MSNBC reports NK apparrently tested a Nuke

[clevin]

http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/15190745/
They "agreed to halt it" just "hours ago", ..... and now, they apparently TESTED one..

[XNine]

That is just fantastic. That guy is even more insane than Iran or America's president... This is going to mean trouble...

[jsw]

Yeah, but... "no leakage", no seismic activity confirmed. Did they actually test anything?

[xsedrinam]

Yeah, but... "no leakage", no seismic activity confirmed. Did they actually test anything?
"A South Korean official said an explosion had been detected in the north-east of North Korea, measuring 3.5 on the Richter scale." North Korea In Nuclear Test Claim (http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/in_depth/6032525.stm)

[thedude110]

Do smart people know what 3.5 on the Richter Scale means? A big nuke? A little nuke? Your average, run of the mill nuke?

Don't entirely mean to be flippant, but am wondering how a test really changes anything. We knew the nukes were there before, and now we all really know they're there.

Will be interested to see how directly the White House responds and who precisely does the responding.

[EricNau]

North Korea considers the test a big success, after all, they didn't accidentally nuke themselves. :D :p

All jokes aside, it'll be years before North Korea is a real threat; I'm not worried yet.

...I say we nuke 'em before they can nuke us.

[xsedrinam]

Do smart people know what 3.5 on the Richter Scale means? A big nuke? A little nuke? Your average, run of the mill nuke?

Don't entirely mean to be flippant, but am wondering how a test really changes anything. We knew the nukes were there before, and now we all really know they're there.

Will be interested to see how directly the White House responds and who precisely does the responding.
Looks like smart people would consider 3.5 "minor". Less smart and uninformed bystanders would probably rate it a ..."daaamn, what was that?" :)

[EricNau]

Do smart people know what 3.5 on the Richter Scale means? A big nuke? A little nuke? Your average, run of the mill nuke?
According to wikipedia, an explosion measuring 3.5 on the richter scale would be equivalent to the Chernobyl nuclear disaster in 1986 (Note: This is based purely on explosive strength and NOT nuclear output).

Also, a "Small atomic bomb" would measure about 4.0 and the Nagasaki atomic bomb measured 5.0.

[elfin buddy]

I believe a 3.5 on the Richter scale is pretty small.

In fact, to make sure I'm not full of *****, I just looked it up (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Moment_magnitude_scale). According to Wikipedia, a one kiloton weapon is about the same as a 4 on the Richter scale.

That's pretty damn small. No wonder nobody detected it. More like a tactical nuke than anything else. But yeah, it's only going to get bigger with time... :(

EDIT: Dammit, EricNau beat me to it!

[thedude110]

In fact, to make sure I'm not full of *****, I just looked it up (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Moment_magnitude_scale).

Did you see the formula on that page?

I swear to god, Tom Hanks lives to make me feel inferior.

Will be putting "Where M sub O is the seismic moment" into a poem at some point, though.

[pseudobrit]

It's possible, assuming the 3.5 figure is correct, that the test was a "fizzle" where the yield is significantly below expectations. It's also possible that they simply used a very large conventional device to bluff the world.

[EricNau]

I believe a 3.5 on the Richter scale is pretty small.

In fact, to make sure I'm not full of *****, I just looked it up (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Moment_magnitude_scale). According to Wikipedia, a one kiloton weapon is about the same as a 4 on the Richter scale.

That's pretty damn small. No wonder nobody detected it. More like a tactical nuke than anything else. But yeah, it's only going to get bigger with time... :(

EDIT: Dammit, EricNau beat me to it!
Keep in mind, you were looking at Moment magnitude scale, not the Richter scale. :)

[obeygiant]

NK seems desperate.

[FFTT]

The more troubling aspect to all of this is that we are being tested too.

The United States is now so overly committed in the Middle East that our only
course of action is diplomacy or an air strike.

We don't have enough actual boots on the ground as the term goes to
actually control any major situation.

The rest of the world is watching to see how we proceed from here.

[Chundles]

USGS says 4.2

I say Kim Jong Il just rounded up a few hundred thousand of his subjects, sent them down the mine and got them to jump at exactly the same time.

USGS Report. (http://earthquake.usgs.gov/eqcenter/recenteqsww/Maps/10/130_40.php)

[beatsme]

according to CNN, the USGS recorded a 4.2 magnitude seismic event in North Korea, but as of right now (12:42am EDT) no one in the US gov't in willing to verify that an detonation has taken place.

personally, I'm not that worried about it, at least in terms of how it can threaten the US. China's not letting go of Kim Jong-il's leash anytime soon. And as long as the US is pouring money hand over fist into the Chinese economy, China will have no desire to sour relations with the West.

I do think it's a threat to Taiwan. The Chinese know we want them to put a stop to this kind of thing, and I'm willing to bet that they'll say "we'll keep this guy in check, but we want the ROC back..."

...maybe not in those exact words, but my feeling is that's how it'll play out.

just my opinion...

[Ugg]

personally, I'm not that worried about it, at least in terms of how it can threaten the US. China's not letting go of Kim Jong-il's leash anytime soon. And as long as the US is pouring money hand over fist into the Chinese economy, China will have no desire to sour relations with the West.

I do think it's a threat to Taiwan. The Chinese know we want them to put a stop to this kind of thing, and I'm willing to bet that they'll say "we'll keep this guy in check, but we want the ROC back..."


China is pouring money hand over fist into US treasuries so that we can afford to spend a trillion or so dollars fighting wars in Afghanistan and Iraq. It's a mutual relationship, not nearly as one sided as you make it out to be. China faces a potentially greater threat from nukes in NK than the US does due to its proximity to the mad Elvis of NK.

I wouldn't be surprised if China used Taiwan as a bargaining tool with the US but China will defend itself above all.

[beatsme]

It's a mutual relationship, not nearly as one sided as you make it out to be.

I didn't mean to imply (and don't think I did) that it is. We need their low-cost labor as much as they need the US contracts. Granted.

China is pouring money hand over fist into US treasuries so that we can afford to spend a trillion or so dollars fighting wars in Afghanistan and Iraq.

link? or were you speaking metaphorically? The reason I ask is because I feel rather dubious about the contention that China is a vested partner in the "war against terrorism," mostly because of this (http://usinfo.state.gov/xarchives/display.html?p=washfile-english&y=2006&m=August&x=20060828170426bpuh0.2782251) and also this (http://www.ciaonet.org/olj/meria/meria_sep05/meria05_rur01.html)

[EricNau]

link? or were you speaking metaphorically? The reason I ask is because I feel rather dubious about the contention that China is a vested partner in the "war against terrorism," mostly because of this (http://usinfo.state.gov/xarchives/display.html?p=washfile-english&y=2006&m=August&x=20060828170426bpuh0.2782251) and also this (http://www.ciaonet.org/olj/meria/meria_sep05/meria05_rur01.html)
I can't tell you why, but China is pouring their money into the US (I believe mostly in the form of Bonds). ...That's right, the US is borrowing money from China. :eek:

[Ugg]

I didn't mean to imply (and don't think I did) that it is. We need their low-cost labor as much as they need the US contracts. Granted.



link? or were you speaking metaphorically? The reason I ask is because I feel rather dubious about the contention that China is a vested partner in the "war against terrorism," mostly because of this (http://usinfo.state.gov/xarchives/display.html?p=washfile-english&y=2006&m=August&x=20060828170426bpuh0.2782251) and also this (http://www.ciaonet.org/olj/meria/meria_sep05/meria05_rur01.html)

You did say that "China will have no desire to sour relations with the West"

I don't contend that China is a vested partner in the fight against terrorism. The only time they really get involved is when it threatens their well being. What they are doing by buying US treasuries, is financing our military engagements. Not that they want to but without that infusion of cash, the US would be in dire straits.

Once again, China faces a bigger threat through an errant nuke than the US does, they're not going to let little Kim get too far in his efforts to build nukes. It's not in their best interest.

