North Korea 'has missile to strike US'

  1. North Korea 'has missile to strike US'


    North Korea 'has missile to strike US'

    15:03 13 February 03


    North Korea has the means to strike the west coast of the US with missiles and may already have developed nuclear payloads, the director of the US Central Intelligence Agency (CIA) has warned.

    George Tenet told a Senate armed services committee hearing that the Stalinist state probably had "one or two" nuclear warheads.

    Vice Admiral Lowell Jacoby, director of the Defence Intelligence Agency, told the same senate hearing that North Korea has a Taepodong-2 missile that could reach the US, but said this weapon had yet to be tested. The last flight test of a missile conducted by North Korea was in 1998, when a Taepodong-1 was fired over Japan.

    The distance from the North Korean capital Pyongyang to Los Angeles is about 9500 kilometres. The CIA estimates the Taepodong-2's maximum range to be about 10,000 km. But, according to reports of South Korean military information, the two or three stage missile has a maximum range of 6700 km.


    Heavy load


    Jacoby said a Taepodong-2 could "target parts of the US with a nuclear weapon-sized payload in the two-stage configuration, and has the range to target all of North America if a third stage was used".

    The disclosure came just hours after North Korea was officially reported to the United Nations Security Council by the International Atomic Energy Agency for violating international nuclear non-proliferation agreements.

    But not all defence experts are convinced that North Korea has the capabilities suggested by the CIA. Ben Sheppard, a defence analyst with Jane's Information Group told New Scientist: "It's technically possible for them to develop a missile that could reach the US, but whether it could carry a nuclear payload is somewhat questionable."

    A first generation nuclear warhead could weigh as much as 1000 kilograms, he says, which a Taepodong-2 would be unable to carry so far. Sheppard adds that it is also not clear that North Korea has successfully harnessed its nuclear energy programme for the production of nuclear weapons.


    Inspectors expelled





    Related Stories


    North Korean nuclear tension eases


    US missile defence shield operational by 2004
    17 December 2002

    North Korea admits nuclear weapons plan
    17 October 2002


    For more related stories
    search the print edition Archive



    Weblinks


    Central Intelligence Agency

    International Atomic Energy Agency

    UN Security Council

    Democratic People's Republic of North Korea



    The current international crisis began when the North Korea restarted a nuclear reactor that could be used to make weapons-grade plutonium in October 2002. The state then expelled IAEA inspectors on 31 December and withdrew from the international Non-Proliferation Treaty in January.

    In 1993, North Korea signed a nuclear safeguards agreement officially declaring the extent of its nuclear weapons to the IAEA. Mark Gwozdecky, IAEA spokesman, was unwilling to speculate on North Korea's current nuclear weapons capabilities but told New Scientist: "In the early 90's our inspectors discovered discrepancies in North Korea's declaration. We knew that they had produced more plutonium than they had declared to us, but we were never able to determine how much more."

    Gwozdecky says the IAEA would like to see North Korea allow inspectors to return to the country to continue their work.

    The US, which has accelerated its controversial plans to construct a missile defence system shield, has named North Korea as a threat. North Korea has said any economic sanctions imposed in response to its renewed nuclear programme would be viewed as an act of war.


    Will Knight


  2. Crazy North Korea psychos. If they have 2 warheads, we probably have like what...50? Might as well nuke the **** out of them now, before they strike first...

    On another note, wow about all those people flocking out to the store to buy duct-tape to help protect them in case of chemical warfare. Heh....

  3. Good thing I live closer to Cuba they can't afford them. Sucks to be on the west coast. We have more than 50 nukes though. Son we are masters of nuclear bombs along with Russia.
    •   
       


  4. Originally posted by DarCSA
    We have more than 50 nukes though.
    Good to know.

  5. We have WAY MORE than 50 nukes!

  6. True we do have WAAAY more than 50 nukes but I do think that we have level thinking not to use the unless it is a last resort.. something I don't think N. Korea has much of..

  7. True enough. NK's leader is an absolute dictator, he can and will do anything he thinks. That includes bombing us. Ang the only ones that can control him are the Chinese. i also heard that that Japan may do a preempetive strike on N.K. That just scares the piss out of me. Two wars, one US.
  8. Nelson
    Nelson's Avatar

    North Korea


    I live in Japan & there is often coverage of North Korea here on TV.
    The North Koreans are totally out of control.
    You must have seen the news where over the past 30 years they have been abducting Japanese from Japan.
    I think that a total of about 30 or so are presumed to have been abducted from mainly coastal areas.
    They take them to North Korea and make them teach Japanese to spies, scientists etc.
    The Japanese, being Japanese, are non-confrontational.
    Imagine if this happened to the US.
    I can`t understand why the US are attacking Iraq first, besides the oil reserves.
    I really think that North Korea poses a greater threat at the moment.

