North Korea tests nuke - Tilted Forum Project Discussion Community

MSD · 10-09-2006, 07:10 AM

http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/asia-pacific/6033457.stm
http://earthquake.usgs.gov/eqcenter/.../10/125_40.php (click the orange square for info)

Quote:

North Korea's claim to have successfully carried out a nuclear weapon test underground has sparked international condemnation.

President George W Bush said the US was working to confirm the claim, which he branded a "provocative" act.

He said he and regional leaders agreed North Korea's actions were unacceptable and deserved an immediate response from the United Nations Security Council.

Security Council members are meeting in New York to discuss their reaction.

South Korean media said the test took place in Gilju in Hamgyong province at 1036 (0136 GMT).

But both the US and Japan said they had detected seismic waves. Russia said it was "100% certain" a nuclear test had occurred.

The size of the bomb is uncertain. South Korean reports put it as low as 550 tons of destructive power but Russia said it was between five and 15 kilotons. The 1945 Hiroshima bomb was 12.5-15 kilotons.

BBC diplomatic correspondent Jonathan Marcus says North Korea's claimed test does not necessarily mean it has a fully-fledged nuclear bomb or warhead that it can deliver to a target.

'Unpardonable'

In his first public statement, the US president said the North Korean claim "constitutes a threat to international peace and security."

He said he had telephoned Chinese, Japanese, Russian and South Korean leaders, who had all reaffirmed their commitment to a nuclear-free Korean peninsula.

"Once again, North Korea has defied the will of the international community, and the international community will respond," he said.

"The North Korea regime remains one of the world's leading proliferators of missile technology including transfers to Iran and Syria."

Mr Bush added that the development would not help North Korea's "oppressed and impoverished" people, who deserved a better future.

Japan's foreign ministry said Mr Bush and Japan's Prime Minister Shinzo Abe had agreed there should be "decisive UN action".

Mr Abe, currently visiting Seoul, earlier called the claimed test "unpardonable".

The region was "entering a new, dangerous nuclear age", Mr Abe said.

He said Japan and the US would step up co-operation on the missile defence system they began after a North Korean missile test in 1998.

South Korean President Roh Moo-hyun said it would be "difficult" to maintain his country's policy of engagement with the North. He feared the move could "spark a nuclear arms build-up in other countries".

The head of the South's intelligence service told lawmakers it had detected more movement at a North Korean test site and he could not rule out further nuclear tests.

In Seoul, about 500 protesters rallied against the claimed test, burning a portrait of North Korean leader Kim Jong-il.

South Korea has also suspended a scheduled aid shipment of concrete to North Korea.

In an unusually strong statement against its ally, China said the claimed test "defied the universal opposition of international society".

The BBC's Rupert Wingfield-Hayes in Beijing says China's statement is an indication of how strongly it is angered by North Korea's action, although Beijing will still be loath to support tougher sanctions against Pyongyang.

'Historic event'

When it announced the test, the North's KCNA media agency described it as an "historic event that brought happiness to our military and people".

It said the test would maintain "peace and stability" in the region and was "a great leap forward in the building of a great prosperous, powerful socialist nation". There was no radiation leak, it said.

The development comes three days after the UN Security Council agreed on a formal statement urging North Korea to cancel any planned nuclear test and return to disarmament talks.

Pyongyang pulled out of the nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty in 2003 and has refused for a year to attend talks aimed at ending its nuclear ambitions.

North Korea's official media has long warned that the US was preparing to attack and developing a nuclear capability was the only way to prevent this.

If confirmed, the test would make North Korea the ninth country known to have nuclear weapons.

A nuke anywhere from half a kiloton to 15 kilos is small by Cold War standards, but it's still a nuke test and once the technology is there the potential for constructing larger weapons is a lot higher and they will come quickly.

This is significant event, but I don't think that NK will be stupid enough to use nukes on neighbors. What concerns me is the economic fallout and the potential for North Korea to benefit from this. South Korea's stock market and currency experienced significant drops after this news came out, all the NK government has to do is light off another one, watch the market drop, invest in SK stock and currency through fake corporations, and get rich while being nice and calm and watching their investments grow (possibly to the point that they can survive an economic cutoff by China?)

edit:
They may test another one soon http://today.reuters.com/news/articl...KER-URGENT.XML

Sultana · 10-09-2006, 07:56 AM

I am freaked the hell out about this. What concerns me even more than the thought of nuclear weaponry in the hands of N. Korea is the thought that all the smaller countries that have participated in the Non-Proliferation Treaty are now gonna be scared, and justifiably so, and everyone will feel justified to have their own nuclear arsenal. All it takes is one well-armed mad man...I only hope that China will come down hard on N. Korea (the leadership, not the people) (and how great is it to have to depend on China for anything, eh?).

Ustwo · 10-09-2006, 08:13 AM

I'm a bit confused. They claim they tested one. We can't confirm this? Did we turn off all the sensing equipment when the cold war was over? Did they really test this or do they just want more free food after another failed harvest?

Hell it might have just been a fuel air bomb. We need additional confirmation before we proceed.

Gatorade Frost · 10-09-2006, 08:30 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Ustwo

I'm a bit confused. They claim they tested one. We can't confirm this? Did we turn off all the sensing equipment when the cold war was over? Did they really test this or do they just want more free food after another failed harvest?

Here's the earthquake information

It looks relatively confirmed to me.

Not sure how to handle the situation, personally.

MexicanOnABike · 10-09-2006, 08:33 AM

why is this such a big deal? doesnt the US have more nukes than anyone? why would somone testing 1 nuke be bad? they are only defending themselves.

highthief · 10-09-2006, 08:37 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by mexicanonabike

why is this such a big deal? doesnt the US have more nukes than anyone? why would somone testing 1 nuke be bad? they are only defending themselves.

