Say hello to the world's new nuclear power...

[FlamesAddiction]

http://www.reuters.com/newsArticle.jhtml?t...storyID=7452415

Arms proliferation might be getting worse. Looks like North Korea might have purchased a nuclear weapon from Pakistan. Funny how a country that proliferates nukes, and is run by a dicatator is an ally of Bush's "war on terror" (sic).

[Frank the Tank]

Oh this is really comforting. I'll sleep well tonight...

[CaptainCrunch]

well this is terrifying especially since we know that the North Korean's have developed and tested long range missiles.

Looks like the bad old days are coming back thanks to nations that shouldn't be a part of the Nuclear club, being in the nuclear club.

I'm going to build a bomb shelter.

Where are my colored markers again

[Frank the Tank]

I am turning my garden shed into a Fortress of Solitude.

[Cowperson]

Long article in the Calgary Herald or some such paper yesterday, via the Washington Post I believe, indicating North Korea has cut the food rations to its people in half in the last month.

They are effectively on a starvation diet.

So . . . . two scary forces at work: 1) Nukes in the hands of people who think the Marquis of Queensbury is a gay hairdresser and 2) 30 plus million people who might finally have their stomachs tighten enough to pull down the government.

I'll bet the army is getting fed though.

Something is going to happen there internally I would think.

Cowperson

[CaptainCrunch]

Originally posted by Cowperson@Jan 27 2005, 07:49 PM
Long article in the Calgary Herald or some such paper yesterday, via the Washington Post I believe, indicating North Korea has cut the food rations to its people in half in the last month.

They are effectively on a starvation diet.

So . . . . two scary forces at work: 1) Nukes in the hands of people who think the Marquis of Queensbury is a gay hairdresser and 2) 30 plus million people who might finally have their stomachs tighten enough to pull down the government.

I'll bet the army is getting fed though.

Something is going to happen there internally I would think.

Cowperson

The army gets food priority, thier food and clothing, and other neccesities are a whole seperate industry that gets serviced before the people do. So honestly which side are the majority of the soldiers going to fall on when the balloon goes up.

Also Kim has turned paranoia into an artform, so its very likely that there are any kind of organized dissention groups.

The government won't fall until Kim dies of old age, and leaves without an heir.

We don't even know what his family situation is, does he have a wife, or kids.

[Frank the Tank]

I can't stop singing "Kung-Fu Fighting" for some reason......

[Agamemnon]

Originally posted by CaptainCrunch+Jan 27 2005, 08:04 PM--></div><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td>QUOTE (CaptainCrunch @ Jan 27 2005, 08:04 PM)</td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'> <!--QuoteBegin-Cowperson@Jan 27 2005, 07:49 PM
Long article in the Calgary Herald or some such paper yesterday, via the Washington Post I believe, indicating North Korea has cut the food rations to its people in half in the last month.

They are effectively on a starvation diet.

So . . . . two scary forces at work: 1) Nukes in the hands of people who think the Marquis of Queensbury is a gay hairdresser and 2) 30 plus million people who might finally have their stomachs tighten enough to pull down the government.

I'll bet the army is getting fed though.

Something is going to happen there internally I would think.

Cowperson

The army gets food priority, thier food and clothing, and other neccesities are a whole seperate industry that gets serviced before the people do. So honestly which side are the majority of the soldiers going to fall on when the balloon goes up.

Also Kim has turned paranoia into an artform, so its very likely that there are any kind of organized dissention groups.

The government won't fall until Kim dies of old age, and leaves without an heir.

We don't even know what his family situation is, does he have a wife, or kids. [/b][/quote]
I think he definitely has one crazy son.

[Looger]

north korea desires nukes to defend itself from US occupation.

it is easily the most prepared nation in the world for nuclear war, its tunnel system and bunker complexes are a feat of engineering.

though it's possible, of course, that they may launch their handful of nukes at a handful of targets one day, i think nations like israel, india, pakistan, and the united states are probably far closer in actual deployment policy as they invade, occupy, and goad other countries. north korea sits above the 38th parallel and cleans its guns.

