and the games have begun... NORTH KOREA

houseman

Board Supporter
Awards
1
  • Established
Here we go!

(CNN) -- Citing what it calls U.S. threats to topple its political system, North Korea said it is dropping out of six-party nuclear talks and will "bolster its nuclear weapons arsenal," the country's official news agency KCNA said Thursday.

The report was North Korea's first public admission that it possessed nuclear weapons.

Pyongyang previously has asserted its ability and right to produce them. In April 2003, U.S. officials said that North Koreans claimed in private meetings they had at least one nuclear bomb.

On Thursday, U.S. Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice called on North Korea to reconsider its decision to withdraw from the talks or risk further isolation.

Rice said the North Koreans, by leaving negotiations, would be "deepening their isolation because everyone in the international community, and most especially North Korea's neighbors, have been very clear that there needs to be no nuclear weapons on the Korean Peninsula in order to maintain stability in that region." (Full story)

In the statement reported by KCNA, the North Korean Foreign Ministry said: "We have shown utmost magnanimity and patience for the past four years since the first Bush administration swore in.

"We cannot spend another four years as we did in the past four years, and there is no need for us to repeat what we did in those years."

U.S. diplomats have said that North Korea has used similar language when stepping aside from anti-nuclear proliferation talks in the past, although it is the first time that Pyongyang has been so explicit about its development of nuclear weapons.

The Foreign Ministry statement said North Korea's "stand to solve the issue through dialogue and negotiations and its ultimate goal to denuclearize the Korean Peninsula remain unchanged."

Since 2003, the United States, the two Koreas, China, Japan and Russia have held three rounds of talks aimed at persuading the North to abandon its nuclear weapons development in return for economic and diplomatic rewards.

But no significant progress was reported in those talks, all hosted by China, North Korea's last remaining major ally.

A fourth round of talks in September did not take place when North Korea refused to attend, citing what it called a "hostile" U.S. policy.

Thursday's statement from the North Korean Foreign Ministry said nuclear weapons are "for self-defense to cope with the Bush administration's evermore undisguised policy to isolate and stifle" its government.

The communist state said it felt "compelled to suspend" participation in the six-nation talks "for an indefinite period."

"We have wanted the six-party talks but we are compelled to suspend our participation in the talks for an indefinite period till we have recognized that there is justification for us to attend the talks and there are ample conditions and atmosphere to expect positive results from the talks," the Foreign Ministry said.

"The U.S. disclosed its attempt to topple the political system in the DPRK [Democratic People's Republic of Korea] at any cost, threatening it with a nuclear stick. This compels us to take a measure to bolster its nuclear weapons arsenal in order to protect the ideology, system, freedom and democracy chosen by the people in the DPRK."

The United States has opposed North Korea's demands that it hold one-to-one nuclear talks, saying a multilateral diplomatic approach is required.

Some observers in Washington say Pyongyang may be posturing for a more preferable negotiating position in light of recent developments regarding the suspected nuclear program in Iran. (Full story)

International leaders expressed disappointment at Thursday's announcement.

Russia's Foreign Ministry said it "regrets" North Korea's decision. In a statement on the ministry's Web site, spokesman Alexander Yakovenko said Moscow is "carefully studying" the announcement and added, "For us it can only cause regret ... to our mind, this attitude contradicts Pyongyang's declared striving for denuclearization of the Korean Peninsula.

"Despite the firmness of the statement by the North Korean Foreign Ministry," Yakovenko said, "Russia still hopes for the soonest possible resumption of the six-nation negotiations and compromises in settling problems with due consideration of the interests of all sides."

Bush tones down 'axis of evil' rhetoric
U.N. Secretary-General Kofi Annan said North Korea could be brought back to the negotiating table. British Foreign Secretary Jack Straw agreed, saying, "It would be a major mistake by [North Korea] were they to go down this route."

