Reply With Quote
Good sense is the master of human life.
Lucky Numbers: 2, 7, 11, 15, 21, 33
Hey, sounds like what the anti-McDonald's crowd
want us all to eat. No fat.............
Good sense is the master of human life.
Lucky Numbers: 2, 7, 11, 15, 21, 33
Well now for some good news. Seems the test was likely a dud.
Janes
North Korea claims nuclear test
By Joseph Bermudez Jr JDW Correspondent
Colorado
Initial South Korean Ministry of Defence and National Intelligence Service reports indicated that a 3.58-3.7-magnitude blast was detected emanating from a North Korean nuclear test at 10.36 am local time (01:36 GMT). Subsequent reports from the US Geological Survey (USGS) place the magnitude of the tremor at 4.2 on the Richter scale. The difference in the reports is due to the fact that the USGS assessment, being somewhat later, was able to incorporate a larger number of sensor reports in its preparation.
The USGS data identifies the time and location of the blast as 9 October at 01:35:27 (GMT) and centred at 41.311—N, 129.114—E at a depth 0-1 km. This places the site approximately 42 km northwest of Kilchu, in the province of North Hamgyong, on the remote slopes of Mant'ap-san Mountain. This coincides with reports that first appeared during 2005 of su ious tunnelling and construction activities in the area. Subsequent reports during the past month indicate that the North Koreans had excavated a 700 m-long horizontal tunnel under Mant'ap-san.
Although details are tentative, initial and unconfirmed South Korean reports indicate that the test was a fission device with a yield of .55 kT. By comparison the nuclear bomb that was dropped on Hiroshima yielded approximately 12.5 kT. The figure of .55 kT, however, seems too low given the 4.2 register on the Richter scale. This could suggest - depending upon the geological make-up of the test site - a yield of 2-12 kT. If, however, the lower yield is correct, it would suggest that the test had been a "pre- or post-detonation" event (ie a failure), as it had been anticipated that North Korea's first nuclear test would have a significantly higher yield.
Whadya expect? It was made in North Korea after all.
Based on the performance of their recent missle launches, I would not expect much from their nuclear "arsenal" (emphasis on the word "arse")
Considering uranium is North Korea's only trump card, it's understandable they would spend it sparingly.
There's a pro-McDonald's crowd? ... should I assume they are Republican?
Here's the irony - no WMDs in Iraq, yet everyone knows that North Korea has been working up to this, and now they've done it. Not only that, but Kim Jong Il and family are just crazy enough to use what they've made.
23,000,000 people run by a truly nasty authoritarian regime which starves its people. Anyone think that maybe North Korea should have been the country invaded in 2003? It would've still been an economic boon to the arms manufacturers/logistics companies, and I doubt there'd be a civil war once those people were freed from the of their dictator! Win-win as far as I can see. Might've cost you a few more troops though, and who knows what biological/chemical nightmares they have stockpiled to unleash on the south...
Iran is learning the lesson of the USA "Macho Men" wimping out vs. NK.
You don't even need nuclear capability, just a huge, well-equipped, paid, and motivated army with lots of munitions, rockets, etc and deep, hardened fortifications and the USA will decide an invasion would be too damn costly.
Russia collapsed due to starvation of hard petro-dollars when the price of oil collapsed in the mid-80s, and Russia's thin, old industry was simpley exhausted trying to support the Russians in Afghanistan.
NK has even a weaker industrial base to support an army and war. Who would supply NK with oil during a war? Chavez? No oil, no diesel, no tanks, no trucks, no logistics. NK is easy to blockade for oil and other raw materials.
Remember, even the British Navy couldn't make it to the Falklands in 1982 without the USA supplying diesel all along the way.
So the question really is whether China would support NK logistically against the USA? or would China stand by and just let that pesky, unpredictable NK be neutralized by the USA?
Last edited by boutons_; 10-09-2006 at 09:50 PM.
[quo]You don't even need nuclear capability, just a huge, well-equipped, paid, and motivated army with lots of munitions, rockets, etc and deep, hardened fortifications and the USA will decide an invasion would be too damn costly.[/quote]
That's right, it's called the Red Army of the People's Republic of China, you ing idiot.
GERTZ: U.S. doubts Korean test was nuclear; Readings fall short of atomic explosion... MORE...
U.S. intelligence agencies say, based on preliminary indications, that North Korea did not produce its first nuclear blast yesterday, WASHINGTON TIMES star reporter Bill Gertz is set to report in Tuesday editions.
U.S. officials, speaking on the condition of anonymity, said that seismic readings show that the conventional high explosives used to create a chain reaction in a plutonium-based device went off, but that the blast's readings were shy of a typical nuclear detonation.