[FFTT]

China received a 20 minute warning and they are not at all pleased, to say the least.

http://www.dnaindia.com/report.asp?NewsID=1057555

[Dont Hurt Me]

It's possible, assuming the 3.5 figure is correct, that the test was a "fizzle" where the yield is significantly below expectations. It's also possible that they simply used a very large conventional device to bluff the world.I agree but 1 thing is clear here how do you negotiate anything with a country that lies straight to your face, says they will do one thing then does another, N.K. has shown over and over that its words,its agreements,treatys,etc all mean nothing. I wonder if they are still printing U.S. currency? Not that we will do anything like this but the U.S. could destroy the entire country if it so wanted and not by conventional means. A all out nuclear assault could eliminate N.K. forever period.

China has done nothing to these guys, they are screwing up big time because they are the ones who dont want a nuclear Taiwan. Hey China since you dont seem interested in N.K. why dont we just send a few Nukes to Taiwan,Japan and South Korea just as a safety measure now:D

[Thomas Veil]

I believe diplomacy is the answer.

We should reach an agreement with North Korea: for every nuclear weapon they test on their soil, we should be allowed to test a nuclear weapon on their soil. ;)

[telecomm]

This Newsweek article (http://msnbc.msn.com/id/15175633/site/newsweek/) (published online before the apparent test) casts things in an interesting light.

[Black&Tan]

China received a 20 minute warning and they are not at all pleased, to say the least.

http://www.dnaindia.com/report.asp?NewsID=1057555


Not so sure about dnaindia. Their other lead story is that Angelina Jolie wants more lesbian love scenes in her movies so she can talk about shopping....

http://www.dnaindia.com/report.asp?NewsID=1057491

[iGary]

http://i.a.cnn.net/cnn/2006/WORLD/asiapcf/10/09/korea.nuclear.test/newt1.korea.mon.05.ap.jpg


I just want to shave his head and take away his Aqua Net.

[Dont Hurt Me]

This Newsweek article (http://msnbc.msn.com/id/15175633/site/newsweek/) (published online before the apparent test) casts things in an interesting light.Interesting indeed, but it does show more of the Cheney /Bush mindset of lie & spin. Maybe we should send N.K. a letter to just wait 2 more years until we kick out all these liars. Bush & Cheney cant be trusted to negotiate anything in my view for our country. Its clear they are working hard for the military industrial complex and all those businesses who reap billions building weapons. The short Korean is no better they all are powermongers when you get down to it and none of them really represent the people of either country.

[iGary]

Interesting indeed, but it does show more of the Cheney /Bush mindset of lie & spin. Maybe we should send N.K. a letter to just wait 2 more years until we kick out all these liars. Bush & Cheney cant be trusted to negotiate anything in my view for our country. Its clear they are working hard for the military industrial complex and all those businesses who reap billions building weapons. The short Korean is no better they all are powermongers when you get down to it and none of them really represent the people of either country.

You sound like a broken record. You say "spin and lies" one more time, I'll make you sit in the corner. :D

[Black&Tan]

This Newsweek article (http://msnbc.msn.com/id/15175633/site/newsweek/) (published online before the apparent test) casts things in an interesting light.

Looks like this is the other side of the coin. We have the truth, as revealed by the US government. And the truth, as related by Newsweek. Which one do you choose? I think its probably in the middle. While there are probably mitigating circumstances which could contribute to North Korea's actions, but I don't think they excuse the testing of a nuke.

[Dont Hurt Me]

iGary , give me a new phrase but Lie & Spin is just what these guys do on almost anything they talk about or are involved in. Even Bush & Cheney are going around still saying there was link between Alqueda and Iraq which is false, they are still saying Iraq had WMDs which again in making s... up. They stretch the truth everytime. Please give me something better then LIE & SPIN.;)

[yg17]

I'm more worried about bush's response to this than I am of NK themselves. Does anyone actually think they're a threat?

[Ugg]

I'm more worried about bush's response to this than I am of NK themselves. Does anyone actually think they're a threat?

They're a real threat to peace in Asia, they're not a direct threat to the US. The probability of one of their nukes reaching US soil is very, very slim. If NK were to nuke South Korea, all hell would break loose.

[yg17]

They're a real threat to peace in Asia, they're not a direct threat to the US. The probability of one of their nukes reaching US soil is very, very slim. If NK were to nuke South Korea, all hell would break loose.

I don't think they're going to nuke anyone because they know that we, or any other country, can kick their ass.

[elfin buddy]

Keep in mind, you were looking at Moment magnitude scale, not the Richter scale. :)

Heh heh, whoops :rolleyes: Thought they were the same thing...good catch!

[Josh]

Bush, Japan not Pleased: http://edition.cnn.com/2006/WORLD/europe/10/09/monday/index.html

Is it just me, or does N. Korea seem so desperate that they'd blow up their own country if ever backed into a corner?

That's what worries me the most about any of this.

[Dont Hurt Me]

When you have nothing you have nothing to loose. North Korea has nothing and is one of the poorest nations in the world. Ever look at a night Map of North Korea you would think the midget Kim young punk is the only one with a light bulb. Also worth mentioning its illegal to have outside contact with anyone ,any country. This crime has the death penalty.

[zimv20]

my analysis is that this is a dream gift to the GOP. not only does it get the foley scandal off the front page, but it once again ups the fear factor. if i didn't know better, i'd say KJIl wants to keep the GOP in power.

[MACDRIVE]

http://i.a.cnn.net/cnn/2006/WORLD/asiapcf/10/09/korea.nuclear.test/newt1.korea.mon.05.ap.jpg


I just want to shave his head and take away his Aqua Net.

http://deephousepage.com/smilies/rofl5.gif LOL!!! Thank you iGary for that one. :)

[Queso]

my analysis is that this is a dream gift to the GOP. not only does it get the foley scandal off the front page, but it once again ups the fear factor. if i didn't know better, i'd say KJIl wants to keep the GOP in power.
This also crossed my mind. A bit too convenient on the timing front.

[Dont Hurt Me]

http://deephousepage.com/smilies/rofl5.gif LOL!!! Thank you iGary for that one. :)We need a picture of his shoes, I hear he wears lifts to make him taller then his natural 5'3"

[FFTT]

I just read through my Stratfor Intelligence Summary about this.
http://www.stratfor.com/

I'll let you make up your own conclusions

Summary

No sooner had the dust cleared from North Korea's first nuclear test Oct. 9 than speculation emerged about a second test. Although the North Koreans probably are capable of carrying out another test, Pyongyang can get almost as much political mileage by merely faking preparations for a second test.

Analysis

Within hours of North Korea's nuclear test Oct. 9, the head of Seoul's National Intelligence Service, Kim Seung Gyu, told South Korea's parliament that Pyongyang might be preparing a follow-on nuclear test at its Ponggye site in the country's northeast. Kim said increased activity, vehicles and personnel have been observed at the site, which was originally believed to be where the first North Korean nuclear test would take place.

The North's Oct. 9 test, now believed to have taken place in the Hwadae area, was about a 4.2 on the Richter scale, which would be consistent with more than 1,000 tons of high explosives, or one kiloton. Other estimates have put the blast at around 550 tons of high explosives. In either case, the blast was very small compared to past and current nuclear weapons.



A second nuclear test certainly is within North Korea's capabilities. It is widely believed that Pyongyang possesses six to eight nuclear devices and material enough to produce a few more.

The relatively small explosive yield of the test suggests that the North Korean device failed to function properly, though it could also mean that the North Koreans wanted to test their design on a smaller scale before conducting a full-scale test. If that is the case, Pyongyang, now confident in the effectiveness of its device, could be preparing a full-effect test.

The preparations at Ponggye cited by Kim, however, could be just for show. North Korea might be seeking to capitalize politically on the first test by making the world think a second test is imminent. This would be useful for keeping those countries that are most concerned with its nuclear capabilities -- the United States, Japan, South Korea and China -- off balance. With elections set for 2007 in South Korea and U.S. midterm elections only weeks away, the political magnitude of the North's test might exceed what was actually measured on the Richter scale.

This behavior is consistent with Pyongyang's strategy in dealing with the United States, Japan, South Korea and China, part of which is delaying a solution to the nuclear crisis for as long as possible. Keeping these countries off balance and jittery over the possibility of another test prevents them from acting decisively. The indecision keeps them from being unified in their response, and the resulting lack of unity gives North Korea time and leverage.