Mostly because they are crazy as rabid squirrels (the leadership of NK, that is). They are infinitely more dangerous than any number of Saddams, IMO.

Seaver · 10-09-2006, 08:44 AM

Calm down people, they did this before and it turned out through seizmic (sp?) signatures to be just a really big bomb underground.

Nukes have a very tell-tale signature. First from the detonation of the detonation explosion, then the nuclear one. Lets just wait and see what teh analysis says before freaking out.

highthief · 10-09-2006, 09:20 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Seaver

Calm down people, they did this before and it turned out through seizmic (sp?) signatures to be just a really big bomb underground.

Nukes have a very tell-tale signature. First from the detonation of the detonation explosion, then the nuclear one. Lets just wait and see what teh analysis says before freaking out.

Wonder why no one thought of that before the Iarq invasion for those mythical WMDs?

hunnychile · 10-09-2006, 09:44 AM

Let them test the bombs all they want in their country. They'll have to deal with all the radiation dispersed within their borders.

In truth, I'm more worried that Bush is going to make more stupid aggresive statements (yeah, let's piss them off...) and then send more US troops over to S. Korea and invade N. Korea while we're at it. Seems like it is just more of the same old reasons for our red neck cowboy prez to go where we aren't wanted & waste all our manpower, ie. US lives & billions on another trumped up military action.

We have nukes. So now they have nukes. It's a moot point in some ways...

Lady Sage · 10-09-2006, 10:06 AM

We can have as many nukes as we want but no one else is allowed to? How does that work exactly?

I dont like the fact that anyone has nukes including ourselves, besides we dont use them anymore so why have them?

If we all just minded our own business like Canada.... who bothers Canada? We should learn by their example.

This is just the ramblings of a totally mad woman, pay no mind.

stevie667 · 10-09-2006, 10:23 AM

This is all going to end in tears for someone, probably the NK peasant population.

Lady Sage · 10-09-2006, 10:34 AM

Yeah, I had thought of that as well. Where did they test it exactly and how many of their own people are going to have loads of fun (insert sarcasm here) reaping the benefits of nuclear fallout? Do they even care?

Ace_O_Spades · 10-09-2006, 10:40 AM

mutually assured destruction is sure to be the revived buzzword of the year if they begin stockpiling nukes

KirStang · 10-09-2006, 11:03 AM

Mutually Assured Destruction - MAD, which, regrettably is what the policy is. Can fringe countries be looking to achieve nuclear power in order to achieve international bargaining power?

debaser · 10-09-2006, 11:56 AM

What does this have to do with Mark Foley touching little boys?

Gatorade Frost · 10-09-2006, 12:30 PM

If a country the size of North Korea starts stockpiling nukes, I don't think MAD destruction will be the buzzword. It was with Russia because that was a literally half-the-world against half-the-world. Compare that to today - One country versus what, all the other countries? China is even against North Korea's "Hey, look at me's." If they use a nuke, it's not going to destroy all of humanity.

Craven Morehead · 10-09-2006, 12:43 PM

The real fear is NK selling nuclear weapons to any nation that will pay enough for them. Think Iran. Or any oil producing country. Or any country with a crackpot at the helm.

That's why this is a big deal. NK needs money, this is a quick way to get it. NK does not have a delivery system as of yet that can do much more than explode over the Sea of Japan. Sooner or later NK gets that fixed. But other countries have rockets capable of delivering a device to a potential adversary. Think Isreal.

This is a real threat to world peace.

Willravel · 10-09-2006, 12:50 PM

Let Japan take this one. They have vested interest, they are at most risk, and they haven't botched a war in like 50 years. They have a capable military, and I seriously, seriously doubt China will back NK. China wants to roll with the fast and furious nations, reving their big engines and driving circles around everyone else, and NK just got a pinto. Japan's good people. They know what they have to do, and their troops are *gasp* actually trained for jungle comat! $5 says that they handle NK better than we handled Iraq.

ratbastid · 10-09-2006, 12:57 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Craven Morehead

But other countries have rockets capable of delivering a device to a potential adversary. Think Isreal.

Although they've never confirmed or denied it, Israel is generally believed to already have a nuclear arsenal. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Israel_...ss_destruction

... but the rest of your point is perfectly valid. Unfortunately.

ironman · 10-09-2006, 01:05 PM

Open message to George W. Bush, the CIA, the NSA, Rambo and Robocop:
Dudes, these guys "DO HAVE" Weapons of Mass Destruction.-

jorgelito · 10-09-2006, 01:11 PM

It's worse than that. North Korea needs cash, OBL et al have lots of cash. The real threat is North Korea selling weapons (nuclear etc) to non-state actors like terrorist organizations or non-rogue states.

There is precedent, NK has been caught before (ship) trying to export weapons to Syria etc. Luckily we caught them else the Lebanon eperience may have turned out quite differently, like-wise Iraq (think insurgents crossing into Iraq from Syria). EX: an IED that is nuclear goes off in Iraq.

MAD is no longer applicable in the post 9/11 world order (in my opinion). NK is in an assymetrical relationship vis-a-vis the other parties. basically, none of the parties are willing to pay the price in acceptable losses to resolve the NK situation while NK has nothing to lose and can hold everyone hostage to its demands. Especially in a regime like Kim's there is no inherent built in self-preservation device that MAD operates on. I personally think NK is "suicidal", if anything, they are playing a game of chicken.

hunnychile · 10-09-2006, 01:44 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by willravel

Let Japan take this one. They have vested interest, they are at most risk, and they haven't botched a war in like 50 years. They have a capable military, and I seriously, seriously doubt China will back NK. China wants to roll with the fast and furious nations, reving their big engines and driving circles around everyone else, and NK just got a pinto. Japan's good people. They know what they have to do, and their troops are *gasp* actually trained for jungle comat! $5 says that they handle NK better than we handled Iraq.

