U.S. Officials have confirmed the launch of the North Korean rocket that will bring up a communications satellite.
| Quote: |
U.S. counterproliferation and intelligence officials confirmed Japanese news reports of the expected launch between April 4 and 8.
|
http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20090325/ap_on_go_ot/us_nkorea_missile I thought the controversial part was whether it was really a satellite or if it was really a disguised ICBM test...
They're sure its a satellite now?
It's kind of both, if a missile can launch a satellite successfully into space, then it definitely is capable of reaching the US. That's what the controversy is about.
| ocalhoun wrote: |
I thought the controversial part was whether it was really a satellite or if it was really a disguised ICBM test...
They're sure its a satellite now? |
Either way I'm guessing it will probably explode in mid-flight from some shoddy equipment failure. Considering they can barely pay to keep their shoddy panelaks up, their equipment up to date, and their military officers decently fed (they can't even do this much), I doubt they will have any more success than their previous Taepodong-2 launch. | {name here} wrote: |
| ocalhoun wrote: | I thought the controversial part was whether it was really a satellite or if it was really a disguised ICBM test...
They're sure its a satellite now? |
Either way I'm guessing it will probably explode in mid-flight from some shoddy equipment failure. Considering they can barely pay to keep their shoddy panelaks up, their equipment up to date, and their military officers decently fed (they can't even do this much), I doubt they will have any more success than their previous Taepodong-2 launch. |
Or something worse, it may travel in a wrong direction and explode where it is not supposed to explode, then cause a Tsunami .... 
lol... or it could launch successfully and everyone gets freaked out. The US will be the first to sanction North Korea probably.
^I wouldn't want to be the one in charge of making 'the decision' if the rocket's trajectory curved off towards the East though...
You'd have to figure out if it was a satellite, test ICBM, or real ICBM, and you'd have to have the right answer in a big hurry!
| ocalhoun wrote: |
^I wouldn't want to be the one in charge of making 'the decision' if the rocket's trajectory curved off towards the East though...
You'd have to figure out if it was a satellite, test ICBM, or real ICBM, and you'd have to have the right answer in a big hurry! |
probably serious stuff here, hope it does not happen, but good to think about it though.It will probably be a piece of crap, given their last attempts. I just hope it doesn't turn into a big surprising success, and then another big surprising nuclear success. I mean, when a world leader threatens to turn the Sea of Japan into a lake of fire because he didn't get his way, then he can't be trusted with anything. I don't even trust him with a legitimate satellite rocket.
Of course, who suffers the most from this crazed sociopath? The citizens of North Korea. If he launces an ICBM, we can intercept it, no problem. Unfortunately, our retalliation would destroy the lives of many innocent(albeit brainwashed) North Koreans.
He needs to be whacked.
| Solon_Poledourus wrote: |
If he launces an ICBM, we can intercept it, no problem. Unfortunately, our retalliation would destroy the lives of many innocent(albeit brainwashed) North Koreans.
|
Not too sure about that... An anti-satellite missile might be able to hit it at the peak of its trajectory, but could we get one there in time? A patriot missile might be able to hit it near the ground, but will there be any stationed and active close enough to the target?
That it would... I wouldn't be surprised at all if there was a couple US nuclear subs that just happen to be stationed near North Korea right now. | Quote: |
| Not too sure about that... An anti-satellite missile might be able to hit it at the peak of its trajectory, |
That's true.
| Quote: |
| but could we get one there in time? A patriot missile might be able to hit it near the ground, but will there be any stationed and active close enough to the target? |
I'd almost bet on the US having some kind of plan in place in the case of a North Korean strike, as unstable as that place is. But like I said, we might be unpleasantly surprised by them. I'd hate to think that we don't have anything ready to go in that area, considering the urgency with which we attack relatively low-rent guys in the Afghan/Pakistan area. If I had to wager between N. Korea or an Afghan ICBM coming our way, I'd definately put my money on ol' Kim.
But anythings possible these days. | Solon_Poledourus wrote: |
| I'd almost bet on the US having some kind of plan in place in the case of a North Korean strike, as unstable as that place is. |
Totally agreed, and the US must have probably had that plan in place at the stage when the North Korean armaments were still in design phase! Ditto Iran 
Iran is another one that gives me shivers. Years ago, I went there with a friend of mine, and it was fantastic. He was a local, so he showed me around his turf, and we had a blast. Not too much later, it just became this place that Americans don't go. And now, this Ahmadinejad guy just makes me cringe.