North Korea's intent with its first nuclear test was to shock the world and demonstrate that it has the will and capability to carry out its threats. That was accomplished. From Pyongyang's perspective, there is little need for a second test. Just about the only reason the North Koreans would have for conducting a second test is that they have constructed two types of nuclear devices -- plutonium and uranium -- and want to test them both. Given their meager resources, the North Koreans are not likely to waste material to carry out two explosions of the same type.

[beatsme]

have we had confirmation from a reputable source that a nuclear detonation did in fact take place? I see no reason to take North Korea's word for it.

EDIT: I'm not directing this at you FFTT...I'm just asking

[Ugg]

have we had confirmation from a reputable source that a nuclear detonation did in fact take place? I see no reason to take North Korea's word for it.

EDIT: I'm not directing this at you FFTT...I'm just asking

Nope.

Sniffer planes will be flying along the coast of Korea this week to see if they can "smell" the after effects of a nuke.

[XNine]

Can someone with access to photoshop at the moment please take the picture gary posted, and give Lil Kim bright red hair, like a troll doll. I will love you forever if you do.

[FFTT]

It seems Stratfor's analysis is that Kim's capabilties are quit limited, so in reality he's just throwing a rather dangerous temper tantrum trying to get a desired reaction from the international community.

More important to him is the ego boost that he derives from having his citizens
think that he's taking on the world in their behalf.

What he's really saying is that you better not Saddam me.

[clayj]

http://i.a.cnn.net/cnn/2006/WORLD/asiapcf/10/09/korea.nuclear.test/newt1.korea.mon.05.ap.jpg


I just want to shave his head and take away his Aqua Net.I just want to throw him off of a very, very high ledge.

Seriously, what's it gonna take for someone (the Chinese, hopefully, in this case) to decide that whackjobs like Kim Jong-Il need to be euthanized/terminated with extreme prejudice?

And why aren't we sending in the cruise missiles to destroy every NK surface installation which is involved in the manufacture of materials for nuclear weapon construction?

[Chundles]

We all know exactly why he's done this. He wants some attention because he's so ronery...

http://www.cinema.com/image_lib/8885_p007_thumb.jpg

[Queso]

I just want to throw him off of a very, very high ledge.

Seriously, what's it gonna take for someone (the Chinese, hopefully, in this case) to decide that whackjobs like Kim Jong-Il need to be euthanized/terminated with extreme prejudice?

And why aren't we sending in the cruise missiles to destroy every NK surface installation which is involved in the manufacture of materials for nuclear weapon construction?
1) You won't need a high ledge. A medium one will do ;)

2) Replace Kim Jong-Il with any other world leader and you see why that's not such a good idea. They're all percieved as nutjobs by somebody.

3) Because this country is in China's sphere of influence. They need to resolve this one, preferably quickly.

We all know exactly why he's done this. He wants some attention because he's so ronery...
Can you believe they just showed that clip on the ITN News bulletin? I guess they don't have much library footage of the real man :D

[clayj]

1) You won't need a high ledge. A medium one will do ;)

2) Replace Kim Jong-Il with any other world leader and you see why that's not such a good idea. They're all percieved as nutjobs by somebody.

3) Because this country is in China's sphere of influence. They need to resolve this one, preferably quickly.1. Nah, I want him to have plenty of time to think about what's about to happen. And I want to hear him yell "Hans Brix!" on the way down. ;)

2. There is no moral equivalency here. If you want to compare the Dear Leader to Pol Pot or Stalin or those idiots who run Myanmar, fine. But don't compare him to the leader of ANY Western style democracy.

3. Fine. The Chinese need to be put on warning that since they claim dominion over NK, any use of a nuke by NK against South Korea or Japan or the US, or any sale/transfer of nuclear technology to Iran or to a terrorist group, will be interpreted as being caused by Chinese inaction. Enough of this BS already.

[jsw]

3. Fine. The Chinese need to be put on warning...
What good would that do?

[skunk]

3. Fine. The Chinese need to be put on warning that since they claim dominion over NK, any use of a nuke by NK against South Korea or Japan or the US, or any sale/transfer of nuclear technology to Iran or to a terrorist group, will be interpreted as being caused by Chinese inaction. Enough of this BS already.And that would help how, exactly?

[Queso]

2. There is no moral equivalency here. If you want to compare the Dear Leader to Pol Pot or Stalin or those idiots who run Myanmar, fine. But don't compare him to the leader of ANY Western style democracy.
To your eyes and mine, yes. But put yourself in the position of an Iranian, Pakistani or Palestinian and you'll see what I'm getting at.

[clayj]

What good would that do?You mean aside from the fact that it would convey the message that we've had it up to here with Kim Jong-Il?

Honestly, is there anyone out there who truly believes that we're all better off with people like the Dear Leader developing nukes? This has gone on long enough. The Chinese have treated North Korea like a crazy pit bull... they won't let anyone else do anything about it, but it's inevitable that the dog is gonna escape from the yard and maul someone before it's finally euthanized.

To your eyes and mine, yes. But put yourself in the position of an Iranian, Pakistani or Palestinian and you'll see what I'm getting at.Uh, no. Why don't you explain the moral equivalence to me? I'm not Iranian, Pakistani, or Palestinian. I hail from a country, just as you do, that has a long-standing tradition of democracy. Explain to me why a self-proclaimed dictator (who INHERITED the position from his father) should be considered equally compared to the elected (and soon to be gone) leader of a democracy.

[skunk]

Uh, no. Why don't you explain the moral equivalence to me? I'm not Iranian, Pakistani, or Palestinian. I hail from a country, just as you do, that has a long-standing tradition of democracy. Explain to me why a self-proclaimed dictator (who INHERITED the position from his father) should be considered equally compared to the elected (and soon to be gone) leader of a democracy.Besides "a long-standing tradition of democracy" - which has only seen full enfranchisement within the last 100 years - and besides the curious distinction you make in the nepotism of each contender, we have a long tradition of invading and destroying other countries and killing tens of thousands of their inhabitants. We also killed hundreds of thousands of Koreans. But I suppose that's OK because we set the rules - and move the goalposts at will.

[mactastic]

Honestly, is there anyone out there who truly believes that we're all better off with people like the Dear Leader developing nukes?
No. But there are people who believe that this could get a whole lot worse if not handled properly. Most of those people were the same ones who were scoffed at when they also said that there were worse outcomes than Saddam being in control of Iraq.

If you recall, back in early 2003 people like you were making arguments like "Does anyone really believe that we're better off with Saddam Hussein than Iraqi democracy?"

[clayj]

Besides "a long-standing tradition of democracy" - which has only seen full enfranchisement within the last 100 years - and besides the curious distinction you make in the nepotism of each contender, we have a long tradition of invading and destroying other countries and killing tens of thousands of their inhabitants. We also killed hundreds of thousands of Koreans. But I suppose that's OK because we set the rules - and move the goalposts at will.Oh, well, to hell with history then. Are you saying that democracy isn't worth fighting for because it's "only seen full enfranchisement within the last 100 years"?

And the communists (first the Russians, then the Chinese) started the conflict in Korea. Not us. The communists installed Kim Il-Sung and allowed Kim Jong-Il to continue in his stead. Not us. The communists turned their country into a full-on humanitarian disaster zone, allowing 99% of their people to starve while the ruling elite live in (comparative) luxury and use the money they're not spending on food to develop nuclear weapons. Not us.

I don't see how you can, with a straight face, defend North Korea's actions. And I'm saddened by the fact that so many people are unwilling to say "our system is better" because of some strange devotion to the concept of moral equivalence. I guess it says a lot about Western culture that so many are willing to enjoy the freedoms it provides while, at the same time, condemning as much of it as they can and defending those who would see us destroyed.

No. But there are people who believe that this could get a whole lot worse if not handled properly. Most of those people were the same ones who were scoffed at when they also said that there were worse outcomes than Saddam being in control of Iraq.