The underground explosion, which Pyongyang dubbed a historic nuclear test, is thought to have been the equivalent of several hundred tons of TNT, far short of the several thousand tons of TNT, or kilotons, that are signs of a nuclear blast, the official said. Developing...
lol at the new avatar, 01Snake.
"Aw, Mrax Brix!"
that in itself is pretty odd, since you don't need hundreds of tons of explosives to trigger a nuclear reaction. It's either a deliberate hoax, or a teeny, tiny nuclear warhead.
"People's Republic of China"
ah! Long before you were born, we heard this canard about PRC wanting to invade VN if and when the American quit VN. It just was just as true as the domino theory.
The US underestimated the NVN desire for its own VN nation, aka, nationalism, NOT to be PRC-occupied serf colony.
Similiarly, Iraqis, no matter how divided, now see the USA invaders and long-term US miltary bases as an insult to their nationalism, an impediment to peace, an incitement to more violence, not less.
With the way the economy is going in PRC, and the corrupt (non-Communist) power structure enriching itself by many $Bs, and total suppression of dissent (even in the USA), I doubt PRC would bother to interfere if the USA reduced NK to rubble.
The question the PRC has would the USA also stand-by as PRC took over Taiwan?
You don't think the PRC would be concerned with having US troops in its backyard, particularly if the confrontation went nuclear?
You're dumber than I thought.
I don't get it. If the bomb was a fizzle, its not going to produce a 4.0 quake. Also, the US is gioing to act as if the blast actualy occured because that gives them the most leverage in the UN.
No matter whait it was, nuclar or tnt, pop or fizzle, NK announced it as a nuclear " you".
dubya response is "ok, you've ed me. I be stayin the course"
The North Koreans have a very weak industrial base, but even that weak industrial base has had 50 years to prepare, with no small amount of Chinese support.
China sees the PDRK as a buffer between them and South Korea, who has been regarded as a puppet of the US.
I think this is a case where the presence of American troops actually accomplishes the opposite of what we intended to do.
South Koreas military is more than sufficient to stop North Korea, and is supported by a well-developed industrial base.
The need for US troops here is 10 years gone.
As for what to do about NK:
Nuthin. Let them have their happy fun bomb. It will be unreliable and crappy, as will the "missles" they try to put them on.
North Korea probably has a few prototype weapons, but nothing really credible. If NK ever does decide to go bonkers, let the Chinese deal with it. They want a buffer, let them pay the price. A billion Chinese can *probably* handle a country 2% their size on their border.
The funny thing about China's recent industrialization and joining of the global community, is that their economic interests and the US's have more in common than you might think.
Just my stream of consciousness thinking on the subject.
lol @ Drudge...
Well, trying to invade NK (even with full US armed forces) ain't that easy. The NKs have a whole load of stuff aimed at Seoul which is just 60 miles from the border. US tries anything and bang there go a couple hundred thousand ROK citizens. Also, the military is much better fed and supplied than you might think thanks to Kim-Il's "military first" policy. There are something like a million troops in the NK army, most of whom are within 30 miles of the border. The NKs have been preparing for an invasion for 50 years and things are scattered, hardened, and hidden. They have huge empty highways (only the party faithful have cars) which can be used to rapidly move materiel around, and which also can be sabotaged to present a formidable barrier to invading forces.
Pyongyang, 200 miles from the DMZ, is largely a Potemkin village. The NKs probably have removed key military infrastructure from the area since it is such a blindingly obvious target. Either that, or buried it deep in their underground Metro which is widely believed to hardened enough to survive nuclear impacts.
And let's don't forget that the PRC got involved the LAST time US forces got anywhere near the border. They wouldn't just sit by if we invaded unless there was some incredibly serious quid-pro-quo going on behind the scenes.
All that said, yeah I wish we weren't so invested in Iraq so our options were still all available.
You're absolutely right, I was being a bit flippant. I'd say more like a couple of million ROK citizens, because I'm sure NK has stockpiles of alll sorts of chemical and biological weapons they'd use without hes ation.
It's far more likely that the Japanese and South Koreans will now develop their own bombs and we have another MAD little playground to add to India-Pakistan-Iran, and of course the global superpowers (although I don't worry about their using nukes so much as they have reasonably stable govts and tight command and control procedures).
Aren't they signatories of the Non-Proliferation Treaty?
Why should we bother sending in our army?
Let NK do what it wants, and let China handle their "little brother".
If NK goes nuts on anybody, the Chinese will be the first ones in there, AFTER they have cut off the massive aid that is propping up the NK government now.
SK is becoming a big trading partner with China, and China needs all the investment it can get to deal with its rapid industrialization.
Looking at any military situation without the corresponding economic and political background limits one's thinking.
There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)
Posting Permissions
