PDA

View Full Version : N. Korea has nukes.



lousyskater
02-10-2005, 01:16 PM
shit (http://story.news.yahoo.com/news?tmpl=story&e=1&u=/ap/20050210/ap_on_re_as/nkorea_nuclear)

Cold War: round 2.

wheelchairman
02-10-2005, 01:24 PM
They had them a long time ago as well.

North Korea may be our greatest enemy. But we are supporting them (offering food and aid etc.) And I wonder why. Don't you wonder why?

Mota Boy
02-10-2005, 01:30 PM
Yeah, this has been widely known for at least a couple years. Some big news recently reported was that Pakistan may've sold 'em one.

Iddy
02-10-2005, 02:21 PM
North Korea may be our greatest enemy. But we are supporting them (offering food and aid etc.) And I wonder why. Don't you wonder why?

i had an idea why a while back... i remember ranting at my dad at why would bush attck iraq but not korea/zimbabwe etc... now i've forgotten what he said.

HornyPope
02-10-2005, 02:28 PM
Everyone knows about North Korea. But how many of you knew that?

http://politics.guardian.co.uk/foreignaffairs/story/0,11538,1409672,00.html

Whoever seeks to obtain a bomb has but to assault one of those bases. Not an easy job mind you, but I imagine the years of no action resulted in the fall into mediocrity on the part of the guards; with so many targets present, the terrorists only need to take advantage of one lousy shift to strike and leave with a fully developed nuclear weapon.

HornyPope
02-10-2005, 02:30 PM
North Korea may be our greatest enemy. But we are supporting them (offering food and aid etc.) And I wonder why. Don't you wonder why?

Chantage (blackmail)?

Nuclear programs are developed as a political pressure first and foremost, and a deterant against potential strike from your enemies is only an after-thought.

wheelchairman
02-10-2005, 02:42 PM
Exactly. It's far cheaper than fighting them.

Skate Rat 19
02-10-2005, 03:31 PM
Well im not at all worried because I live in New York (far from N.Korea's nuclear reach). And because while he may have a few nukes, we have hundreds and we're already on a killing spree.

sKratch
02-10-2005, 05:16 PM
That's an excellent outlook.

Ken Jennings
02-10-2005, 05:34 PM
More slant eye Swiss Asains have exploding onions. Craporama.

yaozee
02-10-2005, 06:29 PM
N.Korea is our country's neighbour but i know little about it
it is a country full of mystery i can't believe it has nuclear
if N korea really has nuclear it means nothing to me it is a funny country
but the Korea foods is prefect i like it

Ken Jennings
02-10-2005, 06:50 PM
I like onions.

JohnnyNemesis
02-10-2005, 06:51 PM
"There is a path for the North Koreans that would put them in a more reasonable relationship with the rest of the world." - Condoleeza Rice, concerning North Korea's disclosure that they have Nuclear Weapons.

I read that in an article, and I must admit, it's absolutely hilarious. When the Bush administration wants to lecture anyplace on developing a reasonable relationship with the rest of the world, I just shake my head in pity.


Well im not at all worried because I live in New York (far from N.Korea's nuclear reach). And because while he may have a few nukes, we have hundreds and we're already on a killing spree.

...Wow.

Ken Jennings
02-10-2005, 06:59 PM
Fried rice, sushi and wontons.

RXP
02-10-2005, 08:20 PM
Don't worry Jack Bauer will keep us safe.

Not Ozymandias
02-10-2005, 10:09 PM
Good for them. Anything it takes to protect yourself from America and its psychotic people.

Betty
02-10-2005, 10:28 PM
Don't worry Jack Bauer will keep us safe.

Hahahahahaha!

I am 100% addicted.

