would cause a problem? I mean, they're just irradiating their country, and we care why?


Wind currents, water currents. Just because you detonate a nuke in one place doesn't mean that the damage doesn't extende well beyond the blast radius.

RedPhoenix, there's a difference between the Cold War and NK. The reason the Cold War worked was because there was at least an element of rationality on each side. I'm not really sure you can count on that with ol' Kim.

Why should the US worry? That's what we do, we're meddlers. Course much of the Western world could be called that.

You're absolutely right though, the pressure and negotiations HAVE to come from the surrounding Asiatic nations (China's not the only one that can exert pressure and has something to lose). Why? Because despite our exports of hollywood and blue jeans, they're still culturally closer to NK than we are. We've pretty much maxed out our influence. It's either sabre-rattling or threats of our stern disappointment - neither of which have proven particularly effective.

We've sanctioned and threatened and wagged our finger at them and it really hasn't gotten us anywhere. This goes for a lot of places, btw. I do believe that NKs neighbors would have better success. And they're tied closer to us economically and diplomatically that we should be able to exert some pressure on them to act.

Course I wonder if that pressure is even necessary - we're not the only ones that can see things coming. And I think the problem is that we still want to call the shots on that action and no one is really taking kindly to that. So no one is acting.




#61 Oct 09 2006 at 9:13 AM Rating: Default
Celcio wrote:
xtremereign wrote:
Besides the potential arms race scenario, anyone else see why testing a nuke would cause a problem? I mean, they're just irradiating their country, and we care why?


Wind currents, water currents. Just because you detonate a nuke in one place


Again, and we care why? I'm fairly certain that we don't have to be concerned about wind blowing nuclear fall out to California from North Korea. Now other countries in the area, yeah they should be concerned.

Question is, why are we the ones getting all hyped up over this when it should be the countries closest to them? If Canada had a dictator like North Korea, and recently tested a nuclear weapon, then I could understand our getting our panties in a bunch. But Canadian's are cool people, Montreal is like a giant ***** house...I mean come on!

I think it's time for some people to step it up over there. You don't see any nuclear threats coming from our hemisphere, I'm thinking the other hemisphere needs to get its *** in gear. When Brazil tests a nuke and starts demanding aid, call me.

Edited, Oct 9th 2006 at 10:15am PDT by xtremereign
#62 Oct 09 2006 at 9:18 AM Rating: Default
Kaelesh the Puissant wrote:
xtremereign wrote:
Besides the potential arms race scenario, anyone else see why testing a nuke would cause a problem? I mean, they're just irradiating their country, and we care why?

N.K.: We tested a nuke! Give us monies!

Sane World: No. Test 100 more and then maybe we'll take you seriously.

N.K.: Fine! We'll test 100 at one time!

Sane World: Yeah, you do that. Bye.


If a nuke detonates on American, European, Canadian, hell Anyan soil in the next few months, we all know where to point our missles. Problem solved. Sure it might take some loss of life on our side, but apparently pre-emption makes everyone hate you. So we just wait for a major city to explode, then end their existence. Game, set, match.

They shouldn't get a dime from us though...not a single dime. We already helped them build the weapons with which they now threaten us. This pisses me off more than Paris Hilton. No more wheeling and dealing, just let them starve while spending all of their available resources on nuclear testing, and enjoy the show.


You're not serious are you? I wouldn't not expect "some loss of life" on our part. Or anyones part. This is some very serious (IMO) shit, we are talking world-ender here. We can't just point a missle at N. Korea and hope for the best. This isn't a run and gun situation Dubbya, The Halo generation and you want.

Edited, Oct 9th 2006 at 9:50am PDT by Kaelesh


I'm dead serious, why wouldn't I be? How long have we been "negotiating" with N.K. and to what end? Things are progressing exactly how you're afraid they will, except currently we're helping that progression. I'm not saying pick a fight with them, I'm just saying don't deal with them at all (or at least not on the forefront). If China starts dealing with them, and call us because we can be of some assistance (short of giving them money), then I'm all for it. This sh*t is so simple it hurts, it's like training a dog...we just keep rewarding them for bad behavior and wonder why they keep acting bad.

We helped them build their nukes, isn't that enough?

As fas as "loss of life" goes, I'm all for stopping it. I just don't believe that diplomacy is viable with N.K., it's failed thus far and we're just empowering our enemy. We give they don't, how is that negotiation? I also don't believe we have support for a military option at this point, and until a bomb goes off somewhere we won't. Would you support a full out attack on North Korea right now? Doubt it, but would you if a nuclear weapon detonated in Detroit? Probably. That's all I was saying.