  9. They are a greater threat then Iraq, but the have got the bomb an are not afraid to use it. That one of the reasons we are attacking Iraq so they do not become another NK: lunatic with a weapon of mass desruction. Plus Bush knows we can't fight two major wars a once.

  10. I've heard that the US has enough nuclear weapons to destroy the world three times over. Over 1000 warheads...
    ISNT ONCE ENOUGH?
    Don't these things go for over $1,000,000.00 a peice? Where is the logic in that?

  11. I saw on on eBay for cheap, but Im waiting for 1fast to get them in. Rather homebrew my own.

  12. lol; speaking of homebrews; there's the old a-bomb/h-bomb design schematics running around the net... its the weapons-grade enriched plutonium/uranium/hydrogen that one has to obtain; its the expensive part...

    it'd be funny if the US put one of the new Satellites with weapon-scale lasers on them that i keep seeing articles of tests on; and just detonated the missile on the launch pad

    as for fighting the NK; there's prolly not many US soldiers afraid of 5ft tall 90lb men... only the WOMD you have to worry about...

  13. The secound they even thought of launching, we would devastate them. Then turn there countys into a whole lotta casinos.

  14. Be careful about under estimating the fighting will of the Koreans.. lb per lb the South Korean Army is as tough as any other.. ROK soldiers are pretty kick ass.. IMHO. I just wish the South Koreans would get on board about defending THEIR country

  15. Speaking as a member of our military, we do have plenty of weapons of destruction.. We even have a new nuclear device that clears out all radioactive particles in 6 months...

    Just think, they **** around, next year we'll open up a new K-Mart that serves sushi..

  16. LOL Pete.. true or have a new parking lot for Japan to use for imports
  17. Nelson
    Nelson's Avatar

    Size isn`t everthing


    Originally posted by Bean
    lol; speaking of homebrews; there's the old a-bomb/h-bomb design schematics running around the net... its the weapons-grade enriched plutonium/uranium/hydrogen that one has to obtain; its the expensive part...

    it'd be funny if the US put one of the new Satellites with weapon-scale lasers on them that i keep seeing articles of tests on; and just detonated the missile on the launch pad

    as for fighting the NK; there's prolly not many US soldiers afraid of 5ft tall 90lb men... only the WOMD you have to worry about...
    I agree with MatthewD on this.
    The North Koreans may be smaller, or for that matter a lot of Asians, than the US soldiers but that doesn`t mean that they`ll be pushovers.
    Plus I don`t think that there would be a lot of hand to hand combat even if there were a war.
  18. Re: Size isn`t everthing


    Originally posted by Nelson


    I agree with MatthewD on this.
    The North Koreans may be smaller, or for that matter a lot of Asians, than the US soldiers but that doesn`t mean that they`ll be pushovers.
    Plus I don`t think that there would be a lot of hand to hand combat even if there were a war.
    its the thought that counts

    almost like the scene in Snatch...

    The wanna-bes buy replicas and start waving it around demanding things...

    "Your obviously the big dick and the man on either side of you are your balls. You know there are two types of balls. Big, brave balls and little minzy ***got balls. Your shrinking and so are your balls. You lack vision. Dicks aren't really clever. They smell some ***** and want a piece of the action. You thought you smelled some good old ***** and brought your two little ***got balls along for a good ole time. But your mistaken. There's no ***** here, just a dose that will make you wish you were born a woman. And the fact that your guns say replica and mine says Desert Eagle .50 should precipitate your balls into shrinking along with your presence. Now **** OFF!!"

  19. Originally posted by ex_banana-eater
    I've heard that the US has enough nuclear weapons to destroy the world three times over. Over 1000 warheads...
    ISNT ONCE ENOUGH?
    Don't these things go for over $1,000,000.00 a peice? Where is the logic in that?
    Try 4,000+ and they cost way more than 1mil each. More like 20mil each. The amount of money we spent during the cold war is astronomical.
    For answers to board issues, read the Suggestion and News forum at the bottom of the main page.

  20. Yes and now this **** hole is so far in depth, we're paying for it

  21. Actually we had a record surplus in the 90's, but it always goes in cycles. Unfortunetly, war has always helped the economy.
    For answers to board issues, read the Suggestion and News forum at the bottom of the main page.

  22. Obviously.

  23. Yeah, there is a reason why Bush isn't worried about the economy.
    For answers to board issues, read the Suggestion and News forum at the bottom of the main page.