And he also looks like Joaquim de Almeida. | Solon_Poledourus wrote: |
Iran is another one that gives me shivers. Years ago, I went there with a friend of mine, and it was fantastic. He was a local, so he showed me around his turf, and we had a blast. Not too much later, it just became this place that Americans don't go. And now, this Ahmadinejad guy just makes me cringe.
And he also looks like Joaquim de Almeida. |
Come off it .... Ahmadinejad has cold, shifty and beady eyes. Joaquim de Almeida has a nice and open face. No comparison except for the colour of hair and face | Quote: |
| Come off it .... Ahmadinejad has cold, shifty and beady eyes. Joaquim de Almeida has a nice and open face. No comparison except for the colour of hair and face |
Yeah it was mostly a joke... alot of the similarity I see is when Mr. Iran is smiling, which is rare. But Joaquim is much more charismatic, he could play the role of Mr. Iran in a mocie, though. | Solon_Poledourus wrote: |
| Quote: | | Come off it .... Ahmadinejad has cold, shifty and beady eyes. Joaquim de Almeida has a nice and open face. No comparison except for the colour of hair and face |
Yeah it was mostly a joke... alot of the similarity I see is when Mr. Iran is smiling, which is rare. But Joaquim is much more charismatic, he could play the role of Mr. Iran in a mocie, though. |
Absolutely, I think I've seen him in Mafia mob type portrayels, and he would be really good as Mr. Iran, probably better than Mr. Iran can be Mr. Iran | deanhills wrote: |
| Absolutely, I think I've seen him in Mafia mob type portrayels, and he would be really good as Mr. Iran, probably better than Mr. Iran can be Mr. Iran |
Yes, he was Buccho in "desperado" with Antonio Banderas, and he was also in "Clear and Present Danger" and many others. I love him as a bad guy.
And Kim Jong Il should be played by Ric Young. Another favorite movie bad guy. | Solon_Poledourus wrote: |
| deanhills wrote: | | Absolutely, I think I've seen him in Mafia mob type portrayels, and he would be really good as Mr. Iran, probably better than Mr. Iran can be Mr. Iran |
Yes, he was Buccho in "desperado" with Antonio Banderas, and he was also in "Clear and Present Danger" and many others. I love him as a bad guy.
And Kim Jong Il should be played by Ric Young. Another favorite movie bad guy. |
Right, an excellent "BAD" guy. I like your thinking We're way off topic now but what do you think about "The good, the bad and the ugly" and which is your favourite of the three? http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Good,_the_Bad_and_the_Ugly I like the bad and ugly guys.
OK back to the thread ... what involvement do you think Russia has with North Vietnam. My understanding is that they have sort have been helping North Vietnam under the table but of course under different headings like oil pipeline etc.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/North_Korea%E2%80%93Russia_relations
Interestingly, I just watched that yesterday. I love Lee Van Cleef, aka Angel Eyes. What a great role.
| deanhills wrote: |
| OK back to the thread ... what involvement do you think Russia has with North Vietnam. My understanding is that they have sort have been helping North Vietnam under the table but of course under different headings like oil pipeline etc. |
For a while there, I had so much hope for Russia. After the Iron Curtain came down, their economy tanked, but then was revived. I visited Moscow a few years ago and was amazed at how much money is there, it's more expensive than Beverly Hills. It seemed like Russia had a good thing going.
But now, I just don't trust that government. It's almost like the old Russia is back in charge, if they ever left. I'm not sure what they have going with N. Korea, maybe it is just pipelines... Unfortunately, when you do business with criminals, you become as responsible for their criminal actions as they are. So maybe Russias' motives are pure, but they are forming ties with those whose motives clearly are not. This puts them both in a bad situation. As well as everyone else.
If N. Korea makes a military display of some new ICBM's, I just hope Russia doesn't back them when we sanction them. This could create a very tense situation. | deanhills wrote: |
| what involvement do you think Russia has with North Vietnam. |
You mean North Korea?
Personally, I think we just need to wait for the launch and see what happens. | Nick2008 wrote: |
| deanhills wrote: | | what involvement do you think Russia has with North Vietnam. |
You mean North Korea?
Personally, I think we just need to wait for the launch and see what happens. |
Right ... sorry, I did mean North Korea. I can't help thinking there is more that meets the idea, for the reason that North Korea is a poor country, it would need a BIG sponsor. US will not stop North Korea Rocket.
| Quote: |
Japan had said earlier it would deploy missile interceptors to destroy any parts of a North Korean rocket that might fall on its territory.