Willravel is totally correct IMO. Yes, let Japan field this upcoming battle (of words we hope/desire - not weapons) It's in their neighborhood and they do still have the upper hand in technology & sanctions - not us as some hope and thought. The Japanese ARE good people in my mind, in that they know that threats are wasted upon major players world wide. In fact, wouldn't it be great to share the responsibility of "keeping the world" safe with players such as China & Japan. That would be a smart move politically for our leaders to date.

We need the Asians as much as they need us in the USA. BTW - Our stockmarkets ARE joined at the hip in so many ways. It's almost scary if one isn't diversified enough to roll with all these punches.

Seaver · 10-09-2006, 02:42 PM

Quote:

Wonder why no one thought of that before the Iarq invasion for those mythical WMDs?

Chemical/Biological weapons are vastly different than nuclear.

Quote:

Let them test the bombs all they want in their country. They'll have to deal with all the radiation dispersed within their borders.

Quote:

Yeah, I had thought of that as well. Where did they test it exactly and how many of their own people are going to have loads of fun (insert sarcasm here) reaping the benefits of nuclear fallout? Do they even care?

It was an underground test, there's no fallout. However, if not done right it could irradiate some of the water supply.

highthief · 10-09-2006, 04:39 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by jorgelito

It's worse than that. North Korea needs cash, OBL et al have lots of cash. The real threat is North Korea selling weapons (nuclear etc) to non-state actors like terrorist organizations or non-rogue states.

Yup, NK is starving, Their position is such that trading a nuke for a barrel of oil and a side of beef looks good.

Personally, I think the bigger danger is to Japan or South Korea. The north leadership is genuinely bonkers, IMO. I could see them thinking that going out in "a blaze of glory" would be a fitting demise, so long as they took SK or Japan with them.

You know who this is an opportunity for? Russia. Russia goes in, wipes NK from the face of the earth, and suddenly Russia goes from memories of the USSR to genuine superpower again, overnight.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Seaver

Chemical/Biological weapons are vastly different than nuclear.

Your point being ...?

Willravel · 10-09-2006, 05:27 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by highthief

You know who this is an opportunity for? Russia. Russia goes in, wipes NK from the face of the earth, and suddenly Russia goes from memories of the USSR to genuine superpower again, overnight.

It would be an asbolutely inspired move, but they are just as distractred by their war on terror as we are. You should see their news, it's all about Chechnian rebels and bombings and such. It's the same as our stufff with Iraq. Besides, Russia hasn't made a smart military move in decades.

My vote is still for Japan. The little island(s) that could.

Seaver · 10-09-2006, 06:06 PM

Quote:

My vote is still for Japan. The little island(s) that could.

I'm under the impression that Japan still does not have an army due to the WWII treaty. They have a very small air force and navy, but I remember reading that they are not allowed an army.

Willravel · 10-09-2006, 06:11 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Seaver

I'm under the impression that Japan still does not have an army due to the WWII treaty. They have a very small air force and navy, but I remember reading that they are not allowed an army.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Japan_Self-Defense_Forces

Ustwo · 10-09-2006, 06:14 PM

Maybe France and Germany could help out too!

jorgelito · 10-09-2006, 06:16 PM

Japan moving militarily would be disastrous. Not until they have resolved their differences with their neighbors. In fact, Japan is probably the worst party to be involved in a Korean dispute. No way the Koreans will listen the Japanese, it's like throwing gas on a fire.

Russia is useless. No way they could make a move on N K. Their poor excuse for a military would take heavy losses deemed unacceptable.

I too think that NK is capable of doing the "going down in a blaze of glory and trying to take out as many people as possible". It's too bad how little we know of them.

Best moves? In my opinion, S Korea should move the capital all the way south the seaside (at least out of range of the 10,000s artillery now aimed at Seoul. Stop playing games with the North and hold them accountable. US military out except for advisors and similar personel.

China lacks will power and fear the collapse of the NK. But NK is making China their bitch right now, how can anyone respect that? China prefere the status quo and not rock the boat. They mostly want to protect their economy more than anything else. A war on their hands is not something they want. On the other hand, if they took a prominent role in the handling of the Korean mess, they could come out looking good and the Chinese leaders like that.

If it came down to conflict: China should definitely put the smack down (if it even can). Demand help from the UN to help with the inevitable refugee crisis, move military to the border, start air patrols and sea patrols. Cease all aid to NK. UN can air drop relief if it wants. I don't know, doesn't seem all that great either.

For a long shot: Or how about some reverse psychology? Yay NK, good for you, welcome to the nuclear club. Ignore, ignore. I mean, what do they want? What's the point of going nuclear? If they claim it's for energy and security, ok, call them on it. No ones gonna attack them, no one cares about them. If we take away the "power" of nukes from NK, then what? What if we all pretend not to care about NK and their lil' nukes? I swear, lil' Kim is like a little spoiled brat who just wants attention and uses nukes to get it. What a wanker. Maybe child psychology would work on him.

Japan does have a "Self Defense Forces". But under Article 9 of their constitution they aren't supposed to use it for anything other than self-defense. that's why their involvment is so controversial. Many Japanese and their neighbors are unhappy with this direction.

