N. Korea and nukes:

[Swordsman3003]

http://www.cnn.com/2006/WORLD/asiapcf/1 ... index.html

[ManaUser]

Definitely alarming, but do you want to see something neat?

This is a list of earthquakes, updated almost real time.
http://earthquake.usgs.gov/eqcenter/rec ... es_all.php

Code: Select all

MAG     UTC Date/Time           LON     LAT      Depth km Region
4.2     2006/10/09 01:35:28     41.294  129.134  0.0      NORTH KOREA

Real earthquakes don't have a depth of zero km.

You can monitor nuclear tests on the internet.

[Swordsman3003]

I don't know. This worries me a lot more than anything else to happen this year.

[Gengar003]

At least they haven't figured out how to build working missiles yet.

[Swordsman3003]

True enough, but really, that isn't the best way to attack the U.S. with a nuclear weapon IMHO.

I mean, all they'd have to do is to sneak it onto a boat, and merely WALK the bomb into NYC, drop it down some sewer, and set it to detonate in 24 hours or something. Then they can't be blamed for it necassarily.

Also, part of the USA's fear is that they will give nuclear bomb material/knowledge to other countries, or that NK getting a bomb gives Iran the go ahead to develop one.

[WangyJohn]

I mean, all they'd have to do is to sneak it onto a boat, and merely WALK the bomb into NYC, drop it down some sewer, and set it to detonate in 24 hours or something. Then they can't be blamed for it necassarily.

Yes, but the blast and heat-waves as well as alpha and beta radiation would be lost in that. And depending in how deep the sewer, the landmass could even block gamma radiation. The main idea of a nuke is to detonate it above the ground, then the blast spreads.

[Lictor]

At least they haven't figured out how to build working missiles yet.

Actually they do have working missiles. The Taepodong 2 (Sp?) has an approximate range of 2000 miles and is capable of reaching Tokyo. Their goal is for it to reach Alaska. They just haven't got a nuclear warhead small enough to fit on it yet.

[Drigovas]

Very concerning.

Remember watching tv on the morning of 9/11/2001, thinking how much it sucked, but at least the weapons used were primitive, so on the off chance that it resulted in a military conflict, it would likely be one-sided and quick .

Nuclear weapons combined with a seemingly desperate country with a huge military. Much more worrying.

[BriHahn]

They've got a few other missiles too; names escape me at the moment (and I used to be a frickin' S2 in a PATRIOT unit too; God it's been WAAAAAYYYYY too long since I brushed up on my enemy missile knowledge), but the Taepodong-2 at this point is likely only in the test stages. People who live in or near Japan might remember the time North Korea shot off what they claimed was going to be a sattelite that splashed into the ocean on the other side of Japan; turned out it was possibly a test fire of a Taepodong-2 missile.

On the plus side of this; every other country nearby, including NK's former ally China, are telling them to (to borrow a quote from our own Unka G's comic; see the Rape Rape Revolution ones) "cease and knock it the fuck off"!! Everyone BUT Kim Jong Il (because he's insane) sees the idea of more nuclear proliferation by North Korea to be completely BAD.

Also, I might point out that North Korea's ability to support their gigantic military is in major question; North Korea is barely able to sustain itself as it is, and ever since they lost their allies, I find it highly unlikely that they'll be able to sustain their previous level of readiness for their military.

But again, this is just my opinion.

[Fnyunj]

You may recall my paranoid anti-Christianist rant on the other thread - (and I stand by that rant still). But I'm not all that worried about the NK test. Reasons why:

1. A magnatude 4.2 quake translates roughly to 500 - 1000 tons. This means one of four possibilities:
a) twas a dud - they're working with plutonium, not uranium, and the engineering involved in making a successful plutonium device is much more complicated. This is why testing is necessary - America tested around 1000 devices, not all of them were the expected yield - some were more, some were less, - to learn how to make them more reliable.
b) twas a fake - maybe they secretly carted 1000 tons of TNT into that cave and nobody saw? Who knows? Supposedly, in a few days, we should be able to confirm this by detecting nucleides drifting around (even underground tests almost always have leakage).
c) twas "bubble-wrap" - it's possible they used some kind of cushioning agent - supposedly, France did this with their last test, and it threw off the seismic detectors' ability to gauge the size accurately.
d) It's a new, super-secret high-tech mini tactical nuke design that even the Americans haven't figured out yet (yeah right).

2. NK does not want to attack the US. A lot of people are breathlessly claiming that he's a madman (just as portrayed on Team America). More realistically, they want the bargaining power and international status of a "nuclear playa". (better luck next time). The "power" thing is because they want to get the trade sanctions and interdiction measures removed, so they can fix their broken economy. But most of all, they're looking on strengthening their bargaining position with China.

3. NK does not have the capability to field a nuclear device operationally. Well - maybe in about 10 years when they refine their design to make the device small enough, and when their ballistic missile technology catches up.