North Korea has said it would regard any rocket intercept as an act of war.
But Mr Gates said the US would not attempt to shoot it down.
|
Also, about Russia's viewpoint:
| Quote: |
The US had previously said the launch would violate UN Security Council resolutions, while Russia has said North Korea should "abstain" from testing any missiles.
|
Only a week or 2 left until we see the launch.
http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/asia-pacific/7970985.stm | Nick2008 wrote: |
| http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/asia-pacific/7970985.stm |
Looks like Washington DC and Russia are at pretty safe distances from the launch whereas Japan is right in the path of it.Is that safe sattelite that they lunch? maybe tommorow they can control our communication system or around the world but us intelligence analysts see the launch by North Korea as an attempt to best its southern rival while sending a message to Japan and the United States,a senior U.S. intelligence official, speaking anonymously because he is not authorized to discuss the matter with the press i heard in CNN .
| airh3ad wrote: |
| Is that safe sattelite that they lunch? maybe tommorow they can control our communication system or around the world but us intelligence analysts see the launch by North Korea as an attempt to best its southern rival while sending a message to Japan and the United States,a senior U.S. intelligence official, speaking anonymously because he is not authorized to discuss the matter with the press i heard in CNN . |
I could not figure out what you were saying here, what does it mean? 
| Nick2008 wrote: |
US will not stop North Korea Rocket.
| Quote: |
Japan had said earlier it would deploy missile interceptors to destroy any parts of a North Korean rocket that might fall on its territory.
North Korea has said it would regard any rocket intercept as an act of war.
But Mr Gates said the US would not attempt to shoot it down.
|
|
Probably because the US can't shoot it down, unless they get lucky.
There was once a missile-defense system in the works, but it was canceled because a) it was too expensive, and b) the Russians didn't like it, and threatened to nuke us preemptively just before we turned the system on, because that would be their last chance before the threat of mutually assured destruction would go away.
What needs to happen: All currently nuclear equipped states need to work together on a UN controlled anti-ICBM system that will automatically shoot down ICBM's from any country. That would be one step closer to a nuke-free world, but you still have the problem posed by alternative delivery systems for nukes (short-range missile, airplane, sub-launched cruise missile, sneaking it across a border) that couldn't be stopped with this system. However, 'rouge' nations wouldn't be able to get a bomber past defenses, and probably couldn't afford a submarine quiet enough to get close without being noticed, though that still leaves them with the options of sneaking it across a border and short-range missiles. | ocalhoun wrote: |
Probably because the US can't shoot it down, unless they get lucky.
There was once a missile-defense system in the works, but it was canceled because a) it was too expensive, and b) the Russians didn't like it, and threatened to nuke us preemptively just before we turned the system on, because that would be their last chance before the threat of mutually assured destruction would go away.
What needs to happen: All currently nuclear equipped states need to work together on a UN controlled anti-ICBM system that will automatically shoot down ICBM's from any country. That would be one step closer to a nuke-free world, but you still have the problem posed by alternative delivery systems for nukes (short-range missile, airplane, sub-launched cruise missile, sneaking it across a border) that couldn't be stopped with this system. However, 'rouge' nations wouldn't be able to get a bomber past defenses, and probably couldn't afford a submarine quiet enough to get close without being noticed, though that still leaves them with the options of sneaking it across a border and short-range missiles. |
Thanks for this insight. Really interesting, and scary at the same time. Think this is one instance where ignorance is bliss for me. If one has to know all the stuff that is going on surrounding nuclear capabilities one probably will not be able to sleep at night ... 
| deanhills wrote: |
Thanks for this insight. Really interesting, and scary at the same time. Think this is one instance where ignorance is bliss for me. If one has to know all the stuff that is going on surrounding nuclear capabilities one probably will not be able to sleep at night ... |
Another reason to live in the boondocks ^.^
Why waste a nuke on a sparsely populated area when you can hit a big city? | ocalhoun wrote: |
| deanhills wrote: |
Thanks for this insight. Really interesting, and scary at the same time. Think this is one instance where ignorance is bliss for me. If one has to know all the stuff that is going on surrounding nuclear capabilities one probably will not be able to sleep at night ... |
Another reason to live in the boondocks ^.^
Why waste a nuke on a sparsely populated area when you can hit a big city? |
Excellent thought! South America is getting more and more attractive by the minute. Think I need to investigate Quito this summer. | deanhills wrote: |
| ocalhoun wrote: | Probably because the US can't shoot it down, unless they get lucky.