[FlamesAddiction]

Originally posted by Looger@Jan 27 2005, 08:54 PM
north korea desires nukes to defend itself from US occupation.

it is easily the most prepared nation in the world for nuclear war, its tunnel system and bunker complexes are a feat of engineering.

though it's possible, of course, that they may launch their handful of nukes at a handful of targets one day, i think nations like israel, india, pakistan, and the united states are probably far closer in actual deployment policy as they invade, occupy, and goad other countries. north korea sits above the 38th parallel and cleans its guns.

Actually, I'm not as much afraid of them using them as I am having them re-sell them to another country or group. Arms dealing is Kim's favourite past time.

[CaptainCrunch]

north korea desires nukes to defend itself from US occupation.

Not sure if its that simple. 8 or 9 nukes wouldn't stop the American's if they really had a outright reason to invade North Korea. I think that Kim see's these weapons as a diplomatic tool, he's seen the effectiveness of these weapons as he threaten's to build them. If he has them, he has more power to blackmail the region for aid and cash.

it is easily the most prepared nation in the world for nuclear war, its tunnel system and bunker complexes are a feat of engineering.

Tunnel systems and bunkers are no defense against penetrating nukes. The Russian's have an entire regiment of single mega warhead penetrating weapons that are there to turn mount Cheyenne into glowing lake Cheyenne (sp?). Most of the tunnels and bunkers are build around the conventional defense of NK.

though it's possible, of course, that they may launch their handful of nukes at a handful of targets one day, i think nations like israel, india, pakistan, and the united states are probably far closer in actual deployment policy as they invade, occupy, and goad other countries. north korea sits above the 38th parallel and cleans its guns.

Gven the defense alert status of NK, combined with its reckless policy of aggression int the DMZ and thier use of special forces. I think that a NK under a less than rational Kim with functional nukes is a frightening proposition.

[Daradon]

Originally posted by CaptainCrunch@Jan 27 2005, 01:30 PM
well this is terrifying especially since we know that the North Korean's have developed and tested long range missiles.

Looks like the bad old days are coming back thanks to nations that shouldn't be a part of the Nuclear club, being in the nuclear club.

I'm going to build a bomb shelter.

Where are my colored markers again

As opposed to the countries that SHOULD be part of the nuclear club?

What guidelines are you using to determine that?

As for people saying they are terrified, I don't really see why. Maybe if you lived in Washington DC, though I would still say you are overreacting. Unless you are a religious fanatic there's really no point to having just ONE missile. They just want to use it as a bargaining chip for something. I'd be far more worried if I lived around North Korea, as their short to mid-range missiles are more proven than their long range.

It is intereting that it was a US ally that supposedly gave them the material.

[CaptainCrunch]

Originally posted by Daradon+Jan 28 2005, 01:22 AM--></div><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td>QUOTE (Daradon @ Jan 28 2005, 01:22 AM)</td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'> <!--QuoteBegin-CaptainCrunch@Jan 27 2005, 01:30 PM
well this is terrifying especially since we know that the North Korean's have developed and tested long range missiles.

Looks like the bad old days are coming back thanks to nations that shouldn't be a part of the Nuclear club, being in the nuclear club.

I'm going to build a bomb shelter.

Where are my colored markers again

As opposed to the countries that SHOULD be part of the nuclear club?

What guidelines are you using to determine that?

As for people saying they are terrified, I don't really see why. Maybe if you lived in Washington DC, though I would still say you are overreacting. Unless you are a religious fanatic there's really no point to having just ONE missile. They just want to use it as a bargaining chip for something. I'd be far more worried if I lived around North Korea, as their short to mid-range missiles are more proven than their long range.

It is intereting that it was a US ally that supposedly gave them the material. [/b][/quote]
Unfortunately there are members that are or should be part of the nuclear club. Personally I would love to see all nuclear weapons banned, but its unlikely that its going to happen. At least the American's have never tried to use these weapons as an international negotiating chip like N Korea has in the past. And personally based on the value system on display by the leadership of North Korea I think that a country that would rather starve its people so it can have a bomb, then take money that could probably feed a lot of people is a scary proposition. A country that builds a massive advanced military as oppossed to making sure that its economy is functional is a big problem.

they might not on the whole be motivated by god, but thier military is motivated by Kim. And they will do what he says, not because its right, but because its almost been bred into thier military over the last 60 years.