Japan is highly advanced. They are estimated to be able to produce a nuclear weapon within a year or so. They are considered nuclear capable. They are not as weak as they may appear to be though smaller in number, they are more advanced. Plus the US supposedly provides for their defense.

I don't think they can invade and occupy though, that's a whole different ball game.

Willravel · 10-09-2006, 06:30 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Ustwo

Maybe France and Germany could help out too!

Meaning what?

Mojo_PeiPei · 10-09-2006, 06:34 PM

Japan or South Korea aren't really in a position to do much. To start militarily, Japan isn't up to snuff to deal with a country like NK. Japan's military stands more as a defensive measure due to "historical" circumstances. This can be seen by their militaries very name, Japan Self-Defense Forces. This is there operation protocol

Japan's Basic Policy for National Defense stipulates the following policies:[7]

1. Maintaining an exclusive defense oriented policy.
2. To avoid becoming a major military power that might pose a threat to the world.
3. Refraining from the development of nuclear weapons, and to refuse to allow nuclear weapons inside Japanese territory.
4. Ensuring civilian control of the military.
5. Maintaining security arrangements with the United States.
6. Building up defensive capabilities within moderate limits.

Furthermore, they have constitutional issues when dealing with threats.

Quote:

The Japanese military is severely limited by Article 9 of the Japanese constitution which states: "The Japanese people forever renounce war as a sovereign right of the nation and the threat or use of force as means of settling international disputes" and that "land, sea, and air forces, as well as other war potential, will never be maintained." The exact limits of Article 9 is a controversial issue in Japan, but it has been interpreted as allowing for self-defense forces. Thus the JSDF has a very limited oversea capability, lacks long range offensive capabilities like long range Surface-to-surface missiles, air-refueling (as of 2004), Marines or amphibious units, large caches of ammunitions, or ROE (Rules of Engagement).

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Japan_Self-Defense_Forces

As such Japan has no military lift capacity, and extremely limited offensive strike capabilities. They have defense compacts with us in the states, we have just shy of 50,000 troops there. Therefore it seems Japan's only chance at addressing this system is either economic, which means dick when it comes to a dejected leper nation like NK, or diplomatic which is the dance we have been doing with those North Korean assclowns for 12+ years. North Korea has no lift capacity, but they could fight tough in a defensive capacity as they operate under a military first policy, they also maintain the worlds 4th largest standing army I believe.

There is also a problem with China insofar as the regional politics scene is concerned. China tends to push/nudge NK and they prop them up. The thing is a fucked up nutjob country in NK is good for China, it keeps the rest of the legit countries on tilt in dealing with them. China controls the leash and they will keep the status quo because an un-unified Korean province can't challenge them; they are the reason that NK hasn't gone completely under.

Willravel · 10-09-2006, 06:49 PM

Japan has an impressive naval capacity, and they have a lot of short range missles. That's all they need to limit and then destroy North Korea's nuclear capabilities. What idiot would invade NK on foot?

Ch'i · 10-09-2006, 07:13 PM

Containment policy might be invoked. I would be at a loss on why the US would try NK, but many of our administrations have done things that aren't exactly adventagous.

Ratman · 10-09-2006, 07:47 PM

I think you had better do a bit more research on Japan's Self Defense Forces. There is no first strike capability, not even in-air refueuling. All missiles are ground-to-air, strictly defensive. There are less than 300,000 Japanese IN TOTAL under arms, and they are not even "military" personnel, they are classified as "Special Civil Servants". If you want a good laugh, send them against NK in any way.

Edit: I would not call less than 200 total ships "an impressive naval capacity", but that's just me.

Willravel · 10-09-2006, 08:06 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Ratman

I think you had better do a bit more research on Japan's Self Defense Forces. There is no first strike capability, not even in-air refueuling. All missiles are ground-to-air, strictly defensive. There are less than 300,000 Japanese IN TOTAL under arms, and they are not even "military" personnel, they are classified as "Special Civil Servants". If you want a good laugh, send them against NK in any way.

Edit: I would not call less than 200 total ships "an impressive naval force", but that's just me.

I think you should do more research on North Korea's military. Guess what? They don't have shields.

If Japan is in danger (which they are), they are allowed to protect themselves. Japan Air Self-Defense Force front-line formations include three ground-attack squadrons (a squadren that can attack the ground, WITH MISSLES!!). Those squadrens easily have the range to do attack runs on NK, espically if they can get refueled in South Korea a few times before North Korea figures out what's going on. If you want a good laugh, send up the Soviet-era airforce that North Korea has and put them up against the modern technology of Japan.

As for the 200 total ships comment....again Japan has vastly superior technology to North Korea in every way. I'd love to see a Tachikaze class destroyer take on a North Korean frigate or corvette.

host · 10-09-2006, 08:27 PM

Hey, you guys.....wait up! How come nobody told me our forum was moving here?

Ratman · 10-09-2006, 08:51 PM

Let's see... Japan has 300,000 total military personnel to NK's 6 million. Japan has 250,000 frontline personnel to NK's 1.2 million. Japan has a slight advantage of about 300 total aircraft, but NK has around 17,000 missile defense systems to Japan's roughly 1000. And 175 total ships to NK's almost 800.

Technology aside, I'm not sure why this looks like a good match up. Maybe Japan could take out some nuclear capability with a sneak attack (who would suspect the Japanese, right?), but the rest of NK's military machine, however broken down and antiquated it may be, would spring to life and rain hell all over eastern Asia.

Personally, as one who lives in Japan, I would rather not see that happen. If it is necessary to take out NK's nuke sites, it will be necessary to take out their entire military capability. I believe that this would be better accomplished by a sustained cruise missile barrage of unimaginable proportion brought on simultaneoulsy by The US, China, and Russia.