If you recall, back in early 2003 people like you were making arguments like "Does anyone really believe that we're better off with Saddam Hussein than Iraqi democracy?"I don't think you know what "people like me" were saying back in 2003... because I wasn't on this site in 2003. But I still think we're better off with Saddam Hussein out of power.

[mactastic]

I don't think you know what "people like me" were saying back in 2003... because I wasn't on this site in 2003. But I still think we're better off with Saddam Hussein out of power.
I know exactly what people like you were saying in 2003. But if you notice, I said "people like you", not "you". But it sounds like I was right about what you would have said...

And of course you'd think we're better off with Saddam out of power. Hardly anyone likes to admit to themselves that they were wrong.

But I'm sure terrorism is on the decline, Iran's influence in Iraq has waned, hundreds of bodies aren't showing up tortured on the streets of Baghdad, no new terrorists are being created or trained in Iraq, and US troops have been able to draw down in significant numbers as Iraqis have stood up. That would be the definition of "better off" wouldn't it?

[skunk]

Oh, well, to hell with history then. Are you saying that democracy isn't worth fighting for because it's "only seen full enfranchisement within the last 100 years"?No, I'm saying that it hardly has a "long-standing tradition" of anything.

I don't see how you can, with a straight face, defend North Korea's actions. And I'm saddened by the fact that so many people are unwilling to say "our system is better" because of some strange devotion to the concept of moral equivalence. I guess it says a lot about Western culture that so many are willing to enjoy the freedoms it provides while, at the same time, condemning as much of it as they can and defending those who would see us destroyed.North Korea do not want to "see us destroyed", as far as I know. Have they ever said this? Our system is undoubtedly "better" for us, but has it been better for the Iraqis, for Africa?

I don't think you know what "people like me" were saying back in 2003... because I wasn't on this site in 2003. But I still think we're better off with Saddam Hussein out of power.There is your problem: you say "we're better off with Saddam Hussein out of power", but (a) it is patently untrue, and (b) you ignore the fact that we have destroyed Iraq and killed tens of thousands of innocent Iraqis in the process. "The operation was a success but the patient died".

[clayj]

But I'm sure terrorism is on the decline, Iran's influence in Iraq has waned, hundreds of bodies aren't showing up tortured on the streets of Baghdad, no new terrorists are being created or trained in Iraq, and US troops have been able to draw down in significant numbers as Iraqis have stood up. That would be the definition of "better off" wouldn't it?Well, we will never know how things might have gone if we HADN'T gone into Iraq. The "things would have been better" argument is a strawman argument, since we don't know WHAT would have happened if Saddam had been allowed to remain in power. There always seems to be an assumption that things would have remained EXACTLY the same as they were, but of course that's a canard. Things MIGHT have turned out a lot worse off than they actually have. Saddam might have finished a nuke; he might have used it against Israel or the US; we might all be dead now if not for removing Saddam from power.

So there's really no point in continuing that portion of the argument, is there?

[skunk]

Well, we will never know how things might have gone if we HADN'T gone into Iraq. The "things would have been better" argument is a strawman argument, since we don't know WHAT would have happened if Saddam had been allowed to remain in power. There always seems to be an assumption that things would have remained EXACTLY the same as they were, but of course that's a canard. Things MIGHT have turned out a lot worse off than they actually have. Saddam might have finished a nuke; he might have used it against Israel or the US; we might all be dead now if not for removing Saddam from power.There is absolutely ZERO CHANCE that we could all be dead because SH "might have finished a nuke". What a ridiculous argument.

[mactastic]

So there's really no point in continuing that portion of the argument, is there?
Sure, if you agree that there is no point in arguing that we will be better off without Kim Jong Il pursing nukes since there's no way of really knowing.

Fair enough?

[clayj]

No, I'm saying that it hardly has a "long-standing tradition" of anything.Well, what the hell constitutes "long-standing" for you, then? 200 years? 500 years? Pre-Roman Empire?

North Korea do not want to "see us destroyed", as far as I know. Have they ever said this? Our system is undoubtedly "better" for us, but has it been better for the Iraqis, for Africa?Well, gee, why do you suppose NK is developing nukes and ballistic missiles? To act as a deterrent? Even if that's so, do you trust a crazy man like Kim Jong-Il not to just lob one at us (or the Japanese, or the South Koreans) because he feels threatened? I guess a lot of folks in the UK don't care too much about this because you're beyond the range of the Taepodong. It's easy to criticize when you're really not THAT involved in the problem.

As far as the Iraqis and most of Africa is concerned, they've never lived in a democracy. Seems to me like the British could have done a better job in both of those places in installing some appreciation for democracy. It doesn't help that the people in those parts of the world have almost always lived by the code of "kill anyone who's not part of your tribe or religious sect".

There is your problem: you say "we're better off with Saddam Hussein out of power", but (a) it is patently untrue, and (b) you ignore the fact that we have destroyed Iraq and killed tens of thousands of innocent Iraqis in the process. "The operation was a success but the patient died".(a) Prove it. See my post above for why you can't. (b) I don't ignore this. The violence in Iraq is now started by Iraqis and foreign insurgents. We're trying to establish PEACE and ORDER.

[Queso]

Uh, no. Why don't you explain the moral equivalence to me? I'm not Iranian, Pakistani, or Palestinian. I hail from a country, just as you do, that has a long-standing tradition of democracy. Explain to me why a self-proclaimed dictator (who INHERITED the position from his father) should be considered equally compared to the elected (and soon to be gone) leader of a democracy.
You're completely missing the point. I agree with you, but there are millions of people around the world who view Bush as an evil demagogue and Westerners as evil.

You need to put yourself into the heads of your enemies in order to understand firstly what motivates them, but more importantly what they fear. You can't go round saying to people that "democracy is right, your country is wrong" when they have no experience of democracy. All you achieve is getting their backs up as they see it as you (the enemy) criticising their country and their leaders. It pulls them together just at the moment you want them to break apart.

The Pentagon and CIA used to be good at divide and conquer. You should be asking yourself why they aren't anymore. Either through arrogance from your military superiority or through a poor education system, they've forgotten one of the best weapons they had.

[clayj]

There is absolutely ZERO CHANCE that we could all be dead because SH "might have finished a nuke". What a ridiculous argument.Oh, right. Like the killing of some obscure archduke in Serbia couldn't POSSIBLY start a continentwide war back in 1914. Oh, wait. That DID happen.

If Saddam finished ONE nuke and used it on Tel Aviv, the Israelis would have incinerated the entire Middle East... and then it wouldn't take much for the Russians or the Chinese to make things worse.

Don't tell me that one single action can't result in catastrophe. We've seen it happen before.

[clayj]

The Pentagon and CIA used to be good at divide and conquer. You should be asking yourself why they aren't anymore. Either through arrogance from your military superiority or through a poor education system, they've forgotten one of the best weapons they had.No, the Pentagon and the CIA haven't forgotten how to do their jobs. It's that there are too many people HERE who get in their way. Left-leaning judges, congressmen, and senators, the media, and idiot lawsuits (like the ones that claim that we need to give CONSTITUTIONAL rights to prisoners at Guantanamo). Back when we were facing off against the Soviets, people were smarter about letting our guys take care of the problem.

And with that, I am done with this discussion. In my opinion, Kim Jong-Il needs to be put down like the rabid dog he is... and he's just demonstrated the ability to bite, and bite hard. I don't think we should wait for him to vaporize Seoul or Tokyo or Honolulu before we do something about him.

[skunk]

Well, gee, why do you suppose NK is developing nukes and ballistic missiles? To act as a deterrent? Even if that's so, do you trust a crazy man like Kim Jong-Il not to just lob one at us (or the Japanese, or the South Koreans) because he feels threatened? I guess a lot of folks in the UK don't care too much about this because you're beyond the range of the Taepodong. It's easy to criticize when you're really not THAT involved in the problem.Are you really that worried that a Taepodong missile will get all the way to Alaska - right in your backyard, I know - when they can't even test-fire it successfully? We're not involved in the problem until you lot start over-reacting and provoking a crisis. As usual.