In his inaugural address last month, President Bush did not mention North Korea by name. But he said U.S. efforts have lit "a fire in the minds of men."

"It warms those who feel its power, it burns those who fight its progress and one day this untamed fire of freedom will reach the darkest corners of our world," he said.

In his February 2 State of the Union address, Bush only briefly mentioned North Korea, saying Washington was "working closely with governments in Asia to convince North Korea to abandon its nuclear ambitions."

Bush's tone was in stark contrast to his speech three years ago when he branded North Korea part of an "axis of evil" that included Iran and Iraq. This year's address raised hopes for a positive response from North Korea.

Earlier this month, Bush and South Korean President Roh Moo-hyun agreed to push for an early resumption of the six-nation talks.

But Pyongyang said Bush's call for the spread of freedom in his inaugural speech was a diabolical scheme to turn the world into "a sea of war flames."

"In his inauguration speech, Bush trumpeted that 'fire of freedom will reach dark corners of the world.' This is nothing but a plot to engulf the whole world in a sea of war flames and rule it by imposing a freedom based on power," North Korea's state-run Pyongyang Radio said this month.
 
natedogg

natedogg

Well-known member
Awards
1
  • Established
Here we go!
Looks like it might be time once again to lay the smackdown on yet another country. Time will tell, we'll just have to see what develops. Hopefully this won't have to be resolved with violence.
 

houseman

Board Supporter
Awards
1
  • Established
The problem is... woh has military effort to take on NK and China?

China will support North Korea should an invasion/attack happen. NO country has the man power to fight it out with China.
 
natedogg

natedogg

Well-known member
Awards
1
  • Established
The problem is... woh has military effort to take on NK and China?

China will support North Korea should an invasion/attack happen. NO country has the man power to fight it out with China.
Manpower no, weaponary, the US is far superior in every way. Hopefully it doesn't go that far though.
 
CEDeoudes59

CEDeoudes59

USA HOCKEY
Awards
1
  • Established
well thank goodness, that absolute pussy (what was his name?) isn't our president.
 
Beelzebub

Beelzebub

Registered User
Awards
1
  • Established
Manpower no, weaponary, the US is far superior in every way. Hopefully it doesn't go that far though.
definately, U.S. has some pretty wicked weapons that have yet to be used. the new motto, "fight smarter, not harder"

in any case, i hope it doesn't get to that level. it wouldn't be pretty.
 

houseman

Board Supporter
Awards
1
  • Established
I'd say North Korea has some pretty powerful weaponry themselves... nukes :(
 
natedogg

natedogg

Well-known member
Awards
1
  • Established
Do they?

Didn't they sign a dismantel treaty? ;)
I'm not sure of how many, but I knew a few guys in Security Forces who guarded bases where we store nukes. Let's just say we have more than you know.
 
fightercowboy

fightercowboy

Member
Awards
1
  • Established
There are 500 land based nukes at Malmstrom AFB, FE Warren AFB, and Minot AFB. Plenty more used on B2s, B52s, and subs.
 

good_guye28

Member
Awards
1
  • Established
this is just scary to me i served in korea and i know they are probably still tunneling over there... back when i was there they had found 5, who knows how many more there are. i can just see this as another vietnam........
 

knox

Member
Awards
1
  • Established
Personally I think NK is all talk. they are desperatly trying to create controversy to bring some unknown attention upon themselves. It would be extremely unwise if NK or China made any hostile acts towards the U.N. or ally countries due to global boycotting...jmo. China is big, but they are poor. They probably couldn't afford enough fuel for their tanks to get down to NK. And yes America and Russia have enough nuclear arsonal to blow the world several hundred times over..(scary). The only way NK could use their nuke..considering it's a bomb and not a missle, would be to transport it by land and or to toss it out a cargo plane....I could be completely wrong on all this but it's just my opinion.
 