I don't believe that Japan is in danger of NK's nukes yet, because there is no delivery system other than a bomber. Before we start talking about Japan gettin' all up in NK's face militarilly, there are other options to explore.

roachboy · 10-09-2006, 08:55 PM

well, since we are all here anyway, why not have a look at this?

Quote:

Bush's 'Axis of Evil' Comes Back to Haunt United States

By Glenn Kessler and Peter Baker
Washington Post Staff Writers
Tuesday, October 10, 2006; Page A12

Nearly five years after President Bush introduced the concept of an "axis of evil" comprising Iraq, Iran and North Korea, the administration has reached a crisis point with each nation: North Korea has claimed it conducted its first nuclear test, Iran refuses to halt its uranium-enrichment program, and Iraq appears to be tipping into a civil war 3 1/2 years after the U.S.-led invasion.

Each problem appears to feed on the others, making the stakes higher and requiring Bush and his advisers to make difficult calculations, analysts and U.S. officials said. The deteriorating situation in Iraq has undermined U.S. diplomatic credibility and limited the administration's military options, making rogue countries increasingly confident that they can act without serious consequences. Iran, meanwhile, will be watching closely the diplomatic fallout from North Korea's apparent test as a clue to how far it might go with its own nuclear program.

"Iran will follow very carefully what happens in the U.N. Security Council after the North Korean test," said Robert J. Einhorn, senior adviser at the Center for Strategic and International Studies (CSIS). "If the United Nations is not able to act forcefully, then Iran will think the path is clear to act with impunity."

Michael E. O'Hanlon, a Brookings Institution scholar and co-author of the new book "Hard Power: The New Politics of National Security," said the U.S. response to North Korea will have ripple effects. "Iran will certainly watch what happens. North Korea watched what happened with Pakistan and decided that the world didn't punish Pakistan too hard or too long," he said. "Iran will certainly notice if North Korea gets treated with kid gloves."

Political strategists debated the domestic implications of the North Korean test with midterm elections four weeks away. Some Republicans predicted it would take the focus off the Mark Foley congressional page scandal and remind voters that it is a dangerous world best confronted by tough-minded leaders. Some Democrats argued it would be seen as another failure of Bush's foreign policy and moved quickly to try to pin blame on the Republicans. "Is this going to help Republicans?" asked Jim Manley, spokesman for Senate Minority Leader Harry M. Reid (D-Nev.). "The answer to that is absolutely not. This is another significant foreign policy failure for the administration."

In Bush's 2002 State of the Union address, a speech designed to shift the political debate from a battle against al-Qaeda to a possible confrontation with Iraq, the president mentioned North Korea, Iraq and Iran and declared: "States like these, and their terrorist allies, constitute an axis of evil, arming to threaten the peace of the world. By seeking weapons of mass destruction, these regimes pose a grave and growing danger. . . . In any of these cases, the price of indifference would be catastrophic."

All three issues came to a head in 2003: The United States invaded Iraq and discovered no weapons of mass destruction; North Korea began to obtain weapons-grade plutonium from fuel rods that had been under international observation; and Iran disclosed that it had made rapid progress with a previously secret uranium-enrichment program.

In contrast to its handling of Iraq, the administration has tried to resolve the North Korean and Iranian nuclear breakouts with diplomacy. But progress has been slow, in part because the United States has been reluctant to hold bilateral talks with either country except within the context of broader talks with other nations.

Former senator Sam Nunn (D-Ga.) faulted the administration for focusing on Iraq first, when greater threats loomed in North Korea and Iran. "We started with Iraq in the 'axis of evil' side, when we thought they did not yet have nuclear weapons, and that sent the signal to others that they better get them quick," he said. "I think we started on the wrong end of that."

The administration launched a full-court press yesterday at the Security Council, proposing elements of a tough resolution that would call for imposing an arms embargo and a series of legally binding U.N. financial and trade sanctions. The United States also called for international inspections of all trade in and out of North Korea to enforce the sanctions.

U.S. officials yesterday were focusing especially closely on the reaction of China, long North Korea's main benefactor. The Chinese government publicly denounced the test in unusually strong language, and a senior U.S. official said the private comments of Chinese officials were equally strong. While China has been reluctant to pressure North Korea, fearing a collapse of the government and mass refugees on its border, "the question is whether a chaotic North Korea is worse than a nuclear North Korea," the official said, speaking on the condition of anonymity because of the diplomatic sensitivities.

Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice appears likely to make a trip to the region soon to further build support for a tough response by China, Japan and South Korea. Several experts predicted that although China's leadership is angry enough to support some sanctions, it always will stop short of putting enough pressure on Pyongyang to force its collapse. "Full-up sanctions I don't see happening," said former White House Asia expert Michael J. Green, now at CSIS.

James B. Steinberg, President Bill Clinton's deputy national security adviser and now dean of the Lyndon B. Johnson School of Public Affairs at the University of Texas at Austin, said the North Korea test will raise a larger question that echoes Ronald Reagan's most famous 1980 campaign line -- "With respect to the axis of evil," Steinberg said, "are you better off today than you were four years ago? . . . It's clear that the answer is we're worse off with respect to the nuclear proliferation problem in both North Korea and Iran than four to six years ago, and I would argue we're worse off in our overall security because of the situation in Iraq."