As far as the Iraqis and most of Africa is concerned, they've never lived in a democracy.Nor did they need one, apparently.
It doesn't help that the people in those parts of the world have almost always lived by the code of "kill anyone who's not part of your tribe or religious sect".Your comment speaks volumes.

(a) Prove it. See my post above for why you can't. (b) I don't ignore this. The violence in Iraq is now started by Iraqis and foreign insurgents. We're trying to establish PEACE and ORDER.BS. Take your blinkers off. Iraq was relatively stable, had a functioning economy, enjoyed a working infrastructure despite intensive efforts by the US and UK to degrade it, and produced more oil than it does now. Nor was it involved in terrorism. In what way exactly is it better off? In what way are we better off? What are you smoking?

[Lau]

Can someone with access to photoshop at the moment please take the picture gary posted, and give Lil Kim bright red hair, like a troll doll. I will love you forever if you do.

You know I can't resist a challenge like that...

[skunk]

No, the Pentagon and the CIA haven't forgotten how to do their jobs. It's that there are too many people HERE who get in their way. Left-leaning judges, congressmen, and senators, the media, and idiot lawsuits (like the ones that claim that we need to give CONSTITUTIONAL rights to prisoners at Guantanamo). Back when we were facing off against the Soviets, people were smarter about letting our guys take care of the problem.

And with that, I am done with this discussion. In my opinion, Kim Jong-Il needs to be put down like the rabid dog he is... and he's just demonstrated the ability to bite, and bite hard. I don't think we should wait for him to vaporize Seoul or Tokyo or Honolulu before we do something about him.A classic restatement of everything that makes you wrong.

[zap2]

No, the Pentagon and the CIA haven't forgotten how to do their jobs. It's that there are too many people HERE who get in their way.



Come on....no government is perfect, the people should be allowed to speak up for change, and since here we are allowed, I'd be ashamed if everyone in American took Bush's idea sitting down.


Do you think people should sit down, shut up and let the government "take care of things"? When my government does illegal things, I'm not going to stand there and take it, I'm going to speak my mind. If my government does something good, I'll support it.

[Black&Tan]

You know I can't resist a challenge like that...


...and I was thinking Bozo. Unfortunately, you ever try adding whiteface in Photoshop??

[mactastic]

No, the Pentagon and the CIA haven't forgotten how to do their jobs. It's that there are too many people HERE who get in their way. Left-leaning judges, congressmen, and senators, the media, and idiot lawsuits (like the ones that claim that we need to give CONSTITUTIONAL rights to prisoners at Guantanamo). Back when we were facing off against the Soviets, people were smarter about letting our guys take care of the problem.

And with that, I am done with this discussion. In my opinion, Kim Jong-Il needs to be put down like the rabid dog he is... and he's just demonstrated the ability to bite, and bite hard. I don't think we should wait for him to vaporize Seoul or Tokyo or Honolulu before we do something about him.
Ah yes, blame the left. That's all you've got isn't it? Rather than engage in critical debate, you've simply chose to repeat the Rush Limbaugh talking-points. If only those ****ing lefties weren't around, we'd be able to take care of Saddam and Jong-Il. Is that what you think? You think the all-powerful left with no power of oversight, let alone lawmaking, has been the reason this administration has aquired the reverse-Midas touch? If only the left hadn't meddled, Bush would have gotten bin Laden at Tora Bora? If only the media had kept their mouths shut, Iraq would be a smashing success by now? If only the leftist judiciary had stood aside, we'd have all the terrorists in jail or dead by now?

When are you going to start practicing the personal responsibility that you preach? YOUR side ****ed all this stuff up, and you have the gall to blame the left for your own sad misfortunes?

Back when we were facing off against the Soviets we didn't strip people of their constitutional rights just because people like you can't seem to stop pissing themselves everytime they hear the work "terrorist".

[Queso]

No, the Pentagon and the CIA haven't forgotten how to do their jobs. It's that there are too many people HERE who get in their way. Left-leaning judges, congressmen, and senators, the media, and idiot lawsuits (like the ones that claim that we need to give CONSTITUTIONAL rights to prisoners at Guantanamo). Back when we were facing off against the Soviets, people were smarter about letting our guys take care of the problem.
The CIA can't do it's job because it's painfully underfunded for the modern world, and the Pentagon has far too much of it's resources concentrated fighting the wrong war. That you blame the "left" shows that someone is doing a successful divide and conquer. Sadly on the American people.

Blame the people at the top if you want to blame anyone. They are the ones that have put America in this position. Nobody else.

And with that, I am done with this discussion. In my opinion, Kim Jong-Il needs to be put down like the rabid dog he is... and he's just demonstrated the ability to bite, and bite hard. I don't think we should wait for him to vaporize Seoul or Tokyo or Honolulu before we do something about him.
If you haven't learned yet that the easiest way to get your enemies co-operating is a direct attack on one of them then you never will. At the moment North Korea has nukes but no missiles, and Iran has missiles but no nukes. Either you start talking to one of them or they will trade.

[beatsme]

No, the Pentagon and the CIA haven't forgotten how to do their jobs. It's that there are too many people HERE who get in their way.

I'm inclined to believe that "divide and conquer" has been abandoned because, over the long term, it just doesn't work. Didn't work with the Ottoman Empire or Germany, didn't work with French Indochina, didn't work with Korea, clearly isn't working in Iraq. All it does is trade a set of known issues for a set of unknowns...not worth the cost.

[OutThere]

I think that we would all benefit from looking at this from the perspective of non-world-power nations.

Put aside what preconceptions you can and think about this. Consider, if you will, what it would be like to live in, or even lead, a small country trying to build up its military power, when faced with the seemingly all-powerful United States throwing its weight around and invading countries with no substantial reason.

Every step you make to improve your military is examined and critiqued by the powers that be in the U.S, and millions of people think you deserve to be completely annihilated for not conforming the Western world's preconceived ideas of proper government.

Given a flip-flopped situation, in which the U.S. was a rising power, and another country was a global superpower with the current ideals of the U.S., much of the population of the U.S, and our current leadership, would be considered crazy and would 'need to be dealt with'.


Also, for a little perspective, people seem to be dismissing NK as being a pathetic and essentially powerless.

Consider this: Iraq is a complete debacle, and they had nothing as far as an organized army, or weapons of mass destruction. Yet still, we don't have enough troops and we can't seem to control the situation, no matter what we do.

Now look at North Korea. They have the 4th largest number of active troops in the world (1 (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_countries_by_number_of_active_troops)), with 49.03 active troops per thousand of their population. That is the highest in the world. The U.S. has 4.76 troops/1000 people.

They also have the 4th largest army in the world, ranked by active troop strength, with more than double the number of total soldiers than the U.S. (2 (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_countries_by_size_of_armed_forces).


As to 'being better off without Saddam Hussein', take a look at http://www.costofwar.com/

Saddam Hussein had no weapons of mass destruction, no real army to speak of, and was doing nothing to further terrorism (except allow terrorists to live in Iraq, but guess what? they're still there!). So far we've spent in the realm of $332,000,000,000.00 on the war. Look at the costofwar page, and honestly say that removing Hussein was worth more than anything else we could have done with 332 billion dollars.

[XNine]

You know I can't resist a challenge like that...

YES! THAT IS THE ****!!!!!! That's what I'm talking about! Lau... You have my love forever! *hugs*

[Music_Producer]

Saddam might have finished a nuke; he might have used it against Israel or the US; we might all be dead now if not for removing Saddam from power.

So there's really no point in continuing that portion of the argument, is there?

LOL.. thanks for the laugh. Instead of being here on macrumors, you should probably build a nuke-proof bunker :p

[Ugg]

I hail from a country, just as you do, that has a long-standing tradition of democracy. Explain to me why a self-proclaimed dictator (who INHERITED the position from his father) should be considered equally compared to the elected (and soon to be gone) leader of a democracy.

You hail from a region of the country that denied blacks the right to vote well into the 60s. That means that this country's tradition of being a democratic republic is barely 60 years old. The bush/harris shenanigans in Florida made it clear that democracy still has a tenuous following in this country.