Edited, Oct 9th 2006 at 10:24am PDT by xtremereign
#63 Oct 09 2006 at 9:25 AM Rating: Excellent
Liberal Conspiracy
*******
TILT
RedPhoenixxxxxx wrote:
Jophiel wrote:
If anyone has a Plan (C), pipe up with it.
Jawbox wrote:
It seems that maybe instead of focusing so intently on North Korea and Iran, we should first be focusing on Russia and China. We need to get those two powerhouses firmly on board with us (and with most of the UN), and we should not do it through diplomatic coercion. We need to be their buddies
He snuck that in while I was still replying to posts on Page 1. I admit he has a good point though.

The most obvious reason, of course, for concern is proliferation. Iran, Syria, Libya, hell even Chavez has been buying up conventional weaponry on the premise that the United States is coming any day now. On a finer scale, the concern isn't that Syria will fire ICMBs at New York but rather when they give a smaller bomb to Hezbollah.
____________________________
Belkira wrote:
Wow. Regular ol' Joph fan club in here.
#64 Oct 09 2006 at 9:34 AM Rating: Good
*****
18,463 posts
xtremereign wrote:
Joph wrote:
I don't think any nation with the ability to trade nuclear weapon science is going to 'starve'.


Well the apparently you would think wrong.

http://www.usip.org/pubs/specialreports/sr990802.html
http://www.atimes.com/koreas/DC16Dg01.html
http://freekorea.blogspot.com/2005/05/one-kwangju-per-day-for-six-years.html

You should try reading your links.
Your first link's author wrote:
Critics argue that the United States and other donor nations should starve the North Korean regime into collapse. Yet the famine has already taken a large number of lives, and the regime, though shaken, is still in power. It is important to remember that no Communist government has been overturned during or after a famine, though coups or popular revolts have frequently replaced authoritarian governments after famines. However, the Communist record in this century may not be applicable in the case of North Korea, because other Communist regimes experienced famine early in their histories when revolutionary fervor was at its peak, and they maintained control of the food distribution system so that dissenters would starve if they were not put down by internal security forces. The North Korean regime has de facto privatized the food distribution system; its revolutionary fervor has diminished over time and by the famine itself; and it has no allies left to save it in the event of a military coup, which is the only serious threat to the survival of the regime.
Bolding mine.
#65 Oct 09 2006 at 9:41 AM Rating: Decent
*****
10,755 posts
I'm not saying one can't use their beloved freedom of speech to criticize, I'm just bored to death with twits using the URL button to link every article that is anti-Bush, Republican, whatever. Especially so by foreigners.

So, in the interest of our viewers, I thought it would be a nice change to hear some suggestions. Seeing as though we are all scholars and brainiacs.

I don't recall anyone using that ridiculous cop-out recently either.
#66 Oct 09 2006 at 9:46 AM Rating: Excellent
Liberal Conspiracy
*******
TILT
I, much like John Kerry, am saving all my top-secret answers to the world's ills for when I'm elected president. You'll get no freebies out of me, folks!
____________________________
Belkira wrote:
Wow. Regular ol' Joph fan club in here.
#67 Oct 09 2006 at 9:48 AM Rating: Default
Atomicflea wrote:
xtremereign wrote:
Joph wrote:
I don't think any nation with the ability to trade nuclear weapon science is going to 'starve'.


Well the apparently you would think wrong.

http://www.usip.org/pubs/specialreports/sr990802.html
http://www.atimes.com/koreas/DC16Dg01.html
http://freekorea.blogspot.com/2005/05/one-kwangju-per-day-for-six-years.html

You should try reading your links.
Your first link's author wrote:
Critics argue that the United States and other donor nations should starve the North Korean regime into collapse. Yet the famine has already taken a large number of lives, and the regime, though shaken, is still in power. It is important to remember that no Communist government has been overturned during or after a famine, though coups or popular revolts have frequently replaced authoritarian governments after famines. However, the Communist record in this century may not be applicable in the case of North Korea, because other Communist regimes experienced famine early in their histories when revolutionary fervor was at its peak, and they maintained control of the food distribution system so that dissenters would starve if they were not put down by internal security forces. The North Korean regime has de facto privatized the food distribution system; its revolutionary fervor has diminished over time and by the famine itself; and it has no allies left to save it in the event of a military coup, which is the only serious threat to the survival of the regime.
Bolding mine.


Umm...I'm sorry but I don't know exactly what point you're trying to make here? I said let them starve, not let them starve until they overthrow their government. Just starving is good enough for me. You know, the kind of starving that gets all the humanitarians around the planet all riled up and ready for action. The kind you just can't ignore, with pictures of little babies, their rib cages jutting out, living in mud huts. That kind of starving.