  24. Originally posted by Bobo


    Try 4,000+ and they cost way more than 1mil each. More like 20mil each. The amount of money we spent during the cold war is astronomical.
    What is the logic in making so many more weapons than needed?

  25. With an initial strike by the former Soviet Union, many of them could of been rendered useless. But they did overdo it and thats why it was easy for the US to agree to disarm the majority of them in the 80's.


    Remember too that not all of them were huge 100 megaton warheads. Many were smaller, and used to scatter damage over a very large area.
    For answers to board issues, read the Suggestion and News forum at the bottom of the main page.

  26. I know this is a tad off topic but I just had to post this. There's some ******* over on Syntrax's board that believes US citizens should be blown up! He says "we deserve what we get." His board name Myotrainer and if he ever wants to join...please STOP HIM. MODs I beg you do not let dingleberry on our beloved board.

  27. We can't ban people for a difference in opinion, but if he rants and raves and causes trouble, I will be happy too.
    For answers to board issues, read the Suggestion and News forum at the bottom of the main page.

  28. Originally posted by Bobo
    We can't ban people for a difference in opinion
    Thank god! I would have been gone along time ago.....



    Oh ****, Im a mod....

  29. Ah well I tried.

  30. Can I add DMSO to my nukes for better radiation absorption?

  31. so who is one whose sides? North Korea has trading relations with China, but that doesn't mean China support NK. South Korea and Japan both are against NK? We know France, Germany, Italy and others support U.S. but don't really want war. Could the Russians be fake allies? Is Pakistan hiding Bin Laden? Any other countries that has substantial power?

  32. why bother oral administration of nuclear fallout? the max absorption you'll see is like 40%... try injecting it man... in fact there's an experiment you can try... you can add the cypionate ester to the radiation base and only inject it once a week...

    kicks ass for tans; and the strength increase from the growth of a third arm is incredible!

  33. Originally posted by DarCSA
    Can I add DMSO to my nukes for better radiation absorption?

    freaking funniest thing ive read all day!
    I like your style man!

  34. Originally posted by YellowJacket
    I saw on on eBay for cheap, but Im waiting for 1fast to get them in. Rather homebrew my own.
    LMAO. Good one.
  35. Nelson
    Nelson's Avatar

    Axis of Evil


    Originally posted by bigbadboss101
    so who is one whose sides? North Korea has trading relations with China, but that doesn't mean China support NK. South Korea and Japan both are against NK? We know France, Germany, Italy and others support U.S. but don't really want war. Could the Russians be fake allies? Is Pakistan hiding Bin Laden? Any other countries that has substantial power?
    It has been proved that North Korea & India have secretly been exchanging military technology & expertise.
    The North Korean President has made numerous visits to Russia in the last few years and is one of the few countries other than China which have good diplomatic relations with North Korea.
    Russia, China, India & North Korea could form a nice `axis of evil` along with Iraq & Al Quaeda.

  36. Originally posted by Matthew D
    Be careful about under estimating the fighting will of the Koreans.. lb per lb the South Korean Army is as tough as any other.. ROK soldiers are pretty kick ass.. IMHO. I just wish the South Koreans would get on board about defending THEIR country
    having some love ones located in south korea, i know their passion to defend their country against the north and wanting/having similar interest in stopping the north as the US is strong. Its just the governments (south) unwillingness to enter a battle without the comfort of an alliance with good ol' US. bottom line, i hope nothing as far as nuclear/military occurs with the north or any other country...however it it comes to it...we know our soldiers and the alliances who follow gonna come out on top. Bottom line. Sage

  37. Bullets don't care who tall you are or how much you weigh.....

  38. yeah its just when your 90lbs you get knocked down easier by one

  39. I wouldn't want to start a war with N. Korea anytime soon, even when Iraq is taken care of. We tried fighting them once in the 1950s and didn't do so hot, remember?
  

  
 

Similar Forum Threads

  1. Replies: 53
    Last Post: 08-03-2011, 02:55 PM
  2. Replies: 7
    Last Post: 11-25-2010, 10:14 PM
  3. Time To Nuke North Korea!
    By TheMyth in forum Politics
    Replies: 29
    Last Post: 10-21-2006, 04:44 PM
  4. #Lifting has moved to DALNET
    By Alexxx in forum Exercise Science
    Replies: 0
    Last Post: 09-07-2003, 08:24 PM
  5. Next World Problem North Korea
    By Matthew D in forum General Chat
    Replies: 18
    Last Post: 03-25-2003, 08:56 AM
Log in
Log in