As far as inherited positions you're on a pretty lame footing here, bushco is little better than the kims.

But, I see you've already cut and run, typical behaviour for a republican this time of year, isn't it?

[beatsme]

Now look at North Korea. They have the 4th largest number of active troops in the world (1 (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_countries_by_number_of_active_troops)), with 49.03 active troops per thousand of their population. That is the highest in the world. The U.S. has 4.76 troops/1000 people.

They also have the 4th largest army in the world, ranked by active troop strength, with more than double the number of total soldiers than the U.S. (2 (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_countries_by_size_of_armed_forces).


just an observation...

North Korea is a densely populated, industrialized nation, which makes them more sensitive to aerial bombardment, something the US can really do well. Bombing doesn't work so well in places like Iraq, Afghanistan, or (gulp) Vietnam because there's really not a whole lot there to blow up, so after a while you're just making the rubble bounce.

NK's standing army is formidable, and I wouldn't want to be the first country they got mad at, but their strength in numbers is about all they have going for them. Technologically, they're no match for the US, or China for that matter.

I wonder about the quality of the NK leadership, as well. France had the largest standing army in the world in 1940, and they were beaten soundly by a numerically inferior but much better equipped and better trained Wehrmacht.

just thinking out loud...

[skunk]

just an observation...

North Korea is a densely populated, industrialized nation, which makes them more sensitive to aerial bombardment, something the US can really do well. Bombing doesn't work so well in places like Iraq, Afghanistan, or (gulp) Vietnam because there's really not a whole lot there to blow up, so after a while you're just making the rubble bounce.So, your solution is to bomb the crap out of another few million civilians, on the off-chance that they "might" do something? What is "doing it well" in these circumstances?

NK's standing army is formidable, and I wouldn't want to be the first country they got mad at, but their strength in numbers is about all they have going for them. Technologically, they're no match for the US, or China for that matter.

I wonder about the quality of the NK leadership, as well. France had the largest standing army in the world in 1940, and they were beaten soundly by a numerically inferior but much better equipped and better trained Wehrmacht.

just thinking out loud...Forming foreign policy on the back of a selective reading of history is what got us into this mess in the first place.

[pseudobrit]

And with that, I am done with this discussion.


I just want to say that it's absolute ******** when people do this. Absolute ****ing ******** and I'm sick of seeing it.

Sorry for my candor.

[Dont Hurt Me]

I love all of clayJ's mights, While Saddam might might and might, Bin Laden a member of the family that Bush's family was so close to Did,Did,and did and Bin Laden is Free, Saddam is in jail with his country in ruin. Why do the republicans still spin 911? Iraq didnt do it and Saddam was contained big time. Why not blame the ones who mucked all of this up? Cheney/Bush and their gang of republicans? Saddam another mid east monster bred from Islam had nothing to do with 911. Yet even today the republicans still lie hoping the ClayJs will stick with them and their lies. Anyway you paint it this administration is a disaster. While dicking with Saddam they have empowered N.Korea and Iran.

[Sedulous]

So, your solution is to bomb the crap out of another few million civilians, on the off-chance that they "might" do something? What is "doing it well" in these circumstances?

Forming foreign policy on the back of a selective reading of history is what got us into this mess in the first place.

I do not think he was suggesting that bombing a country into rubble is the solution. Rather, he was saying that in a gaming scenario, the NK army is massive, but probably not very effective against some methods of warfare... particularly those methods for which the US is unrivaled.

[beatsme]

So, your solution is to bomb the crap out of another few million civilians, on the off-chance that they "might" do something? What is "doing it well" in these circumstances?

whoa...your words, not mine. At no time did I suggest that we start bombing. I'm merely pointing out what I perceive to be a crucial vulnerability in NK.

Re: doing it well, according to the United States Strategic Bombing Survey (http://www.ussbs.com/), it's better to cause a high degree of destruction in a few really crucial areas of the economy rather than cause widespread destruction in many areas.

Forming foreign policy on the back of a selective reading of history is what got us into this mess in the first place.

I'm not advocating any particular policy. I'm saying that from a military point of view, in a war waged between two industrialized nations, technology tends to trump greater manpower.

[Ugg]

I just want to say that it's absolute ******** when people do this. Absolute ****ing ******** and I'm sick of seeing it.

Sorry for my candor.

He followed it up by telling me I'm now on his ignore list. I imagine I'm not the only one so I wonder why he keeps coming back?

Unfortunately there are a lot of people who are only too willing to drink the bushco koolaid without doing any critical analysis beforehand. Those willing to distort history are those most likely to repeat it.

[Sedulous]

I love all of clayJ's mights, While Saddam might might and might, Bin Laden a member of the family that Bush's family was so close to Did,Did,and did and Bin Laden is Free, Saddam is in jail with his country in ruin. Why do the republicans still spin 911? Iraq didnt do it and Saddam was contained big time. Why not blame the ones who mucked all of this up? Cheney/Bush and their gang of republicans? Saddam another mid east monster bred from Islam had nothing to do with 911. Yet even today the republicans still lie hoping the ClayJs will stick with them and their lies. Anyway you paint it this administration is a disaster. While dicking with Saddam they have empowered N.Korea and Iran.

Actually, it was "US" that put Saddam in power and equipped him with chemical weapons. Makes it even more sweet, no?

[beatsme]

I do not think he was suggesting that bombing a country into rubble is the solution. Rather, he was saying that in a gaming scenario, the NK army is massive, but probably not very effective against some methods of warfare... particularly those methods for which the US is unrivaled.

exactly so, yes.

[Ugg]

I'm not advocating any particular policy. I'm saying that from a military point of view, in a war waged between two industrialized nations, technology tends to trump greater manpower.

Wouldn't that be extremely short sighted though? There are masses of troops on the border with South Korea and it would only take a few hours for the North Koreans to devastate much of South Korea. I doubt bombing would be able to target all the troops on the border as well as all those "critical" sites.

Such a campaign might neutralize kim, but at what cost?

I understand you're not advocating such a campaign, just basing it on what you've read. What's your take on the situation?

[Sedulous]

He followed it up by telling me I'm now on his ignore list. I imagine I'm not the only one so I wonder why he keeps coming back?

Unfortunately there are a lot of people who are only too willing to drink the bushco koolaid without doing any critical analysis beforehand. Those willing to distort history are those most likely to repeat it.

Clayj isn't a bad guy. It is hard to keep the whole story straight and many people have different opinions because there are many "stories" to justify our current situation. While I agree with most people here (that Dubya has proven to be a liability), it is still good for us all to hear the "other side".

[Sedulous]

Wouldn't that be extremely short sighted though? There are masses of troops on the border with South Korea and it would only take a few hours for the North Koreans to devastate much of South Korea. I doubt bombing would be able to target all the troops on the border as well as all those "critical" sites.

Such a campaign might neutralize kim, but at what cost?

I understand you're not advocating such a campaign, just basing it on what you've read. What's your take on the situation?

One US missle sub off the coast could (and this is in a "gaming scenario") vaporize most of those troops in less than five minutes. Meanwhile, most of them would have to cross a highly fortified zone filled with landmines and other horrible things.

[skunk]

I'm saying that from a military point of view, in a war waged between two industrialized nations, technology tends to trump greater manpower.You have the manpower and the technology in Iraq. Theoretically. And once you've flattened NK, what then? You'll have millions of destitute refugees to deal with. This is no gaming scenario.

[skunk]

Clayj isn't a bad guy. It is hard to keep the whole story straight and many people have different opinions because there are many "stories" to justify our current situation. While I agree with most people here (that Dubya has proven to be a liability), it is still good for us all to hear the "other side".Is it still good if the "other side" is expressed in unconscionable bollocks?

[skunk]

One US missle sub off the coast could (and this is in a "gaming scenario") vaporize most of those troops in less than five minutes. What the hell with? Cruise missiles? Nuclear warheads dropped within meters of defending US and SK troops? I don't think so. And what is this "gaming scenario"? This is millions of real people we're talking about, not just oriental cannon-fodder.