There was once a missile-defense system in the works, but it was canceled because a) it was too expensive, and b) the Russians didn't like it, and threatened to nuke us preemptively just before we turned the system on, because that would be their last chance before the threat of mutually assured destruction would go away.
What needs to happen: All currently nuclear equipped states need to work together on a UN controlled anti-ICBM system that will automatically shoot down ICBM's from any country. That would be one step closer to a nuke-free world, but you still have the problem posed by alternative delivery systems for nukes (short-range missile, airplane, sub-launched cruise missile, sneaking it across a border) that couldn't be stopped with this system. However, 'rouge' nations wouldn't be able to get a bomber past defenses, and probably couldn't afford a submarine quiet enough to get close without being noticed, though that still leaves them with the options of sneaking it across a border and short-range missiles. |
Thanks for this insight. Really interesting, and scary at the same time. Think this is one instance where ignorance is bliss for me. If one has to know all the stuff that is going on surrounding nuclear capabilities one probably will not be able to sleep at night ... |
Actually the United States has achieved some significant success using the Aegis naval system for intercepting missiles. In testing the system failed only four times out of twenty tests since 2002. (Ballistic Missile Defense Flight Test Record). But I agree with Calhoun that we'd have to be quite lucky to intercept the North Korean launch. Yet given it is but one missile, the destroyers might have a decent chance.
Of course, this is all academic since the United States will not attempt to intercept the missile because of the obvious provocation this would be considered by North Korea.
My "worst case" scenario is this: North Korea launches the missile but it fails in flight. Japan launches interceptors to destroy debris, just as they said they would. North Korea refuses to admit that their missile failed of its own accord, and claims Japan destroyed the missile in flight.
You can use your imagination to continue the walk down the spiral staircase.
| deanhills wrote: |
| ocalhoun wrote: | | deanhills wrote: |
Thanks for this insight. Really interesting, and scary at the same time. Think this is one instance where ignorance is bliss for me. If one has to know all the stuff that is going on surrounding nuclear capabilities one probably will not be able to sleep at night ... |
Another reason to live in the boondocks ^.^
Why waste a nuke on a sparsely populated area when you can hit a big city? |
Excellent thought! South America is getting more and more attractive by the minute. Think I need to investigate Quito this summer. |
Reminds me of the story (don't know if its true or not) about the British couple during the late 1970s looking for the safest, least likely place on Earth to experience a war, for that is where they wished to live. After much research and debate, they deemed the Falkland Islands to be ideal and moved there...and later had a front row seat to the very thing they sought so desperately to avoid.
Me, I try to heed the advice of General Joshua Chamberlain of the War Between the States: "There is no promise of life in peace and no decree of death in war."
Respectfully,
M
Last edited by Moonspider on Thu Apr 02, 2009 3:29 am; edited 1 time in total | Moonspider wrote: |
Me, I try to heed the advice of General Joshua Chamberlain of the War Between the States: "There is no promise of life in peace and no decree of death in war."
Respectfully,
M |
Well said! Think more than avoiding missiles, I don't have real fixed roots anywhere and have to find an alternative country as think I've done more years in the Middle East than what I wanted to do. Probably for lack of knowing where I would like to settle next. At one stage I was thinking about Malaysia, but think South America has a greater attraction for me. Will have to buckle down however and learn some Spanish, as can imagine it would be necessary for visiting Quito. | deanhills wrote: |
| Well said! Think more than avoiding missiles, I don't have real fixed roots anywhere and have to find an alternative country as think I've done more years in the Middle East than what I wanted to do. Probably for lack of knowing where I would like to settle next. At one stage I was thinking about Malaysia, but think South America has a greater attraction for me. Will have to buckle down however and learn some Spanish, as can imagine it would be necessary for visiting Quito. |
If the proverbial sh*t hits the fan, I'm headed for Machu Picchu, near Cuzco, Peru. It's high altitude, remote, easily defensible, and best of all, its got ready-made farms and housing. It's a fixer-upper.
My Spanish is passable, and my rifle speaks a language that everyone understands. | Solon_Poledourus wrote: |
If the proverbial sh*t hits the fan, I'm headed for Machu Picchu, near Cuzco, Peru. It's high altitude, remote, easily defensible, and best of all, its got ready-made farms and housing. It's a fixer-upper.