Staff writer Dafna Linzer contributed to this report.

source: http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn...100901130.html

so this whole thing makes me nervous but not for the reasons most are talking about above.
i think it looks more like the situation the article outlines.
and that, folks, could be very ugly indeed.

o and here's another bit of curious infotainment:

http://www.nytimes.com/2006/10/10/wo...rtner=homepage

the article is strange: "so it was a test and so like it was a success in that regard but not a very big one, really, almost maybe not one or just a really little one. nk really isn't part of the Huge Nuclear Penis Club, no this doesn't count pshaw----or maybe the opposite..."

but it does have a cool graphic that shows the differences in waveforms between nuclear weapons being fired underground and earthquakes, which is nice to know no matter how this plays out.

unless the vienna 1815 approach (calling dr. kissinger...) is reflected in what the administration does next.

i think they're going to have to do diplomacy.
and everyone everywhere will be thinking about iraq the whole time.

i find myself almost cheering for cowboy george.
"go george," i say
and i kinda push my fist outward.

Ch'i · 10-09-2006, 09:12 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Ratman

I believe that this would be better accomplished by a sustained cruise missile barrage of unimaginable proportion brought on simultaneoulsy by The US, China, and Russia.

So you want China, Russia, and the US to kill thousands of innocent people, again? Whatever happened to diplomacy? Perhaps it was caught in the crossfire.

Willravel · 10-09-2006, 09:21 PM

Best option? North Korea suddenly has a massive bloodless civil war and Kim is removed from power and replaced by the Dalai Lama and a resurected Gandhi. They develop a clean energy source that's only byproduect is a calorie free form of chocolate.

In reality, South Korea and Japan are in danger. We all know South Korea is massively outgunned, therefore it falls to Japan. Japan, despite being outnumbered, is not outgunned. Japan has the right to defend itself. If Japan asks for help from the UN, then I really hope the UN is able to snap into action (unlike what they normally do). The US does have a great deal of troops posted for just such a rainy nuclear day in the South Pacific (Bali Ha'i!!!). I'm hoping that multilateral peace talks will be succesful, but I know that the US, Japan, Australia(?) and South Korea combined could wipe North Korea from history very quickly...if we simply bomb them from above. The problem with that is of course that only 1 in like 48 North Koreans are military and if we bomb indiscrimantly, like was done in Iraq, we end up with massive civilian casualties.

What ever happened to spies? Why isn't there a James Bond in NK finding out where the nukes are?

10-09-2006, 07:56 AM	#2 (permalink)
Sultana Falling Angel Location: L.A. L.A. land	I am freaked the hell out about this. What concerns me even more than the thought of nuclear weaponry in the hands of N. Korea is the thought that all the smaller countries that have participated in the Non-Proliferation Treaty are now gonna be scared, and justifiably so, and everyone will feel justified to have their own nuclear arsenal. All it takes is one well-armed mad man...I only hope that China will come down hard on N. Korea (the leadership, not the people) (and how great is it to have to depend on China for anything, eh?). __________________ "Love is a snowmobile racing across the tundra and then suddenly it flips over, pinning you underneath. At night, the ice weasels come." - Matt Groening My goal? To fulfill my potential.

10-09-2006, 08:13 AM	#3 (permalink)
Ustwo Pissing in the cornflakes	I'm a bit confused. They claim they tested one. We can't confirm this? Did we turn off all the sensing equipment when the cold war was over? Did they really test this or do they just want more free food after another failed harvest? Hell it might have just been a fuel air bomb. We need additional confirmation before we proceed. __________________ Agents of the enemies who hold office in our own government, who attempt to eliminate our "freedoms" and our "right to know" are posting among us, I fear.....on this very forum. - host Obama - Know a Man by the friends he keeps.

10-09-2006, 08:33 AM	#5 (permalink)
MexicanOnABike Location: up north	why is this such a big deal? doesnt the US have more nukes than anyone? why would somone testing 1 nuke be bad? they are only defending themselves. __________________ - Movie Reviews - Ratings-

10-09-2006, 08:44 AM	#7 (permalink)
Seaver Junkie Location: Fort Worth, TX	Calm down people, they did this before and it turned out through seizmic (sp?) signatures to be just a really big bomb underground. Nukes have a very tell-tale signature. First from the detonation of the detonation explosion, then the nuclear one. Lets just wait and see what teh analysis says before freaking out. __________________ "Smite the rocks with the rod of knowledge, and fountains of unstinted wealth will gush forth." - Ashbel Smith as he laid the first cornerstone of the University of Texas

10-09-2006, 09:44 AM	#9 (permalink)
hunnychile Alien Anthropologist Location: Between Boredom and Nirvana	Let them test the bombs all they want in their country. They'll have to deal with all the radiation dispersed within their borders. In truth, I'm more worried that Bush is going to make more stupid aggresive statements (yeah, let's piss them off...) and then send more US troops over to S. Korea and invade N. Korea while we're at it. Seems like it is just more of the same old reasons for our red neck cowboy prez to go where we aren't wanted & waste all our manpower, ie. US lives & billions on another trumped up military action. We have nukes. So now they have nukes. It's a moot point in some ways... __________________ "I need compassion, understanding and chocolate." - NJB Last edited by hunnychile; 10-09-2006 at 09:47 AM..

10-09-2006, 10:06 AM	#10 (permalink)
Lady Sage Mistress of Mayhem Location: Canton, Ohio	We can have as many nukes as we want but no one else is allowed to? How does that work exactly? I dont like the fact that anyone has nukes including ourselves, besides we dont use them anymore so why have them? If we all just minded our own business like Canada.... who bothers Canada? We should learn by their example. This is just the ramblings of a totally mad woman, pay no mind. __________________ If only closed minds came with closed mouths. Minds are like parachutes, they function best when open. It`s Easier to Change a Condom Than a Diaper Yes, the rumors are true... I actually AM a Witch.