Sir Foxx

Sir Foxx

Active member
Awards
1
  • Established
The only thing China has is a lot of people to throw at someone. That's what nukes are for, to take out large groups of people. China would be laid to waste if they decided to go full on against us.
 

Knowbull

Well-known member
Awards
1
  • Established
I think NK is more of a hazard to themselves and their immediate neighbors, than they are to us, has anyone looked at those morons? Fortunately they are way behind us in terms of technology and intelligence (they realize they are inferior) hence their hostile attitude. Im pretty sure they are liable to nuke themselves, doesnt mean they arent dangerous though, never trust an idiot with a weapon.
 
Beelzebub

Beelzebub

Registered User
Awards
1
  • Established
can't remember who said it, i think one of our presidents, but it was something to the effect of "i'm not worried about the country with thousands of nukes, i'm more concerned with the country that has one."
 

knox

Member
Awards
1
  • Established
If i understood the CNN report correctly the NK president or the guy in charge w/ the goofy name insisted the purpose for their nuclear programs were in defense of the Bush administration....am i right on this? Can this be considered a direct threat against the U.S.? Like someone said earlier, the North Koreans are waay behind the rest of the world in technology. If they do in fact have a nuclear bomb, it needs to be considered the detonator is actually a seperate device from the nuke it self. And from what i understand the building a Nuclear bomb is the easy part, the device to detonate it is the difficult part. That is why i think it's probably a bomb rather then a missle, only a select few have nuclear missles..for example: ICBM's<---I think that's right. anyway, If NK thinks they need a nuke in defense then by-goly let them have one, since the only targets within range would be South Korea and themselves. But then again, if the North Koreans did blown the **** out of themselves i'm sure the rest of the world would find some creative way to blame it on us.
 
Sir Foxx

Sir Foxx

Active member
Awards
1
  • Established
Also, Kim Jong Ill(sp?, leader of NK) has banned long hair. This guy has to go. Mullets Unite!:D
 

Matthew D

Well-known member
Awards
1
  • Established
The problem with any use of nukes is the "no win" situation you leave youself in.. the fallout is going to come back on you and I am not just talking politcs
We should have taken care of this situation way before we even thought about Iraq but now I don't think we are going to able to fight two wars at the same time.. and then you have the added factor of North Korea's leader being as stable as a truck load of old dynamite.. He has the nukes and HE will use them.. I just have that feeling about him.. his dad was bad but this dude is crazy as a loon and bad..
 

LCSULLA

Well-known member
Awards
1
  • Established
The problem with any use of nukes is the "no win" situation you leave youself in.. the fallout is going to come back on you and I am not just talking politcs
We should have taken care of this situation way before we even thought about Iraq but now I don't think we are going to able to fight two wars at the same time.. and then you have the added factor of North Korea's leader being as stable as a truck load of old dynamite.. He has the nukes and HE will use them.. I just have that feeling about him.. his dad was bad but this dude is crazy as a loon and bad..
I diasagree. First China will back NK. And any action in the Sino theater will be seen as hostile to China. Second Jong is the undisputed leader of NK..he is GOD there. So if he decides that his power base is threatend he will launch. I know people here will say "Thats crazy LC. Someone will stand up and stop him from pushing the button." I highly doubt it. Why? Well he has a powerful cult of personality in NK, as I said he is GOD there. And second most asians are very confucian and one of confucian laws is the absolute subserveance to their leader. Just look at China during the 60's. Mao had that country completely under his control. Over 25 million people died to fulfil his twisted desires. And while they are being influenced by the West (MTV etc). Most of western TV and radio does not get into or out of NK.
 