My Spanish is passable, and my rifle speaks a language that everyone understands. |
Awesome! Think Ocalhoun would also be interested, I imagine they have lots of space for Ocalhoun's horses? | deanhills wrote: |
| Awesome! Think Ocalhoun would also be interested, I imagine they have lots of space for Ocalhoun's horses? |
It's pretty steep terrain, but there's plenty of room for horses, which I would insist on having anyway. I've actually put ALOT of thought into using Machu Picchu as my hideout for a long time. I even wrote a short story about it years ago.
So go ahead N. Korea, launch it. | Solon_Poledourus wrote: |
| deanhills wrote: | | Awesome! Think Ocalhoun would also be interested, I imagine they have lots of space for Ocalhoun's horses? |
It's pretty steep terrain, but there's plenty of room for horses, which I would insist on having anyway. I've actually put ALOT of thought into using Machu Picchu as my hideout for a long time. I even wrote a short story about it years ago.
So go ahead N. Korea, launch it. |
I'm off topic but on a closing note, thought you may be interested in this thread by Ocalhoun regarding good places in South America. Would be nice if you could contribute as I for one am very curious about Machu Picchu, and other places you may have investigated?:
http://www.frihost.com/forums/vt-104014.htmlThe anti-missile shield that was canceled that Russia didn't like was to be placed in Poland and the Czech Republic. There's no way we would intercept a North Korea missile from there.
We'll just see what happens, I'm actually pretty anxious to see if all this hype about a North Korea Nuclear-Capable Missile was serious or a joke.
| Nick2008 wrote: |
The anti-missile shield that was canceled that Russia didn't like was to be placed in Poland and the Czech Republic. There's no way we would intercept a North Korea missile from there.
|
<.< or a Russian one either... At least not a US-bound Russian one. Most of those would take the shorter route directly over the North pole. | Nick2008 wrote: |
| We'll just see what happens, I'm actually pretty anxious to see if all this hype about a North Korea Nuclear-Capable Missile was serious or a joke. |
Exactly. If they could get the Weapons of Mass Destruction threat in Iraq wrong, perhaps this one is exaggerated too. Fortunately does not look as though they have plans to invade North Korea ... so perhaps it is not that serious, or is it? 
| deanhills wrote: |
| Exactly. If they could get the Weapons of Mass Destruction threat in Iraq wrong, perhaps this one is exaggerated too. Fortunately does not look as though they have plans to invade North Korea ... so perhaps it is not that serious, or is it? |
Is there any oil in North Korea? | Solon_Poledourus wrote: |
| deanhills wrote: | | Exactly. If they could get the Weapons of Mass Destruction threat in Iraq wrong, perhaps this one is exaggerated too. Fortunately does not look as though they have plans to invade North Korea ... so perhaps it is not that serious, or is it? |
Is there any oil in North Korea? |
Good question .... I was thinking about it, and then thought not to say it too loud .... According to North Korea Agencies, the missile should be fired tonight or tomorrow early morning, between 10PM EDT and 3AM EDT.
http://www.reuters.com/article/newsOne/idUSTRE53058220090404 So I guess we should all head for our bomb shelters? Wonder why they are so unspecific about the time? Is it weather related perhaps? | deanhills wrote: |
Is it weather related perhaps?
|
Yes, I believe they will fire it at first sign of good weather.
My bomb shelter is ready (aka my living room, TV, sofa, and the chips too! )Looks as though the Middle East is not the only bad weather place right now. North Korea can't launch because of windy conditions. This was an interesting quote:
http://www.reuters.com/article/newsOne/idUSTRE53058220090404
| Quote: |
U.S. President Barack Obama said Friday the international community would take action if North Korea went ahead with the launch to show Pyongyang it could not act with impunity.
"We will work with all interested partners in the international community to take appropriate steps to let North Korea know that they cannot threaten the safety and stability of other countries with impunity," Obama said. |
Wonder what action that really means? I just want this thing to happen, and quickly. If they're going to launch it. Launch it, then we will see what happens, because otherwise just waiting for this maybe dangerous launch to happen it driving me crazy. I'm living in Japan right now, (not in the North, which I believe is the projected site for interception) but I would really rather not be here when political tensions get very high. So have it happen, let's deal with the consequences, and I can stop living in suspense.