I'm personally concerned (maybe terrified was a stong word) that North Korea because they have been nothing but a disruptive force in that nation, and have a historic desire for the industrial capacity of the South, and a long standing hatred of Japan.

A rougue country with one missile frightens me far more then a stabile and rational leadership with a million missiles.

Realistically you don't really need a accurate or advanced long range missile if you can just lob it in the general direction of your enemy. One missile striking in the area of Vancouver or Washington would be devastating.

Oh and its interesting how you try to put the blame on the American's here. Just because they are allies, dosen't mean that the American's control thier government or thier arsenals. This is all about Pakistan doing this and has nothing to do with the yanks.

[Looger]

CaptainCrunch, in response to your points:

Not sure if its that simple. 8 or 9 nukes wouldn't stop the American's if they really had a outright reason to invade North Korea. I think that Kim see's these weapons as a diplomatic tool, he's seen the effectiveness of these weapons as he threaten's to build them. If he has them, he has more power to blackmail the region for aid and cash.

he has in fact tried that recently, though i think that 50 years of hermit policy, mostly before Kim Jong-Il, have more to with the nukes existence - complete and total paranoia. the 8 or 9 nukes would mean a lot larger butcher bill for an invasion, if the americans could invade NK easily they would have done it by now. the cost is larger, NK and america knows it.

Tunnel systems and bunkers are no defense against penetrating nukes. The Russian's have an entire regiment of single mega warhead penetrating weapons that are there to turn mount Cheyenne into glowing lake Cheyenne (sp?). Most of the tunnels and bunkers are build around the conventional defense of NK.

true - but they are better than nothing. they will guard some people/weaponry against surface strikes. but it's like the club for your car - no good against someone that's a pro but some defence against some theft attempts. you and i know that america isn't going to nuke NK for no reason, but they are driven by a culture of fear. and those tunnels mean some troop movement, logistics and communication that are somewhat safer from carpet-bombing a-la-ho chi minh trail. didn't NK contractors advise on and build the tunnels in SV?

Gven the defense alert status of NK, combined with its reckless policy of aggression int the DMZ and thier use of special forces. I think that a NK under a less than rational Kim with functional nukes is a frightening proposition.

if i had to compare NK's adventurism, kidnapping, and that tunnel they built to israel's invasion and 18-year occupation of lebanon, the US's invasion and occupation of iraq, india and pakistan playing nuclear roulette with rogue military commanders trading regular-army artillery barrages in 1999, all of them nuclear powers, i will take NK's aggression, thank you very much. in the context of provocation by all nuclear powers - which is obviously emboldened by those damnable weapons - NK is on the very light end of international beligerency.

Kim-Jong-Il is nuts. he orders executions. but his madness is indiscriminate - stalin style. and he has a great golf game, according to local media.

ariel sharon oversaw the phalange massacres at sabra and chatila. he is on record saying some very inflammatory things, talmudic eradication kinda stuff. he publicly praised that american - (can't remember his first name) goldberg - that died gunning down dozens in the hebron massacre.

who's more dangerous?

[CaptainCrunch]

Honestly in terms of either leaders Sharon or Kim, I'd take neither right here or right now. But at least Sharon is somewhat accountable and Kim is not, and that does make a difference to me.

Don't get me wrong, neither of thier actions rank to me as far as rational.

Not sure if its that simple. 8 or 9 nukes wouldn't stop the American's if they really had a outright reason to invade North Korea. I think that Kim see's these weapons as a diplomatic tool, he's seen the effectiveness of these weapons as he threaten's to build them. If he has them, he has more power to blackmail the region for aid and cash.

he has in fact tried that recently, though i think that 50 years of hermit policy, mostly before Kim Jong-Il, have more to with the nukes existence - complete and total paranoia. the 8 or 9 nukes would mean a lot larger butcher bill for an invasion, if the americans could invade NK easily they would have done it by now. the cost is larger, NK and america knows it.