Matthew D

Well-known member
Awards
1
  • Established
LC, not to be an ass but did you read my post.. I said the same thing as you did, just in a different way..
The using of nukes was his use of nukes and he doesn't give a damn what the rest of the world thinks.. and it is still a NO WIN situation for all of us.. because we will lose due the radiological fallout
I don't think we can take care of NK with any type of warfare.. he will push the button...
 

goldylight

***** Vampire
Awards
1
  • Established
The only thing China has is a lot of people to throw at someone. That's what nukes are for, to take out large groups of people. China would be laid to waste if they decided to go full on against us.
not for nothing - but china has been buying A lot of advanced weaponry from russia as of late.
 
lozgod

lozgod

Active member
Awards
1
  • Established
Oh man, the US has enough nukes to blow up the world a hundred times over! :twisted:
There are no winners in a nuclear war. They launch one and we launch one and then let's say the war is over. They surrender. Problem is we got nuked and millions died. My solution you ask?????????........................................
Nuke em now!
 

houseman

Board Supporter
Awards
1
  • Established
can't remember who said it, i think one of our presidents, but it was something to the effect of "i'm not worried about the country with thousands of nukes, i'm more concerned with the country that has one."
That's from the movie The Sum Of All Fears and it's so very true.

oh so true.
 
natedogg

natedogg

Well-known member
Awards
1
  • Established
The good news is that the US is currently developing a system that would shoot down or intercept a nuclear missle if launched. Actually I think they plan on retesting the weapon sometime this week. Hopefully we can have this system in place in the very near future.
 

Cogrick2

Member
Awards
0
Somehow I doubt that a system like this is anywhere near production. Like the missile shield, it is an attractive idea to many that becomes massively difficult at the level of implementation.

But educate me. Perhaps I don't understand how easy it is to rapidly respond to an imminent nuke. Are they wanting to target the weapon on its descent, on its ascent, or before it is even fired (which would probably be air-to-suface and a very rapid reactionary system).

More info?:cheers:

The good news is that the US is currently developing a system that would shoot down or intercept a nuclear missle if launched. Actually I think they plan on retesting the weapon sometime this week. Hopefully we can have this system in place in the very near future.
 
natedogg

natedogg

Well-known member
Awards
1
  • Established
Somehow I doubt that a system like this is anywhere near production. Like the missile shield, it is an attractive idea to many that becomes massively difficult at the level of implementation.

But educate me. Perhaps I don't understand how easy it is to rapidly respond to an imminent nuke. Are they wanting to target the weapon on its descent, on its ascent, or before it is even fired (which would probably be air-to-suface and a very rapid reactionary system).

More info?:cheers:
Well I don't much, but I do know they've tested this weapon before and failed. Here are some websites that will give you a good idea on how these sytems work (or won't work).

http://fas.org/spp/starwars/program/nmd/

http://www.area51zone.com/abm/index4.shtml

http://slate.msn.com/id/2097087
 
CEDeoudes59

CEDeoudes59

USA HOCKEY
Awards
1
  • Established
The good news is that the US is currently developing a system that would shoot down or intercept a nuclear missle if launched. Actually I think they plan on retesting the weapon sometime this week. Hopefully we can have this system in place in the very near future.
Screw any politician who tries to gut our military funding. This is a matter of life and death.
 

knox

Member
Awards
1
  • Established
If Nk has a nuclear missle the U.S. is by far out of range. Remember during the cold war Russia had to move their nukes to cuba to be in range. I don't know much about the nuke defense systems but I think the gov. has been working on them since the 80's..lasers etc. Only the U.S. and Russia have Inter-galactic balistic missles...I think that is right. These can hit any target in the world.
 

LCSULLA

Well-known member
Awards
1
  • Established
LC, not to be an ass but did you read my post.. I said the same thing as you did, just in a different way..
The using of nukes was his use of nukes and he doesn't give a damn what the rest of the world thinks.. and it is still a NO WIN situation for all of us.. because we will lose due the radiological fallout
I don't think we can take care of NK with any type of warfare.. he will push the button...
LOL. Yeah sorry about that Matt I tend to ramble on abit. But what started my response was the fact that at no time would we have been able to intervene militaraly because China sees NK as a vassel state. That what I was trying to say. Sorry about the rambling :eek:
 
lozgod

lozgod

Active member
Awards
1
  • Established
The good news is that the US is currently developing a system that would shoot down or intercept a nuclear missle if launched. Actually I think they plan on retesting the weapon sometime this week. Hopefully we can have this system in place in the very near future.
I thought Ronald Regan started that in the 80's?
 