10-09-2006, 10:23 AM	#11 (permalink)
stevie667 Too Awesome for Aardvarks Location: Angloland	This is all going to end in tears for someone, probably the NK peasant population. __________________ Office hours have changed. Please call during office hours for more information.

10-09-2006, 10:34 AM	#12 (permalink)
Lady Sage Mistress of Mayhem Location: Canton, Ohio	Yeah, I had thought of that as well. Where did they test it exactly and how many of their own people are going to have loads of fun (insert sarcasm here) reaping the benefits of nuclear fallout? Do they even care? __________________ If only closed minds came with closed mouths. Minds are like parachutes, they function best when open. It`s Easier to Change a Condom Than a Diaper Yes, the rumors are true... I actually AM a Witch.

10-09-2006, 10:40 AM	#13 (permalink)
Ace_O_Spades The Death Card Location: EH!?!?	mutually assured destruction is sure to be the revived buzzword of the year if they begin stockpiling nukes __________________ Feh. Last edited by Ace_O_Spades; 10-09-2006 at 04:52 PM..

10-09-2006, 11:03 AM	#14 (permalink)
KirStang Future Bureaucrat	Mutually Assured Destruction - MAD, which, regrettably is what the policy is. Can fringe countries be looking to achieve nuclear power in order to achieve international bargaining power?

10-09-2006, 11:56 AM	#15 (permalink)
debaser Sir, I have a plan... Location: 38S NC20943324	What does this have to do with Mark Foley touching little boys? __________________ Fortunato became immured to the sound of the trowel after a while.

10-09-2006, 12:30 PM	#16 (permalink)
Gatorade Frost Rookie	If a country the size of North Korea starts stockpiling nukes, I don't think MAD destruction will be the buzzword. It was with Russia because that was a literally half-the-world against half-the-world. Compare that to today - One country versus what, all the other countries? China is even against North Korea's "Hey, look at me's." If they use a nuke, it's not going to destroy all of humanity. __________________ I got in a fight one time with a really big guy, and he said, "I'm going to mop the floor with your face." I said, "You'll be sorry." He said, "Oh, yeah? Why?" I said, "Well, you won't be able to get into the corners very well." Emo Philips

10-09-2006, 12:43 PM	#17 (permalink)
Craven Morehead Custom User Title	The real fear is NK selling nuclear weapons to any nation that will pay enough for them. Think Iran. Or any oil producing country. Or any country with a crackpot at the helm. That's why this is a big deal. NK needs money, this is a quick way to get it. NK does not have a delivery system as of yet that can do much more than explode over the Sea of Japan. Sooner or later NK gets that fixed. But other countries have rockets capable of delivering a device to a potential adversary. Think Isreal. This is a real threat to world peace.

10-09-2006, 12:50 PM	#18 (permalink)
Willravel ... a sort of licensed troubleshooter.	Let Japan take this one. They have vested interest, they are at most risk, and they haven't botched a war in like 50 years. They have a capable military, and I seriously, seriously doubt China will back NK. China wants to roll with the fast and furious nations, reving their big engines and driving circles around everyone else, and NK just got a pinto. Japan's good people. They know what they have to do, and their troops are gasp actually trained for jungle comat! $5 says that they handle NK better than we handled Iraq.

10-09-2006, 01:05 PM	#20 (permalink)
ironman Smithers, release the hounds Location: Guatemala, Guatemala	Open message to George W. Bush, the CIA, the NSA, Rambo and Robocop: Dudes, these guys "DO HAVE" Weapons of Mass Destruction.- __________________ If I agreed with you we´d both be wrong

10-09-2006, 01:11 PM	#21 (permalink)
jorgelito All important elusive independent swing voter... Location: People's Republic of KKKalifornia	It's worse than that. North Korea needs cash, OBL et al have lots of cash. The real threat is North Korea selling weapons (nuclear etc) to non-state actors like terrorist organizations or non-rogue states. There is precedent, NK has been caught before (ship) trying to export weapons to Syria etc. Luckily we caught them else the Lebanon eperience may have turned out quite differently, like-wise Iraq (think insurgents crossing into Iraq from Syria). EX: an IED that is nuclear goes off in Iraq. MAD is no longer applicable in the post 9/11 world order (in my opinion). NK is in an assymetrical relationship vis-a-vis the other parties. basically, none of the parties are willing to pay the price in acceptable losses to resolve the NK situation while NK has nothing to lose and can hold everyone hostage to its demands. Especially in a regime like Kim's there is no inherent built in self-preservation device that MAD operates on. I personally think NK is "suicidal", if anything, they are playing a game of chicken. Last edited by jorgelito; 10-09-2006 at 01:18 PM.. Reason: Automerged Doublepost

10-09-2006, 06:14 PM	#28 (permalink)
Ustwo Pissing in the cornflakes	Maybe France and Germany could help out too! __________________ Agents of the enemies who hold office in our own government, who attempt to eliminate our "freedoms" and our "right to know" are posting among us, I fear.....on this very forum. - host Obama - Know a Man by the friends he keeps.