| Dean_The_Great wrote: |
| I just want this thing to happen, and quickly. If they're going to launch it. Launch it, then we will see what happens, because otherwise just waiting for this maybe dangerous launch to happen it driving me crazy. I'm living in Japan right now, (not in the North, which I believe is the projected site for interception) but I would really rather not be here when political tensions get very high. So have it happen, let's deal with the consequences, and I can stop living in suspense. |
I think it's going to be OK. But of course this is easy to say when you're not in harm's way. I believe the Russians are helping the North Koreans, and they seem to have lots of experience, and I'm sure Japan Government will be careful, and are obviously in close consultation with the US and other Governments. I can imagine they are planning what they are going to do afterwards as well. | deanhills wrote: |
| I believe the Russians are helping the North Koreans, and they seem to have lots of experience, |
Not so sure... If they were getting significant help from Russia, it seems their biggest problem would be deciding if they should ask for blueprints, or just ready-made rockets.
I would guess that if it was a Russian design, then any intelligence service with a good spy satellite would have already identified exactly what it was. | ocalhoun wrote: |
| deanhills wrote: | | I believe the Russians are helping the North Koreans, and they seem to have lots of experience, |
Not so sure... If they were getting significant help from Russia, it seems their biggest problem would be deciding if they should ask for blueprints, or just ready-made rockets.
I would guess that if it was a Russian design, then any intelligence service with a good spy satellite would have already identified exactly what it was. |
Thanks for the insight, stand corrected.
Just noticed that the missile has now been launched and that although North Korea says it was successful, the US and South Korea claim that it fell into the Pacific. So where would the missile be if it is not in orbit, and does that pose a danger to anyone right now?
http://www.reuters.com/article/worldNews/idUSTRE53058220090405Why aren't they entitled to do the same things we and numerous other countries do?
| liljp617 wrote: |
| Why aren't they entitled to do the same things we and numerous other countries do? |
Good question. Probably it is because North Korea do not want to subject themselves to the Non-Profileration Treaty like all the other countries do, which allows for inspections. Iraq also did not want to do that. Right now there is also total confusion as at one point we were talking about a long-range nuclear missile, and now the North Koreans said they launched a peaceful satellite. The US and South Korea says that whatever was launched did not go up but into the Pacific Ocean. So probably the facts need to be sorted out before anybody in the United Nations can really decide what they are going to vote for. Does some one know what the settalite actually was, communication ? whether ? or survillence ?
| harismushtaq wrote: |
| Does some one know what the settalite actually was, communication ? whether ? or survillence ? |
I don't think anyone has a clue, or that it even existed. The more popular theory was that it never made it into space. It fell somewhere in the Pacific Ocean. | deanhills wrote: |
| harismushtaq wrote: | | Does some one know what the settalite actually was, communication ? whether ? or survillence ? |
I don't think anyone has a clue, or that it even existed. The more popular theory was that it never made it into space. It fell somewhere in the Pacific Ocean. |
It did fall into the Pacific. (The North Koreans are the only ones who claim otherwise.) From what I heard, it was supposed to broadcast patriotic N. Korean music from orbit. (Basically, just to prove that they can do it, much like the 'beep ... beep' sputnik broadcasted. They'd probably start launching useful (expensive) satellites once their test satellite launch actually worked properly.)Well, even if the North Koreans could launch a satellite that gives the sputnik-like "Beep...Beep", they can already call that a success.
I believe by current resources they're capable of developing 6 or so nuclear weapons?
| Nick2008 wrote: |
| I believe by current resources they're capable of developing 6 or so nuclear weapons? |
Interesting. I did not know that. Guess that has to be worrisome, especially when they do not seem to be good with the technology of getting it up into space. Just as well there was not a ship in the way when the missile fell into the Pacific ... | deanhills wrote: |
| Nick2008 wrote: | | I believe by current resources they're capable of developing 6 or so nuclear weapons? |
Interesting. I did not know that. Guess that has to be worrisome, especially when they do not seem to be good with the technology of getting it up into space. Just as well there was not a ship in the way when the missile fell into the Pacific ... |
Well their nuclear tests so far have worked, but they probably didn't work very well, because the detected explosions were embarrassingly small for nukes.
