Sidebar Sidebar
Become a MacRumors Supporter for $50/year with no ads, ability to filter front page stories, and private forums.

N. Korea - "War at any moment"

mcrain

mcrain

macrumors 68000
Original poster
Feb 8, 2002
1,775
13
Illinois
From the Agonist:

Two independent sources have told The Agonist this morning that the talks with North Korea have broken up with no progress made and a somewhat acrimonious ending.

China is working very hard to keep the two sides from packing their bags.
Click to expand...
http://www.agonist.org/

This is looking worse and worse by the day. Oh well. We humans had a pretty good run.

Thanks Bush :D :D :D


:mad: :(
 
I never really liked the humans much anyway... too nosy and they were always complaining!!!

But seriously, N. Korea ain't gonna do nothin'. All talk my friends, all talk.

The world's been ending for millenia now.
 
Originally posted by dxp4acu
But seriously, N. Korea ain't gonna do nothin'. All talk my friends, all talk.
Click to expand...

That dude Kim Jong-Il is crazy, though. I could see a scenario where we bomb their Nuclear facilities. Then N. Korea, fearing it's going to get the Iraq treatment, lets fly all its artillery pieces and flattens Seoul. Then, horrified and trying to put a stop to the hudreds of thousands if not millions of deaths, we use a "tactical" nuke on N. Korea.

And then we can only guess at China and Russia's reactions at having a nuke used so close to their borders :eek:
 
Originally posted by dxp4acu

The world's been ending for millenia now.
Click to expand...

Yeah but humans have only had the capability to do it themselves for the past 50 years or so. And we came frighteningly close a few times during the Cold War, both through accidents and political crises.
 
N. Korea talks officially broken off, with "strong views" expressed on all sides, including China.

http://www.heraldsun.news.com.au/common/story_page/0,5478,6335007%5E401,00.html

China and the U.S. will hold talks without N. Korea on Friday. I wonder what China's "strong views" were. They're the key players in this and they've been tight-lipped so far. I could see only two scenarios that China would agree with:

1) toppling Kim Jong-Il and replacing him with a Chinese-dominated regime.

2) convincing Kim Jong-Il to give up nuclear programs in favor of becoming a more traditional Chinese protectorate as under the height of Imperial Chinese rule.

Either way, it would mean even greater Chinese domination over N. Korea.
 
CNN Breaking News: North Korea admits to having nukes.

Well, they could just be lying.


Right? :(

[edit]
MSNBC is the first I saw to have a full article on it:

http://msnbc.com/news/850567.asp?0cv=CA01

Not only did N. Korea admit to having nukes, but it also threatened to export them. Powell retorted that "all options are on the table" to end the N. Korea nuclear threat.
 
Axis of Evil

Anyone else but me remember George W. calling N. Korea a member of an axis of evil?

They have nukes, and we insulted their country and basically dared them to fight us.

:confused:
 
Re: Axis of Evil

Originally posted by mcrain
Anyone else but me remember George W. calling N. Korea a member of an axis of evil?

They have nukes, and we insulted their country and basically dared them to fight us.

:confused:
Click to expand...

And I'm sure N. Korea is exporting its nuclear technology to Iran. All we've done is accelerate proliferation and destabilize the world through our pre-emptive doctrine and belligerence.
 
Cold War or not, our nukes are still on hair triggers, and so are some of those from the former USSR, we haver never had a full stand-down.
 
i'm sure the North Koreans will note that, after Iraq destroyed most of their missiles, the US attacked anyway.

"fool me once, shame on you..."
 
We better get the draft going again...looks like N. Korea will be next, probably in a year or two. With troops still in Iraq and the type of force we need in Korea, I would say a draft would be good to get the numbers up so we can make these countries do what we want.
 
Originally posted by lmalave
That dude Kim Jong-Il is crazy, though. I could see a scenario where we bomb their Nuclear facilities. Then N. Korea, fearing it's going to get the Iraq treatment, lets fly all its artillery pieces and flattens Seoul. Then, horrified and trying to put a stop to the hudreds of thousands if not millions of deaths, we use a "tactical" nuke on N. Korea.

And then we can only guess at China and Russia's reactions at having a nuke used so close to their borders :eek:
Click to expand...

You are wrong. Seoul is not the target. Japan is. They're still pissed off at Japan for WW2. That's why they're testing Missiles aimed at the Sea of JAPAN. The target is Tokyo.

That's why China wants North Korea to settle down. Because if North Korea has nukes, Japan will want to have them too.
 
Originally posted by NavyIntel007
You are wrong. Seoul is not the target. Japan is. They're still pissed off at Japan for WW2.
Click to expand...

and they're still technically at war w/ S. Korea. i can believe that Japan is a target, but i don't think it's at the exclusion of Seoul.
 