4. NK only has enough plutonium from the heavy water reactor they shut down in 1994 for about 3 more bombs. They're sure as hell not going to try to sell those on the black market to terrorists. NK does not have a Uranium enrichment program. NK does not have a way of producing more plutonium (at present).

So - right now, my biggest worry is that Americans will start to get nervous, and vote Republican in the next election.

[Lulujayne]

2. NK does not want to attack the US. A lot of people are breathlessly claiming that he's a madman (just as portrayed on Team America). More realistically, they want the bargaining power and international status of a "nuclear playa". (better luck next time). The "power" thing is because they want to get the trade sanctions and interdiction measures removed, so they can fix their broken economy. But most of all, they're looking on strengthening their bargaining position with China.

With this I most deeply agree.

'Though I'd be the first to admit that it's worrying (as any nuclear tests are, by anyone) what concerns me more is what the subsequent reactions of the global powers-that-be might be, (aside from verbally condemming the tests, because that's a given ) given that creating a global culture of fear has been uber-effective for these administrations over the course of the last 5 years - it makes me wonder (and worry) how they might spin this little gem to us humble masses.

(Once again I'm going to recommend the BBC documentary "The Power of Nightmares - Baby its Cold Outside," to you good folk. It's free to download or stream from the film section of The Internet Archive website. Plus you can find the original "Night of the Living Dead" in there too, and what's better than that - Politics and zombies!?! Good Go I LOVE creative commons )

[RavenxDrake]

North Korea claiming to have nuclear weaponry dosen't frighten me any more than Pakistan, India, Isreal, France, Great Britian, Russian, and the my current "Woohoo! Get 'em boys, Go Longhorns!" Texas-sized ego, pea sized brain US government having them.

What frightens ME, to the CORE, is Bush's quote "The US condemns your actions. Disarm or we will forcable disarm you."

Hell no. HELL NO I will not stand for this kind of thing. Not rampageing through some country, slaughtering the locals and planting a US flag cause we have the right to force everyone to have freedom and democracy where they like it or not... I'm USED to that. But I will not sit back while the Dimbulb in Chief tries to use North Korea as a scapegoat to swing public opinion back to something apporaching favourable. He IGNORED North Korea for years fucking shit up in Iraq cause he didn't like the fact that his daddy didn't to stick Saddam in jail and parade him around in that spiffy orange jumpsuit, and NOW he wants everone to see how strong a stance we're taking on this?!

Hell no.

[Putaro]

What frightens ME, to the CORE, is Bush's quote "The US condemns your actions. Disarm or we will forcable disarm you."

Yah, well, GW and what Army? Thanks to Bush's Iraq fiasco that threat has no teeth. Way to go George! The big stick is supposed to be used to threaten, not to actually get stuck up someone's ass.

[Linkara]

Well, as a supporter of the Iraq War and that person you claim to have a pea-sized brain, I'm glad he's willing to say it. The idea of nuclear weapons in the hands of a psychopath like Kim is a frightening concept, especially if he plans on selling it to, say, a terrorist organization or to any other country that wants to join the nuclear club.

[Swordsman3003]

From my understanding, he is less likely to sell his weapons than many other countries that already have them.

[Nithos]

Well, as a supporter of the Iraq War and that person you claim to have a pea-sized brain, I'm glad he's willing to say it. The idea of nuclear weapons in the hands of a psychopath like Kim is a frightening concept, especially if he plans on selling it to, say, a terrorist organization or to any other country that wants to join the nuclear club.

I'd say he's unlikely to sell any nuclear weapons he develops. He has neither ideological nor pragmatic reasons to do so. To the best of my knowledge, he's not ideologically driven to sell nukes to terrorists, as the only thing he's fanatical about is his own power and security. He's too short on materials to mass produce nuclear weapons and play the role of arms dealer, to the best of my knowledge, so he'd be better off keeping them in his own hands. Keeping the nukes on hand, however, gives him a much stronger position in international politics, as he's now in the don't-fuck-with-me-club, and a dictator's got no reason to not go out in a blaze of radiation if you DO fuck with him. Selling actual materials to other countries doesn't seem likely, again because he doesn't have much on hand at the moment - however, I suspect some of the research involved in making nuclear weapons could find another national buyer. Maybe he would part with small amounts of the material for something like a dirty bomb, but not a true nuclear weapon.

In short, it seems to me that there's no immediate threat from him having nukes, however the long term situation's a lot uglier. North Korea doesn't seem like it's going to be stable in the long term, either Kim's going to push things too far, someone's going to push HIM too far, or he's going to die at some point and that could go lead to something ugly. Maybe it'll be generations, but whatever the situation, it seems very likely at some point, if this continues, that a nuclear weapon will be in a truely unstable nation's hands, and that's when things get unpredictable and difficult to handle.

True enough, but really, that isn't the best way to attack the U.S. with a nuclear weapon IMHO.

I mean, all they'd have to do is to sneak it onto a boat, and merely WALK the bomb into NYC, drop it down some sewer, and set it to detonate in 24 hours or something. Then they can't be blamed for it necassarily.