Though they're trying very hard, N. Korea just doesn't have the technology to be a terror to the world. | ocalhoun wrote: |
| Though they're trying very hard, N. Korea just doesn't have the technology to be a terror to the world. |
This sounds like a relief. Although it still worries me that they have nuclear materials and are incapable enough to create a disaster out of it, i.e. an experiment can just go horribly wrong through lack of expertise. | deanhills wrote: |
| ocalhoun wrote: | | Though they're trying very hard, N. Korea just doesn't have the technology to be a terror to the world. |
This sounds like a relief. Although it still worries me that they have nuclear materials and are incapable enough to create a disaster out of it, i.e. an experiment can just go horribly wrong through lack of expertise. |
Well, that's one nice thing about nuclear weapons research... When things go horribly wrong, it doesn't explode. ^.^ It only blows up when everything works right. | ocalhoun wrote: |
| Though they're trying very hard, N. Korea just doesn't have the technology to be a terror to the world. |
Unless they just buy some nukes from another country and then pass them off as their own. I wouldn't put that past them. | Solon_Poledourus wrote: |
| ocalhoun wrote: | | Though they're trying very hard, N. Korea just doesn't have the technology to be a terror to the world. |
Unless they just buy some nukes from another country and then pass them off as their own. I wouldn't put that past them. |
Who knows, maybe a country like Iran with plenty of grievances against the US would give nuclear weapons to N. Korea as a gift, provided N. Korea aim the weapons at the US? | deanhills wrote: |
| Solon_Poledourus wrote: | | ocalhoun wrote: | | Though they're trying very hard, N. Korea just doesn't have the technology to be a terror to the world. |
Unless they just buy some nukes from another country and then pass them off as their own. I wouldn't put that past them. |
Who knows, maybe a country like Iran with plenty of grievances against the US would give nuclear weapons to N. Korea as a gift, provided N. Korea aim the weapons at the US? |
I'd think it more likely that Iran is interested in buying nukes from N. Korea... especially if N. Korea can manage a truly successful test.
If N. Korea was to buy nukes from anybody, it would probably be from a corrupt Russian military officer and/or the Russian mafia.
Last edited by ocalhoun on Sat May 09, 2009 10:13 pm; edited 1 time in total | ocalhoun wrote: |
| I'd think it more likely that Iran is interested in buying nukes from N. Korea... especially if N. Korea can manage a truly successful test. |
I wonder how many nukes are floating around on the black market? Or at least the materials necessary to build a decent one... | Solon_Poledourus wrote: |
| ocalhoun wrote: | | I'd think it more likely that Iran is interested in buying nukes from N. Korea... especially if N. Korea can manage a truly successful test. |
I wonder how many nukes are floating around on the black market? Or at least the materials necessary to build a decent one... |
Now that is a scary thought. Hopefully none. it'd for sure be impressive if North Korea could even pull off a successful satellite launch. that's way more complicated than I thought they ever could pull off. Let's hope it won't be successful though. Seriously I don't even trust that country with forks, or anything else capable of hurting someone
Looks as though it has become serious business with Obama taking a very certain position viz a viz North Korea's underground testing of a nuclear weapon on Monday.
http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/30929042//
http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/30921379/
I can't understand that North Korea could still go ahead with what it did after the serious ramifications during the earlier missile test. Why would they be so confident? Does it mean that they have strong backing of other countries with the test? Maybe Iran, China and/or Russia? | deanhills wrote: |
I can't understand that North Korea could still go ahead with what it did after the serious ramifications during the earlier missile test. Why would they be so confident? Does it mean that they have strong backing of other countries with the test? Maybe Iran, China and/or Russia? |
They're playing a game called 'brinkmanship'.
They do their best to scare the world, and then pressure the world to give them stuff in order to stop their scary actions during negotiations.
That's how they got free oil supplies in exchange for shutting down nuclear power plants, and they probably hope to get more free stuff this way. | ocalhoun wrote: |
| They're playing a game called 'brinkmanship'. |
Kids play this same game with their parents too. A good ol' fashioned spankin' usually puts a stop to it. | ocalhoun wrote: |
| deanhills wrote: |
I can't understand that North Korea could still go ahead with what it did after the serious ramifications during the earlier missile test. Why would they be so confident? Does it mean that they have strong backing of other countries with the test? Maybe Iran, China and/or Russia? |
They're playing a game called 'brinkmanship'.
They do their best to scare the world, and then pressure the world to give them stuff in order to stop their scary actions during negotiations.
That's how they got free oil supplies in exchange for shutting down nuclear power plants, and they probably hope to get more free stuff this way. |
Come to think about this "brinkmanship" sounds spot on. An international form of bribery ... | deanhills wrote: |
| ocalhoun wrote: | | deanhills wrote: |
I can't understand that North Korea could still go ahead with what it did after the serious ramifications during the earlier missile test. Why would they be so confident? Does it mean that they have strong backing of other countries with the test? Maybe Iran, China and/or Russia? |
They're playing a game called 'brinkmanship'.