Originally posted by NavyIntel007
You are wrong. Seoul is not the target. Japan is. They're still pissed off at Japan for WW2. That's why they're testing Missiles aimed at the Sea of JAPAN. The target is Tokyo.

That's why China wants North Korea to settle down. Because if North Korea has nukes, Japan will want to have them too.
Click to expand...

But that doesn't mean that Kim Jong-Il won't just lash out if he is hit by U.S. missiles. N. Korea's artillery can't reach Japan, after all. And how many tens of thousands of troops do we still have in S. Korea?
 
Originally posted by lmalave
And how many tens of thousands of troops do we still have in S. Korea?
Click to expand...

3.7

i think there are still a few million N. Korean troops just on the other side of the DMZ. it's not that far to Seoul.
 
Originally posted by Abercrombieboy
We better get the draft going again...looks like N. Korea will be next, probably in a year or two. With troops still in Iraq and the type of force we need in Korea, I would say a draft would be good to get the numbers up so we can make these countries do what we want.
Click to expand...

Yeah, a draft, that sounds like a good idea... :rolleyes:

That's what we have nukes for, duh! So we don't have to send people to die; we just use a neutron bomb and walk in with a dozen troops to liberate the shadows.

Besides, Rummy said that draftees were worthless in Vietnam.

This isn't about "making" countries "do what we want." Well, I guess you could say it is, but that's a convoluted foreign strategy if I've ever seen one.
Like Clinton said last week, sooner or later you have to cut a deal. You can't conquer or buy everybody. Ask the Roman empire. Or the British...
 
Originally posted by pseudobrit
That's what we have nukes for, duh! So we don't have to send people to die; we just use a neutron bomb and walk in with a dozen troops to liberate the shadows.
Click to expand...

Just a gentle reminder, because the notion has become so entrenched in our collective imaginations and it keeps coming up: The "neutron bomb," as commonly understood to be a nuclear weapon which destroys living tissue but leaves structures intact, with little residual radiation, does not exist. It's science fiction. For the most part a nuke is a nuke, and if you drop one on something, you have to expect that something won't be there when you're done. I don't know this idea of a non-messy nuke got lodged in people's brains. Wishful thinking, I suppose.

Besides, Rummy said that draftees were worthless in Vietnam.
Click to expand...

I can believe it. If my government were to press me into service against my will, for a cause I felt was unjust, and put me into a firefight under the assumption that I would shoot back to save my own ass, then I can't see why I wouldn't consider my own "side" to be just as big a threat to my safety as the other "side." I certainly wouldn't have a great deal of passion for my work under those circumstances.

(edit)
Like Clinton said last week, sooner or later you have to cut a deal.
Click to expand...

I've seen no evidence that the Bush administration knows how to do this. We've got a lot of fence-mending to do in the international community, and I've seen no evidence the administration knows how to do that either. I'm not partisan, but I gotta tell you, I really miss the days when the biggest problem in the Oval Office was whether the President was getting blown there.
 
Originally posted by Gelfin
Just a gentle reminder, because the notion has become so entrenched in our collective imaginations and it keeps coming up: The "neutron bomb," as commonly understood to be a nuclear weapon which destroys living tissue but leaves structures intact, with little residual radiation, does not exist. It's science fiction. For the most part a nuke is a nuke, and if you drop one on something, you have to expect that something won't be there when you're done. I don't know this idea of a non-messy nuke got lodged in people's brains. Wishful thinking, I suppose.
Click to expand...

It's certainly been tested and produced; it's a small fusion bomb with the uranium casing removed. Wheter we have active stock is perhaps open to debate, but the existence of such weapons is a reality.

http://www.manuelsweb.com/sam_cohen.htm
 
Originally posted by pseudobrit
It's certainly been tested and produced; it's a small fusion bomb with the uranium casing removed. Wheter we have active stock is perhaps open to debate, but the existence of such weapons is a reality.
Click to expand...

You misunderstand me. I don't deny that there is such a thing as a nuclear weapon which is modified to produce a higher yield of neutrons relative to its destructive force, but the reality of this weapon does not jibe with the fanciful popular notion of a bomb that turns people into "shadows on the wall" and cause practically no material destruction.

The weapon still causes substantial destruction. That destruction is only "small" compared to a full-scale standard atomic blast. And the people who are outside the direct blast radius will not be neatly vaporized. They will die at varying rates, and with varying degrees of horribleness, depending on their distance from ground zero, due to intense radiation exposure.

This is not, as people want to believe, a weapon whose effects can be covered up with a nice coat of paint.

To be honest, I've never been sure why killing thousands of people and leaving their infrastructure largely intact is considered more civilized than killing thousands of people the old-fashioned way.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Register on MacRumors! This sidebar will go away, and you'll see fewer ads.
Top Bottom
Back