[mactastic]

One US missle sub off the coast could (and this is in a "gaming scenario") vaporize most of those troops in less than five minutes. Meanwhile, most of them would have to cross a highly fortified zone filled with landmines and other horrible things.
As I recall, NK has tens of thousands of artillery pieces ready to rain destruction down on SK on very little notice. While I understand what you are saying in terms of NK's army being much easier to fight from a conventional warfare POV than a guerilla force such as al-Qaeda, I don't think we could take out enough of NK's conventional capabilities as fast as the scenario you are proposing. I don't think the South Koreans would want to wager on whether or not we could pull it off that cleanly.

[Sedulous]

You have the manpower [i]and[i] the technology in Iraq. Theoretically. And once you've flattened NK, what then? You'll have millions of destitute refugees to deal with. This is no gaming scenario.

Agreed. It is unfortunate the military is not well suited to nation building. North Korea would be even worse than Iraq... although I find it hard to believe there would be as many ideological zealots fomenting civil war.

[mactastic]

Clayj isn't a bad guy. It is hard to keep the whole story straight and many people have different opinions because there are many "stories" to justify our current situation. While I agree with most people here (that Dubya has proven to be a liability), it is still good for us all to hear the "other side".
I agree Clayj isn't a bad guy. He's a well-regarded contributer to this site. However, all 'the other side' managed to express before his poody fit and eventual dissappearing act was that he thought KJI is crazy, should be treated like a rabid dog, and it's all the fault of the left.

Somehow I'd hope there was more to the POV of 'the other side'.

[Dont Hurt Me]

Actually, it was "US" that put Saddam in power and equipped him with chemical weapons. Makes it even more sweet, no?Seems the U.S. is allways getting in bed with the wrong guys, Saddam,Bin Laden, the Shaw, etc. This is because we have a corrupt Washington that works for Corporations and $$$ instead of the people like they pretend to work for. Bush & gang are another prime example, hell they wont even close the mexican border after 10 million illegals. I urge everyone to lets just turn over Congress. Vote out every single incumbant. America would be better served with a random draw of the population rather then Lawyers and Big Business. So Bush has had 6 years to work on N.K. and Iran and their solution is to not talk to either:rolleyes:

[Sedulous]

As I recall, NK has tens of thousands of artillery pieces ready to rain destruction down on SK on very little notice. While I understand what you are saying in terms of NK's army being much easier to fight from a conventional warfare POV than a guerilla force such as al-Qaeda, I don't think we could take out enough of NK's conventional capabilities as fast as the scenario you are proposing. I don't think the South Koreans would want to wager on whether or not we could pull it off that cleanly.

One has to wonder how long these troops would continue to fight after most of the command and control was taken out. That North Korea could destroy Seoul is problematic but it would not allow them a victory. North Korean troops would be vulnerable to aerial bombing and immobilized. I would imagine there would be very high attrition rate once C&C is lost and they are subjected to bombardment. It really is a no win scenario for everyone.

[skunk]

That North Korea could destroy Seoul is problematic I think this qualifies for the Understatement of the Week.

[Sedulous]

Seems the U.S. is allways getting in bed with the wrong guys, Saddam,Bin Laden, the Shaw, etc. This is because we have a corrupt Washington that works for Corporations and $$$ instead of the people like they pretend to work for. Bush & gang are another prime example, hell they wont even close the mexican border after 10 million illegals. I urge everyone to lets just turn over Congress. Vote out every single incumbant. America would be better served with a random draw of the population rather then Lawyers and Big Business. So Bush has had 6 years to work on N.K. and Iran and their solution is to not talk to either:rolleyes:

Most of this was a direct consequence of the cold war. Saddam (Iraq) simply was aligned against the soviets and Iran. The Shah (Iran) was installed by the US but overthrown by soviet backed extremists. Same with Osama and the Taliban... they were fighting our enemy (the Soviets), which made them our "friend". Why Osama decided the U.S. was his enemy after backing him is anyone's guess. It is crazy how these legacy issues still haunt us.

[Sedulous]

I think this qualifies for the Understatement of the Week.

I don't like the reality of it either. But if push came to shove, what do you do? Just watch NK overrun SK? I seriously doubt North Korea would be insane enough to provoke anything but you never know.

[skunk]

Why Osama decided the U.S. was his enemy after backing him is anyone's guess.Yes, that one is a complete mystery. Ungrateful bastard! :rolleyes:

[mischief]

Based on the research I did earlier through the resources at Wikipedia and their contributing support material I doubt that NK can produce a second "BOOM" any time soon. Why?

1: NK has only 1 functional nuclear reactor.
1b: said reactor produces 6kg of Plutonium a year.

2: stockpiles as of the time of the test should have been no more than about 45kg (more likely 42kg)

3: Minimum size for a fission bomb is about half that mass and would yield roughly 1/4 to 3/4 kt (based on the US "Davy Crockett" RPG nuke).

4: The explosive force recorded would have needed better than 70% of that Plutonium.

5: At a rate of 6kg per year it'd be about five years before a second fission device could be built.

6: The only other reactor in NK would need extensive renovation before it could be rebuilt as it was never finished and has deteriorated quite badly in it's half-constructed state.

[XNine]

Yes, that one is a complete mystery. Ungrateful bastard! :rolleyes:

And here I go again, quoting David Cross:
"I don't think Osama Bin Laden sent those planes into attack us because he hates our freedom... No... I think he did it because of our Support for Israel, and our ties to the Saudi family and all of our military bases.... You know why I think that? Because that's what he ****ING said!"

Seriously folks, let's not get on the other foot here. Kim Jung Il is a midget with a short-man's complex who's pissed off because he can't get Lasik and has to wear dorky glasses and pads on his shoes to make himself taller. He wants nothing more than to pull the US and other countries into his country and start crying foul.... Or nuke it while everyone is inside taking him down.

I agree with Mactastic here, if the US or the UN go in to pull the plug, there's too much of a risk that it doesn't get done cleanly enough and then there's millions of North and South Koreans dead. We should be cautious.

[MACDRIVE]

I'm thinking Bush would have already attacked NK if they had oil in the ground, but since they don't, Bush just isn't interested. I also think that if NK was able to load a missile with a boom boom device, they'd launch it at California. But until they have that capability, Bush has no sense of urgency.

[beatsme]

I understand you're not advocating such a campaign, just basing it on what you've read. What's your take on the situation?

eh...there's not that much to worry about. NK having nuclear weapons is clearly a bad thing and definitely is cause for concern, if only because you don't want them exporting the technology to others. But there is no military scenario (at present) in which NK won't wind up being blown to flinders either by the US, China, or both. Kim knows this. He has neither the navy nor the air force to put together an oversea sortie with any measurable chance of success, which limits his possible movements thus: he can go north, into China, or he can go south, into heavily-fortified-by-the-US South Korea. Either way he winds up in a war against a superpower that he has no hope of winning.

The most dangerous scenario I can envision is that Kim somehow drags China into a war against the US. This strikes me as highly unlikely. The Chinese are smart enough to know that getting Kim off of their back porch is much better for them in the short and long term than ruining their burgeoning trade partnership with the US.

my take? Kim's a little man with a big mouth. And we need to keep his nuclear ambitions firmly in check. But is he a legitimate threat to strike? I don't think so.

just my opinion...

[FFTT]

We just need to have a few million of these air dropped all over North Korea

I'm so ronery! :(
http://att.macrumors.com/attachment.php?attachmentid=59565&stc=1&thumb=1&d=1160427756

[zimv20]

no great surprises here (link (http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2006/10/09/AR2006100901218.html)):

GOP officials are urging lawmakers to focus exclusively on local issues and leave it to party leaders to mitigate the Foley controversy by accusing Democrats of trying to politicize it. At the same time, the White House plans to amplify national security issues, especially the threat of terrorism, after North Korea's reported nuclear test, in hopes of shifting the debate away from casualties and controversy during the final month of the campaign. These efforts are aimed largely at prodding disaffected conservatives to vote for GOP candidates despite their unease.