D_town

D_town

Registered User
Awards
1
  • Established
Originally Posted by Deoudes59
well thank goodness, that absolute pussy (what was his name?) isn't our president.
Deoudes, your my DUDE!

Aside from that, I've wanted Kim Jong dead since the first time I saw his little faggot ass. He seems to not give a **** about anything but himself and empowerment. Between NK and Iran, I predict rough waters ahead.
 

NPursuit

Well-known member
Awards
1
  • Established
If Nk has a nuclear missle the U.S. is by far out of range. Remember during the cold war Russia had to move their nukes to cuba to be in range. I don't know much about the nuke defense systems but I think the gov. has been working on them since the 80's..lasers etc. Only the U.S. and Russia have Inter-galactic balistic missles...I think that is right. These can hit any target in the world.
Russia placed nukes in Cuba, so they would have first strike capability. They had ICBMs at the time, but they take longer (obviously) to reach the US. Reagan's "star wars" program was abandoned in the 80s. Bush Jr. has implemented a missle defense system that is to be in use in the next couple of years. Last I knew it wasn't exactly fail proof. I haven't had time to read up on NK's nuke. Anyone know if it's a fission or fusion bomb?
 

knox

Member
Awards
1
  • Established
Russia placed nukes in Cuba, so they would have first strike capability. They had ICBMs at the time, but they take longer (obviously) to reach the US. Reagan's "star wars" program was abandoned in the 80s. Bush Jr. has implemented a missle defense system that is to be in use in the next couple of years. Last I knew it wasn't exactly fail proof. I haven't had time to read up on NK's nuke. Anyone know if it's a fission or fusion bomb?

My guess would be a fission bomb. Since a fusion bomb is considered a hydrogen bomb---(no radiation). Please correct me if i'm wrong.
 

NPursuit

Well-known member
Awards
1
  • Established
My guess would be a fission bomb. Since a fusion bomb is considered a hydrogen bomb---(no radiation). Please correct me if i'm wrong.
I meant is it a fission only device or a fission-fusion device.
 
jarhead

jarhead

Well-known member
Awards
1
  • Established
Right now noone(public) knows for sure what they have or if they have any at all, despite what the little psycho recently claimed. It was suspected that up until 94 they pursued an active nuclear weapons program. Beyond that, there is no way to tell for sure how far they have come. They did have enough fuel rods in storage to produce a small number of weapons. So basically they could be sitting on a small stockpile, or have none at all. As far as the specific type, there is know way to tell yet, and that would be based on what they say anyway.
 
CEDeoudes59

CEDeoudes59

USA HOCKEY
Awards
1
  • Established
Deoudes, your my DUDE!

Aside from that, I've wanted Kim Jong dead since the first time I saw his little faggot ass. He seems to not give a **** about anything but himself and empowerment. Between NK and Iran, I predict rough waters ahead.
where's your liberal compassion? :thumbsup:
where's the new Reagan or Goldwater? we may need them.
 
CDB

CDB

Registered User
Awards
1
  • Established
My guess would be a fission bomb. Since a fusion bomb is considered a hydrogen bomb---(no radiation). Please correct me if i'm wrong.
All nuclear weapons require a fission reaction, either as the main reaction or as a trigger for the main reaction. They all release radiation, though however much of the yield come from fusion vs fission generally determines how 'clean' the bomb is, or relative lack of radiation/fallout it releases compared to other bombs. My guess would be he has either pure fission weapons or boosted fissionweapons. They're simple and give a lot of bang for the buck, and are probably a good way to utilize a limited amount of material.
 

Similar threads


Top