I'm not sure if I'm going to agree with you one this. My biggest fear with Kim is he seems likely to be the type of person to let those missiles fly if he gets backed into a corner with either his people revolt, or he does get invaded.


true - but they are better than nothing. they will guard some people/weaponry against surface strikes. but it's like the club for your car - no good against someone that's a pro but some defence against some theft attempts. you and i know that america isn't going to nuke NK for no reason, but they are driven by a culture of fear. and those tunnels mean some troop movement, logistics and communication that are somewhat safer from carpet-bombing a-la-ho chi minh trail. didn't NK contractors advise on and build the tunnels in SV?

North Korean engineers are very good at making tunnel systems, and they were also hard at work for Saddam previous to this war. These tunnels aren't in place to protect from a nuclear or carpet bombing strike as American satellites can pick up density differences in rock and soil. They are there to transport troops and supplies throughout the country side in secret.

As far as the carpet bombing go, its not really used anymore as American and thier allies are more enamoured with precision guided munitions.

[Looger]

actually i remember watching a news report where they interviewed some engineers that worked on the bunker-busters, and they were quite disappointed that some of the juiciest targets, saddam's underground warrens, barely had their china rattled after direct hits.

[Daradon]

Originally posted by CaptainCrunch@Jan 27 2005, 07:40 PM
Unfortunately there are members that are or should be part of the nuclear club. Personally I would love to see all nuclear weapons banned, but its unlikely that its going to happen. At least the American's have never tried to use these weapons as an international negotiating chip like N Korea has in the past. And personally based on the value system on display by the leadership of North Korea I think that a country that would rather starve its people so it can have a bomb, then take money that could probably feed a lot of people is a scary proposition. A country that builds a massive advanced military as oppossed to making sure that its economy is functional is a big problem.

they might not on the whole be motivated by god, but thier military is motivated by Kim. And they will do what he says, not because its right, but because its almost been bred into thier military over the last 60 years.


I'm personally concerned (maybe terrified was a stong word) that North Korea because they have been nothing but a disruptive force in that nation, and have a historic desire for the industrial capacity of the South, and a long standing hatred of Japan.

A rougue country with one missile frightens me far more then a stabile and rational leadership with a million missiles.

Realistically you don't really need a accurate or advanced long range missile if you can just lob it in the general direction of your enemy. One missile striking in the area of Vancouver or Washington would be devastating.

Oh and its interesting how you try to put the blame on the American's here. Just because they are allies, dosen't mean that the American's control thier government or thier arsenals. This is all about Pakistan doing this and has nothing to do with the yanks.

As you said, there should be NO weapons. I can't say one nation should or shouldn't have them over another nation, that's just ridiculous. No one should have them... And no naiton on the planet has proven to have leader or people responsible or enlightened enough to handle such power. You argue that a naiton that builds it weaponry over making sure it's economy is healthy shouldn't have them. Hmmmm, one could use that argument to raise eyebrows about the US military spending as it continues to roll out record deficits. No, they aren't as poor as the North Koreans, but how exactly are you drawing the lines?

As far as you saying that the U.S. has never used it as a bargaining chip, well that's kinda silly. There's only been one nation that has every used a nuke in a hostile act. As well, the whole cold war could be called bargaining or posturing.

And ALL nations have built up their arsenals while problems have been going on internally, human rights abuses to their own peoples, money that could be better spent elsewhere. If one naiton doens't have the excuse, none do.

The fact of the matter is that they are WEAPONS, and if one country is going to stockpile, how can we condemn another?

And I wasn't blaiming the U.S. or Pakistan for the current developments. I just found it interesting. That was a rather large leap of faith the Capt.

[shoestring]

The nuclear guys .the new nuclear guys are all placed in one sector of the earth.That is the concern I would think.
New buttons to push.

ScARRRY stuff Kids!!!