They do their best to scare the world, and then pressure the world to give them stuff in order to stop their scary actions during negotiations.
That's how they got free oil supplies in exchange for shutting down nuclear power plants, and they probably hope to get more free stuff this way. |
Come to think about this "brinkmanship" sounds spot on. An international form of bribery ... |
The world is catching on though, and refusing to give them anything this time. Nearly everyone is taking a hard stance towards N. Korea now, and even China has been considering withdrawing their critical economical support to the country.
If that happens, we'll get to see what a desperate N. Korea looks like (Nearly everything the N. Korean economy depends on comes from China). I'm guessing it won't be pretty. They might assemble a working medium-range nuclear missile, and go from brinkmanship to outright international blackmail/hostage holding.They're just playing cat and mouse, eventually the cat will catch the mouse. It's only a matter of time before they understand they won't get anywhere wasting millions of dollars on these nuclear tests.
| Nick2008 wrote: |
| They're just playing cat and mouse, eventually the cat will catch the mouse. It's only a matter of time before they understand they won't get anywhere wasting millions of dollars on these nuclear tests. |
Oh, but they already have 'gotten somewhere' with them. If they will continue to get free goods and services because of it remains to be seen. | ocalhoun wrote: |
| Nick2008 wrote: | | They're just playing cat and mouse, eventually the cat will catch the mouse. It's only a matter of time before they understand they won't get anywhere wasting millions of dollars on these nuclear tests. |
Oh, but they already have 'gotten somewhere' with them. If they will continue to get free goods and services because of it remains to be seen. |
Does anyone know what the depth of economic relationship is between the US and North Korea? For example, does the US have off-shore factories there, are they outsourcing to North Korea? | deanhills wrote: |
| ocalhoun wrote: | | Nick2008 wrote: | | They're just playing cat and mouse, eventually the cat will catch the mouse. It's only a matter of time before they understand they won't get anywhere wasting millions of dollars on these nuclear tests. |
Oh, but they already have 'gotten somewhere' with them. If they will continue to get free goods and services because of it remains to be seen. |
Does anyone know what the depth of economic relationship is between the US and North Korea? For example, does the US have off-shore factories there, are they outsourcing to North Korea? |
No, N. Korea's economic ties are almost entirely with China.
The US does quite a bit of trade and outsourcing with S. Korea though, and maintains multiple military bases there, ostensibly for the purpose of defending against a N. Korean attack.North Korea is mostly isolationist though.
| ocalhoun wrote: |
No, N. Korea's economic ties are almost entirely with China.
The US does quite a bit of trade and outsourcing with S. Korea though, and maintains multiple military bases there, ostensibly for the purpose of defending against a N. Korean attack. |
Then again, China owns the largest chunk of US debt in the world. Seems to be all interrelated and incestuous. | Quote: |
SEOUL, South Korea – North Korea has transported its most advanced missile, believed to be capable of reaching Alaska, to a launch site on its west coast near China, news reports said Monday.
|
North Korea is ready to launch it's most advanced long-range missile yet, a missile believed to be capable of reaching Alaska. How much nuclear/missile potential does North Korea have? Discuss.
Source: http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20090601/ap_on_re_as/as_koreas_nuclear;_ylt=Al75hvFhdJQ2gnxMuGhesPes0NUE;_ylu=X3oDMTJpZ3A0N29kBGFzc2V0A2FwLzIwMDkwNjAxL2FzX2tvcmVhc19udWNsZWFyBGNwb3MDMgRwb3MDNgRzZWMDeW5fdG9wX3N0b3J5BHNsawNyZXBvcnRzbmtvcmU- These guys really are cheeky! Wonder how Obama is going to react to this? He must be fuming. With new advances in ICBM interception, the US military is certain that it could take down any missile heading for US soil. That, added to the dissuading presence of the much larger US nuclear arsenal leaves us able to safely ignore N. Korea. The only danger is that they might ally themselves with terrorists, and transport a nuke to its target covertly, instead of on the tip of a missile.
Agreed. I can imagine the US military must be investigating and analyzing all the possibilities from a number of vantage points. Maybe they have already done that before the news was released. I wonder how much information is given to the press sometimes and how much of it is withheld or worded differently "in the interest of safety"