Also, part of the USA's fear is that they will give nuclear bomb material/knowledge to other countries, or that NK getting a bomb gives Iran the go ahead to develop one.

Probably true, but the nukes aren't for attacking, they're for defending. He's had the raw material for a small suitcase dirty bomb for some time, but slaughtering american's really isn't his first priority. I'm not saying he wouldn't happily destroy the US and take over the place if had a wand he could wave to do so, but nuclear missles are far more valuable to North Korea as political weapons than actual military weapons. It's much more useful unused as a looming threat than as a simple means to an end (of thousands of people's lives). Killing people for killing people's sake does Kim no good, and could put his position, and his life, in danger, but having a "fuck with me and I'll kill thousands of people in revenge" weapon is right up his alley.

[Jay042]

Protecting his regime was the mian impetus of the nuclear program. He wanted to have some kind of deterent to keep the US off it's back, and being a nuclear power with long range missle capacity will do that.

[UgghTheCaveman]

I mean, all they'd have to do is to sneak it onto a boat, and merely WALK the bomb into NYC, drop it down some sewer, and set it to detonate in 24 hours or something. Then they can't be blamed for it necassarily.

Yes, but the blast and heat-waves as well as alpha and beta radiation would be lost in that. And depending in how deep the sewer, the landmass could even block gamma radiation. The main idea of a nuke is to detonate it above the ground, then the blast spreads.

You didn't take hydrostatic shock into account, nor the instant vaporization of all liquid to quickly expanding steam along the blast front, giving it quite a bit of explosive power just in the water vapor. Not to mention the radioactive steam blowing out of toilets, sinks, sewage manholes (which, coincidentally, are turned into 100 pound steel tiddlywinks, landing where they may), the proximity, in many cases, of sewage lines to water lines at the mains, allowing cross contamination, and maybe even heat sharing, giving us steam from the pressured water lines, too, blowing valves off everywhere. You're talking about a MUCH more effective way to detonate a bomb, not a less effective one. Radioactive rain continues being radioactive as it rejoins the water table, and radioactive steam becomes radioactive rain.

[BriHahn]

You know, the fact that you know that much about radioactive bombs just makes me wonder...

As a regime, I fully believe North Korea is on it's last legs. Yes, having the nukes is worrisome; there's no doubt about that. But the majority of you bring up a very good point; North Korea simply does not have the resources to mass produce (in a sense) nuclear weapons. They'd have to purchase the uranium or plutonium, and let's face it; their economy is so fucked up I'd be surprised if they could buy ammunition for their rifles at this point. I remember seeing a very interesting unclassified country study on North Korea once that detailed their ability for self-sustainment. It was almost nonexistent, as I recall; most of their support came from their allies at the time. And since they've pulled out of the vast majority of their treaties (at least, last I heard) they no longer have the ability to sustain their own country. (Not that they did very well to begin with, what with every dime going to the military, and even then, the military doesn't live much better than the general populace.) I was looking at the political cartoons available on MSNBC today that are about the nuke test, and most of them depicted Kim Jong Il as a petulant little boy desperately seeking attention. Which, when you get right down to it, is essentially what he is; he's like a spoiled child whining for attention.

As for taking on North Korea, trust me; our commander in chief may be a bit of a cowboy, but the military leaders ain't, and fighting a war on three fronts is asking too much. My guess is, should there be any action against North Korea, it'll have to come from the UN, sorta like Lebanon (and let me just say it was about fucking time on that one; just offers a bit more proof for my point about America being viewed as the police of the world, and when we try to get people to stand up for themselves for once, they just get all whiny about it (Disclaimer: I'm not naming countries or names or anything, I'm just offering an opinion, so please don't think I'm talking about any of you! Love you guys!) and after a major period of grumbling finally get off their fat asses and do something about what ever the problem is, and then turn around and say that America's lazy for not helping). If it comes down to it, I would have to say North Korea isn't a threat at the moment, and that's all there is to it.

*stepping down off the soapbox and shutting up now*

[Lulujayne]

Whelp, if uber-diplomat (and South Korean) Ban Ki Moon takes over from Kofi Annan as UN secretary general things might be very different in regards to dealings with North Korea - and I mean this in a good way.

'Though the US government has been quick to label him (derisively) as "innofensive," I prefer to think of him as "diplomatic" with a unique and somewhat inscrutable style somewhat typical to the asian cultural idea of "face," (in the sense that it is of the upmost importance to not only save your own "face" but also the "face" of whom you're dealing with.)

Time magazine described him as "an iron fist in a velvet glove."

Moon has stated that he feels capable of making big changes in the relationship between North Korea and The Rest Of The World due to his deeper cultural understanding (being Korean himself) and because of growing up in Japanese occupied S.Korea and during the Korean war, he has a deeply ingrained appreciation for peace.

That said - the detonation of the test nuke has probably fecked up his chances of getting the job.