[takao]

I wonder about the quality of the NK leadership, as well. France had the largest standing army in the world in 1940, and they were beaten soundly by a numerically inferior but much better equipped and better trained Wehrmacht.

that was 1936 not 1940
by 1939 germany increased the Wehrmacht and especially Luftwaffe extremely in numbers enough to equal french forces by numbers (infantry)
or even surpass them (tanks/airplanes)
in terms of equipment german tanks were clearly outclassed by the french but the french couldn't use them effectively


it would be foolish to underrate any other industrialized country especially one with a more integrated air defense since without airforce support the US army would be a lot less powerful

[bemylover]

U.S. doubts Korean test was nuclear (http://www.washtimes.com/national/20061009-115158-2477r.htm)
U.S. officials, speaking on the condition of anonymity, said that seismic readings show that the conventional high explosives used to create a chain reaction in a plutonium-based device went off, but that the blast's readings were shy of a typical nuclear detonation.

[beatsme]

that was 1936 not 1940
by 1939 germany increased the Wehrmacht and especially Luftwaffe extremely in numbers enough to equal french forces by numbers (infantry)


I refer specifically to this:

Baldwin, Hanson W. The Crucial Years 1939-1941. New York: Harper & Row, 1976.

wherein the French forces at full mobilization numbered about 5 million versus 2.5 million for the Wehrmacht

in terms of equipment german tanks were clearly outclassed by the french but the french couldn't use them effectively

I believe the reason the French tanks were not equal to the task is because they were not equipped with radios. A disastrous oversight in terms of design.

[KingYaba]

Based on the research I did earlier through the resources at Wikipedia and their contributing support material I doubt that NK can produce a second "BOOM" any time soon. Why?

1: NK has only 1 functional nuclear reactor.
1b: said reactor produces 6kg of Plutonium a year.

2: stockpiles as of the time of the test should have been no more than about 45kg (more likely 42kg)

3: Minimum size for a fission bomb is about half that mass and would yield roughly 1/4 to 3/4 kt (based on the US "Davy Crockett" RPG nuke).

4: The explosive force recorded would have needed better than 70% of that Plutonium.

5: At a rate of 6kg per year it'd be about five years before a second fission device could be built.

6: The only other reactor in NK would need extensive renovation before it could be rebuilt as it was never finished and has deteriorated quite badly in it's half-constructed state.
Very cool, but didn't 60 Minutes report a few years ago about the missing Russian stockpiles? Could NK happen to have a few? Just a thought...

[Josh]

The similarities are too striking.

http://img242.imageshack.us/img242/282/kimst5.jpg

[mactastic]

Based on the research I did earlier through the resources at Wikipedia and their contributing support material I doubt that NK can produce a second "BOOM" any time soon. Why?

1: NK has only 1 functional nuclear reactor.
1b: said reactor produces 6kg of Plutonium a year.

2: stockpiles as of the time of the test should have been no more than about 45kg (more likely 42kg)

3: Minimum size for a fission bomb is about half that mass and would yield roughly 1/4 to 3/4 kt (based on the US "Davy Crockett" RPG nuke).

4: The explosive force recorded would have needed better than 70% of that Plutonium.

5: At a rate of 6kg per year it'd be about five years before a second fission device could be built.

6: The only other reactor in NK would need extensive renovation before it could be rebuilt as it was never finished and has deteriorated quite badly in it's half-constructed state.
IF (and it's a big if at this point still) NK actually did explode a nuke, the next thing we need to find out is if it is indeed one of Kim's estimated 6-8 plutonium-based nukes. There is a chance this was a uranium nuke as well. That was the trade-off Clinton achieved, that NK would cease it's plutonium-based nuke research, but the knock was that NK was widely suspected of cheating by enriching uranium. For anyone not aware of the distinction, plutonium bombs are more powerful and easier to manufacture from the material in the plutonium reactor that Mischief mentions, and it requires very little of the raw material in comparison to uranium enrichment. Uranium enrichment OTOH, requires large quantities of raw material that must be processed in centrifuges. This requires huge amounts of time -- and more importantly, electricity. North Korea is believed to have insufficient electrical and centrifugal resources to produce uranium bombs quickly.

Shortly after Bush took office, North Korea removed the seals from the plutonium reactor and resumed plutonium bombmaking.

But as time goes by it looks more and more like either a misfire, or an attempt at faking a nuclear detonation.

[MACDRIVE]

But as time goes by it looks more and more like either a misfire, or an attempt at faking a nuclear detonation.

I think they're faking it. http://deephousepage.com/smilies/nod.gif

[XNine]

I think they're faking it. http://deephousepage.com/smilies/nod.gif

Just like that woman in Vegas....

[mactastic]

Just like that woman in Vegas....
I thought all the women in Vegas did that... :p

[Ugg]

No airborne radiation detected by US plane or by the Chinese according to this article (http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/us_nkorea;_ylt=Al1tKbwxTXJZhAFkngHr1fms0NUE;_ylu=X3oDMTA2Z2szazkxBHNlYwN0bQ--).

[jelloshotsrule]

No, the Pentagon and the CIA haven't forgotten how to do their jobs. It's that there are too many people HERE who get in their way. Left-leaning judges, congressmen, and senators, the media, and idiot lawsuits (like the ones that claim that we need to give CONSTITUTIONAL rights to prisoners at Guantanamo). Back when we were facing off against the Soviets, people were smarter about letting our guys take care of the problem.

And with that, I am done with this discussion. In my opinion, Kim Jong-Il needs to be put down like the rabid dog he is... and he's just demonstrated the ability to bite, and bite hard. I don't think we should wait for him to vaporize Seoul or Tokyo or Honolulu before we do something about him.

welp, time to change the list

Things I Fear Most:

1. Mindsets like the one described above.

2. Running out of beer.

3. Terrah-ism

[skunk]

No airborne radiation detected by US plane or by the Chinese according to this article (http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/us_nkorea;_ylt=Al1tKbwxTXJZhAFkngHr1fms0NUE;_ylu=X3oDMTA2Z2szazkxBHNlYwN0bQ--).But, according to Bush, simply to claim they have conducted a test is a threat to international peace and security.

[Lau]

welp, time to change the list

Things I Fear Most:

1. Mindsets like the one described above.

2. Running out of beer.

3. Terrah-ism

Awesome. Just awesome. :D

[Don't panic]

I'm thinking Bush would have already attacked NK if they had oil in the ground, but since they don't, Bush just isn't interested. I also think that if NK was able to load a missile with a boom boom device, they'd launch it at California. But until they have that capability, Bush has no sense of urgency.
he would if they targeted texas...;)

[mactastic]

he would if they targeted texas...;)
Or if "they tried to kill mah daddy".

[mischief]

IF (and it's a big if at this point still) NK actually did explode a nuke, the next thing we need to find out is if it is indeed one of Kim's estimated 6-8 plutonium-based nukes. There is a chance this was a uranium nuke as well. That was the trade-off Clinton achieved, that NK would cease it's plutonium-based nuke research, but the knock was that NK was widely suspected of cheating by enriching uranium. For anyone not aware of the distinction, plutonium bombs are more powerful and easier to manufacture from the material in the plutonium reactor that Mischief mentions, and it requires very little of the raw material in comparison to uranium enrichment. Uranium enrichment OTOH, requires large quantities of raw material that must be processed in centrifuges. This requires huge amounts of time -- and more importantly, electricity. North Korea is believed to have insufficient electrical and centrifugal resources to produce uranium bombs quickly.

Shortly after Bush took office, North Korea removed the seals from the plutonium reactor and resumed plutonium bombmaking.

But as time goes by it looks more and more like either a misfire, or an attempt at faking a nuclear detonation.

Here's (http://www.fas.org/nuke/guide/dprk/nuke/index.html) some reading material for you. The first PDF at the bottom is the one I trust the most. The estimates for 6 nukes are based on building Hydrogen bombs. When making fission bombs the necessary mass is quite a bit larger. The smallest US nukes ever manufactured were about 30kg and were man-portable.

If we are to be conservative about the amount involved we're looking at more like one to three nukes total and an adittional pile of 6kg of Plutonium produced per year. The 50Mw reactor is offline, unfinished and distinctly FUBAR so DPRK has a singular 5Mw reactor running.