10-09-2006, 06:16 PM	#29 (permalink)
jorgelito All important elusive independent swing voter... Location: People's Republic of KKKalifornia	Japan moving militarily would be disastrous. Not until they have resolved their differences with their neighbors. In fact, Japan is probably the worst party to be involved in a Korean dispute. No way the Koreans will listen the Japanese, it's like throwing gas on a fire. Russia is useless. No way they could make a move on N K. Their poor excuse for a military would take heavy losses deemed unacceptable. I too think that NK is capable of doing the "going down in a blaze of glory and trying to take out as many people as possible". It's too bad how little we know of them. Best moves? In my opinion, S Korea should move the capital all the way south the seaside (at least out of range of the 10,000s artillery now aimed at Seoul. Stop playing games with the North and hold them accountable. US military out except for advisors and similar personel. China lacks will power and fear the collapse of the NK. But NK is making China their bitch right now, how can anyone respect that? China prefere the status quo and not rock the boat. They mostly want to protect their economy more than anything else. A war on their hands is not something they want. On the other hand, if they took a prominent role in the handling of the Korean mess, they could come out looking good and the Chinese leaders like that. If it came down to conflict: China should definitely put the smack down (if it even can). Demand help from the UN to help with the inevitable refugee crisis, move military to the border, start air patrols and sea patrols. Cease all aid to NK. UN can air drop relief if it wants. I don't know, doesn't seem all that great either. For a long shot: Or how about some reverse psychology? Yay NK, good for you, welcome to the nuclear club. Ignore, ignore. I mean, what do they want? What's the point of going nuclear? If they claim it's for energy and security, ok, call them on it. No ones gonna attack them, no one cares about them. If we take away the "power" of nukes from NK, then what? What if we all pretend not to care about NK and their lil' nukes? I swear, lil' Kim is like a little spoiled brat who just wants attention and uses nukes to get it. What a wanker. Maybe child psychology would work on him. Japan does have a "Self Defense Forces". But under Article 9 of their constitution they aren't supposed to use it for anything other than self-defense. that's why their involvment is so controversial. Many Japanese and their neighbors are unhappy with this direction. Japan is highly advanced. They are estimated to be able to produce a nuclear weapon within a year or so. They are considered nuclear capable. They are not as weak as they may appear to be though smaller in number, they are more advanced. Plus the US supposedly provides for their defense. I don't think they can invade and occupy though, that's a whole different ball game. Last edited by jorgelito; 10-09-2006 at 06:21 PM.. Reason: Automerged Doublepost

10-09-2006, 06:49 PM	#32 (permalink)
Willravel ... a sort of licensed troubleshooter.	Japan has an impressive naval capacity, and they have a lot of short range missles. That's all they need to limit and then destroy North Korea's nuclear capabilities. What idiot would invade NK on foot?

10-09-2006, 07:13 PM	#33 (permalink)
Ch'i Artist of Life	Containment policy might be invoked. I would be at a loss on why the US would try NK, but many of our administrations have done things that aren't exactly adventagous. Last edited by Ch'i; 10-09-2006 at 07:23 PM..

10-09-2006, 07:47 PM	#34 (permalink)
Ratman Addict Location: Somewhere... Across the sea...	I think you had better do a bit more research on Japan's Self Defense Forces. There is no first strike capability, not even in-air refueuling. All missiles are ground-to-air, strictly defensive. There are less than 300,000 Japanese IN TOTAL under arms, and they are not even "military" personnel, they are classified as "Special Civil Servants". If you want a good laugh, send them against NK in any way. Edit: I would not call less than 200 total ships "an impressive naval capacity", but that's just me. __________________ The difference between theory and reality is that in theory there is no difference. "God made man, but he used the monkey to do it." DEVO Last edited by Ratman; 10-09-2006 at 07:52 PM..

10-09-2006, 08:27 PM	#36 (permalink)
host Banned	Hey, you guys.....wait up! How come nobody told me our forum was moving here?

10-09-2006, 08:51 PM	#37 (permalink)
Ratman Addict Location: Somewhere... Across the sea...	Let's see... Japan has 300,000 total military personnel to NK's 6 million. Japan has 250,000 frontline personnel to NK's 1.2 million. Japan has a slight advantage of about 300 total aircraft, but NK has around 17,000 missile defense systems to Japan's roughly 1000. And 175 total ships to NK's almost 800. Technology aside, I'm not sure why this looks like a good match up. Maybe Japan could take out some nuclear capability with a sneak attack (who would suspect the Japanese, right?), but the rest of NK's military machine, however broken down and antiquated it may be, would spring to life and rain hell all over eastern Asia. Personally, as one who lives in Japan, I would rather not see that happen. If it is necessary to take out NK's nuke sites, it will be necessary to take out their entire military capability. I believe that this would be better accomplished by a sustained cruise missile barrage of unimaginable proportion brought on simultaneoulsy by The US, China, and Russia. I don't believe that Japan is in danger of NK's nukes yet, because there is no delivery system other than a bomber. Before we start talking about Japan gettin' all up in NK's face militarilly, there are other options to explore. __________________ The difference between theory and reality is that in theory there is no difference. "God made man, but he used the monkey to do it." DEVO

10-09-2006, 09:21 PM	#40 (permalink)
Willravel ... a sort of licensed troubleshooter.	Best option? North Korea suddenly has a massive bloodless civil war and Kim is removed from power and replaced by the Dalai Lama and a resurected Gandhi. They develop a clean energy source that's only byproduect is a calorie free form of chocolate. In reality, South Korea and Japan are in danger. We all know South Korea is massively outgunned, therefore it falls to Japan. Japan, despite being outnumbered, is not outgunned. Japan has the right to defend itself. If Japan asks for help from the UN, then I really hope the UN is able to snap into action (unlike what they normally do). The US does have a great deal of troops posted for just such a rainy nuclear day in the South Pacific (Bali Ha'i!!!). I'm hoping that multilateral peace talks will be succesful, but I know that the US, Japan, Australia(?) and South Korea combined could wipe North Korea from history very quickly...if we simply bomb them from above. The problem with that is of course that only 1 in like 48 North Koreans are military and if we bomb indiscrimantly, like was done in Iraq, we end up with massive civilian casualties. What ever happened to spies? Why isn't there a James Bond in NK finding out where the nukes are?