Qoo
02-11-2005, 08:07 AM
Only Japan needs to feel fears about N. Korea's nukes. :( All missiles of the country is aiming at Japan where the US's military bases have been located. :eek: :(
Cheers. :)

RXP
02-11-2005, 08:16 AM
I think a tactical nuclear strike needs to be carried out on N. Korea's first strike silos. Minimum civilian causlties while keeping us safe. Then the pakis need to get rid of theirs so India can dominate and reclaim her land.

Jojan
02-11-2005, 08:23 AM
I hope they'll use them and start a war with USA, Russia and China an all the other countries that have nukes. Then we will all die and no one has to suffer for all the pain the world brings us - this unfair cruel world... :(

Now I'm sad...

But I'm going to see SKITSYSTEM later so I'll be happy for a while.

wheelchairman
02-11-2005, 08:33 AM
I think a tactical nuclear strike needs to be carried out on N. Korea's first strike silos. Minimum civilian causlties while keeping us safe. Then the pakis need to get rid of theirs so India can dominate and reclaim her land.
I'd comment. But I haven't the slightest clue as to whether or not you are serious.

A tactical nuclear strike on North Korea's nuclear first strike missiles...wouldn't that create a terrible radiation problem for an overpopulated country which already has a lot of problems?

And I look forward to the day that the CPI and the CKMP will rule both India and Pakistan.

RXP
02-11-2005, 09:26 AM
If Indians stopped having kids they'd be a super power fo real.

RXP
02-11-2005, 09:27 AM
In all seriousness if I were to advocate a first strike which I do think we should do it'd be far better to let spys infiltrate N. Korea report where the nuckes are and let B2B's do the work with conventional ordiance. Or maybe even a UCAV if the program has got far enough.

wheelchairman
02-11-2005, 09:29 AM
Personally I don't think the DPRK should lose their nukes. Either way it would be seen as an act of agression. And North Korea's huge army, and insane leader, that could prove threatening.

RXP
02-11-2005, 09:32 AM
Yeah they'd surely invade the south and a new war would erupt. Shame.

I don't like them having Nukes, I don't like the Indians having Nukes or the Pakis. Dangerous shit.

SicN Twisted
02-11-2005, 10:55 AM
How come nobody percieves it a threat to world peace that western countries have nukes? What exactly has George W. Bush done to prove himself even slightly more reasonable then Kim Jong Il, aside from being bound by international pressure that prevents him from committing as many human rights violations as Kim.

HornyPope
02-11-2005, 11:10 AM
Sky you should instead read this:

You and the atomic bomb (http://orwell.ru/library/articles/ABomb/english/e_abomb.html)

sKratch
02-11-2005, 11:30 AM
Hmm I never thought of that. Interesting. Thank you sir.

HornyPope
02-11-2005, 11:42 AM
You know one of the weapons that started the long and gradual decline of Feudalism was the English long-bow. The later stages of the hundred-years war marked the first time in middle-ages that a common man armed with but a bow stick and arrows with no to little body protection was able to overcome a noble knight laced in a shiny armour that only a person of such stature and wealth could afford. Vulnerable to range attacks, the Knights, who until this date held a monopoly to all things warfare, no longer epitomized as the unstopabable killing machine. Men could once again fight--and win the fight--for their right-doing.

wheelchairman
02-11-2005, 11:59 AM
brilliant writing, the thought had never occurred to me before. I find it hard to believe that George Orwell was not a marxist.

HornyPope
02-11-2005, 12:04 PM
How the hell does a man who advocates the decentralization of a State and opposed the consolidation of power in the hands of a few can be a Marxist?

wheelchairman
02-11-2005, 12:08 PM
Marxism is a wide spectrum of folks from those who idealize the decentralized state to those who worship the overly-centralized state. It's really quite a broad spectrum. But what I was mainly referring to was a constant class analysis in practically everything he writes.

HornyPope
02-11-2005, 12:08 PM
And indeed it's one of his finest essays. You don't see men with such honesty and direct-to-the-point analysis armed with brilliant witt and knowledge in the field of journalism anymore. I find his editorials in the Observer following the immediate years after WW2 as the most fascinating.