Kim Jong-Il will save them. He's a wonderful, kind, all knowing leader with only the peoples of his great "democratic republic" in mind. He's awesome. I wanna make it with him.

"He is addressed by many honorary titles: the "great leader," the son of the nation, national hero, liberator, and the fatherly leader. According to the party, there can be no greater honor or duty than being loyal to him "absolutely and unconditionally."

http://countrystudies.us/north-korea/55.htm
#68 Oct 09 2006 at 9:58 AM Rating: Excellent
Will swallow your soul
******
29,360 posts
Quote:
You're absolutely right though, the pressure and negotiations HAVE to come from the surrounding Asiatic nations (China's not the only one that can exert pressure and has something to lose).


True, though China is potentially open to embarrassment by an ostensible ally; and China has the controlling hand on NK's oil spigot.

____________________________
In a time of universal deceit, telling the truth is a revolutionary act.

#69 Oct 09 2006 at 10:54 AM Rating: Good
Ministry of Silly Cnuts
*****
19,524 posts
I'm not losing sleep.

NK is an odd kettle of fish - there is almost no relationship between the population and the leadership (Yes, starving people usually overthrow despots, but in NK they've had years of famine and kept the lid on). So I don't see any regime change anytime soon.

The fact that NK has pissed off Beijing and Moscow probably puts them back 15 years in terms of regional influence.

I recommend we send Condy in a basque.
____________________________
"I started out with nothin' and I still got most of it left" - Seasick Steve
#70 Oct 09 2006 at 11:06 AM Rating: Good
***
3,339 posts
Samira wrote:
hand on NK's oil spigot.


Why does it always have to be about sex with you.

#71 Oct 09 2006 at 11:11 AM Rating: Excellent
Will swallow your soul
******
29,360 posts
Celcio wrote:
Samira wrote:
hand on NK's oil spigot.


Why does it always have to be about sex with you.


I'm.... I'm so ashamed.
____________________________
In a time of universal deceit, telling the truth is a revolutionary act.

#72 Oct 09 2006 at 11:17 AM Rating: Decent
*****
10,755 posts
Celcio wrote:
Samira wrote:
hand on NK's oil spigot.


Why does it always have to be about sex with you.



He's the official UK sex-bomb. What do you expect?
#73 Oct 09 2006 at 11:24 AM Rating: Excellent
Will swallow your soul
******
29,360 posts
NephthysWanderer the Charming wrote:
Celcio wrote:
Samira wrote:
hand on NK's oil spigot.


Why does it always have to be about sex with you.



He's the official UK sex-bomb. What do you expect?


He who? Huh?
____________________________
In a time of universal deceit, telling the truth is a revolutionary act.

#74 Oct 09 2006 at 11:52 AM Rating: Excellent
Avatar
******
29,919 posts
Did anyone else see the reported test yield of the device they detonated? If that is anywhere near accurate, it's way smaller than the hiroshima bomb, or even the initial manhattan project tests. I'm wondering if they didn't scale down that pakistani design they have and try to make a uranium based missile capable warhead. You would get a better yield using conventional explosives at that scale, but the alure of a missile launchable warhead might prompt them to go that route, since they don't have plutonium facilities.

That or maybe they detonated a large mass of conventional explosives and made a dirty bomb to give off enough radiation to be detectable. Its either that, or they really botched their bomb design.
____________________________
Arch Duke Kaolian Drachensborn, lvl 95 Ranger, Unrest Server
Tech support forum | FAQ (Support) | Mobile Zam: http://m.zam.com (Premium only)
Forum Rules
#75 Oct 09 2006 at 12:00 PM Rating: Decent
*****
10,755 posts
Samira wrote:
NephthysWanderer the Charming wrote:
Celcio wrote:
Samira wrote:
hand on NK's oil spigot.


Why does it always have to be about sex with you.



He's the official UK sex-bomb. What do you expect?


He who? Huh?


Mr. Winky.

You mean he's not British? I just assumed that with the huge red nose and bad hair that he was a limey.
#76 Oct 09 2006 at 12:01 PM Rating: Default
****
4,158 posts
Quote:
I recommend we send Condy in a basque.


If you really wanna scare them, send Margaret Beckett in a basque. That'd learn 'em good!
____________________________
"If you have selfish, ignorant citizens, you're gonna get selfish, ignorant leaders". Carlin.

Reply To Thread

Colors Smileys Quote OriginalQuote Checked Help

 

Recent Visitors: 286 All times are in CST
Anonymous Guests (286)