HornyPope
02-11-2005, 12:13 PM
I met a lot of Marxists less bent on the authoritarian issues, but for most part I interpreted their policy as sweetening the product for the masses. You should also read Orwell's experience from Spanish civil war. He had quite to say on the difference between the Communist and the Anarchist groups and their doings, though at the time his aversion to authority wasn't as defined as he became remembered for it upon his death.

wheelchairman
02-11-2005, 12:25 PM
I would say that most marxists are sincere. The ones who I believe are 'sweetening their products for the masses' are those who deny all former socialist governments, and still claim that they are fighting for true socialism. It seems rather opportunistic to me.

I'd like to read those essays, yes.

SicN Twisted
02-12-2005, 12:59 AM
Orwell was most definately not a Marxist. Marxists all have one thing in common, the dogmatic belief that there will be some sort of second comming in the form of socialist revolution, and there will be a dictatorship of the proletariate. Orwell never believed anything along those lines, he was just a libertarian socialist who believed in equality, he never really preached a workers revolution.

RXP
02-12-2005, 02:08 AM
How come nobody percieves it a threat to world peace that western countries have nukes? What exactly has George W. Bush done to prove himself even slightly more reasonable then Kim Jong Il, aside from being bound by international pressure that prevents him from committing as many human rights violations as Kim.

Do you know how much authority is needed to lanuch a nuclear strike in western countries. I highly doubt any of N. Korea's procedures are as secure. Some crazy general might get pissed one day and end the world.

HornyPope
02-12-2005, 05:47 PM
Learn to Stop Worrying and Love the Bomb!


I read a story about a Soviet officer who was in charge of a radar station that allegedly intercepted a nuclear strike from Americans. He had less than a minute to decide whether to alert his superiors and strike back or to call this a radar malfunction. Good judgement prevailed.

Ken Jennings
02-12-2005, 07:33 PM
All I think about posting right now is this.

http://www.sexyandfunny.com/animations/10.gif

sKratch
02-12-2005, 11:27 PM
Learn to Stop Worrying and Love the Bomb!


I read a story about a Soviet officer who was in charge of a radar station that allegedly intercepted a nuclear strike from Americans. He had less than a minute to decide whether to alert his superiors and strike back or to call this a radar malfunction. Good judgement prevailed.
Yeah, I heard about something like that. Might have been the same thing. The US had given some sort of missile to a Scandinavian (I think) country and they were testing it. The USSR picked it up as a US attack. We were pretty close to nuclear war with that one.

RXP
02-13-2005, 01:22 AM
Yeah and those countries had sense. The N. Koreans don't. So when I here hippies saying what's so bad about them having the bomb the yanks do I wonder if they actually know anything about the military.

HornyPope
02-13-2005, 02:26 AM
True, I feel much safer knowing that the nukes stay in the hands of those who, for fifty years, had over 20 000 missiles with nuclear heads fully armed and aimed at one another.

RXP
02-13-2005, 09:25 AM
I'm not sure how to read that.

But I'm taking it as: they had so many war heads aimed at each other, so many scares and nothing happened. I feel safe too.

Hippies just piss me off when they bang on about things they know nothing about. I mean to compare the USA's launch system to N. Korea (do they even have a 'system') is fucking crazy. Crazy!

Kim Jong Il
02-13-2005, 11:08 AM
In highly centralised systems (such as the one in the Democratic People's Republic of Korea) military control is very strict. Discipline is exerted towards all elements in the army. Thinking of "rogue generals" in China or the DPRK is nothing but a western fantasy tale, designed to fit the role of their "sole commando" movies or computer games.

RXP
02-13-2005, 11:30 AM
Incorrect. I am talking about the technolgical safe guards built in place into the US system as opposed to the N. Koreans. While I don't know if they do have such a system I highly, highly, highly doubt they have the equivalent of a nuclear football.

Not everyone assumes what they see in film = real life btw.