This is my last full day here on sci, I’m going on vacation but I felt it necessary to leave you with a good thread. North Korea, as I nation I pride myself on knowing quite a bit of is a nation that is rationally manipulating the world community. Why would NK admit it has nuclear weaponry? Simple the 6 way party talks were not going anywhere, the US was being just as obstructionist as NK in negotiations. The US refusal for some reason to negotiate with Pyongyang face to face is not conducive to peace, one reason I suppose the US may not want to talk to NK face to face is to make NK doesn’t fool the US into doing something (which is possible imo because the American’s don’t understand NK’s). The American government is playing a game of which it has no idea of how to play; you may here idiot pundits call the regime in NK “crazy”, “eccentric”, “irrational”, which like most insults points to a fundamental misunderstanding/ ignorance of your enemy. North Korea is anything but crazy, after the collapse of the Soviet Union, and the COMECON bloc NK was left to its own devices. NK had very little recourse, it did not want to abandon Juche and Socialism but it didn’t have the monetary wherewithal to stand up in the NWO, so if you have a nuclear reactor pumping out nuclear material what are you going to do? North Korea since the early 80’s has been reverse engineering Scud missiles, they are so good at it that they have been extend the range of the basic Scud from around 200 km to around 2000km with the modified Taepo Dong 1 missile. Now that North Korea has the No Dong B series missile that can attack major American targets:

http://www.globalsecurity.org/wmd/world/dprk/images/nd-b-map.jpg

Which is a missile that is derived from the Soviet Union’s SS-N-6 missile, and since NK’s nuclear warheads according to the CIA are good to go, NK doesn’t even need to detonate a nuclear explosion Pakistan already did that in 1998. America has been outmanoeuvred big time ladies and gents she’s been played. The North Korean regime under the Clinton administration would have probably gotten rid of her WMD programs eventually since the US in conjunction with South Korea were getting serious about rapprochement with NK with economic incentives for verification of the dismantlement of NK’s WMD programs. Now the situation is all but over, the Bush administration has now through its belligerent tone has turned off NK and justifiably so. Remember it was Bush state of the Union address that he named three nations as targets for American hegemony project PNAC, Iraq, Iran, and North Korea. After March 2003 when the US invaded Iraq and made good on its promise from that state of the union address do you honestly believe that Kim would sit back and do nothing? I know I wouldn’t have, and since negotiations with the Bush team is truly a waste of time I would intensify my nuclear capabilities, something North Korea has done. Now the question that some idiot pundits are saying is “why would NK attack us if we will totally destroy them?” I think North Korea realizes it would be wiped off the face of the Earth, and it’s a price worth paying to them if it means that Los Angeles is destroyed, give North Korea enough time and her missile capabilities will get more and more advanced, according to Time magazine North Korea should have a Tapeo Dong missile that will be able to hit the East coast of the United States. What is amazing about all this is that the Cold War is not over, and it could be really ignite again. What are the consequences of a nuclear NK war? Simply the collapse of the Pacific economy, confidence in Chinese, Korean, and other nations economies will fall, capital flight would ensue, which would plunge the region into depression. Japan if attacked by a nuclear weapon which can happen today would have its economy collapse that would spread contagion, and a nuclear attack on a major US city by a nuclear weapon would collapse the world economy. North Korea power extends far beyond its mere military power, its power is also psychological and can rock the basis of the capitalist economy. Globalization could be dead ladies and gentlemen. Since the Bush administration is adamant that it will not talk to North Korea, desperation may hit NK and that something NO one wants.

Think twice America.

Like Gwen Stefanie's song "What you waiting for" says:


Tick-tock, tick-tock
Tick-tock, tick-tock
Tick-tock, tick-tock
Tick-tock, tick-tock
La, la, la, la, la, la, la

Like an echo pedal, you're repeating yourself
You know it all by heart
Why are you standing in one place
Born to blossom, bloom to perish
Your moment will run out

Take a chance you stupid ho

What will the failure of the now-broken nuclear non-proliferation agreement with North Korea known as the Agreed Framework cost the United States?


On Oct. 16, 2002 North Korean government officials admitted their country had secretly continued development of nuclear weapons in violation of a 1994 non-proliferation agreement with the United States. Coming from a nation identified, along with Iraq and Iran, as a member of terrorism's Axis of Evil, North Korea's nuclear weapons confession threatens peace in not only the Korean peninsula, but all of Asia. Fearing that immediate U.S. military action might prompt North Korea to attack South Korea, currently home to some 37,000 U.S. troops, the White House expressed hopes that diplomatic efforts would be sufficient to convince the North Koreans to ''comply with its commitments . . . and to eliminate its nuclear weapons program in a verifiable manner." It was, however, well-intentioned "diplomatic efforts" by the Clinton administration that failed in the first place. That piece of 1994 diplomacy was known as the "Agreed Framework."

Lacking its own supplies of traditional energy resources like oil or coal, North Korea turned to nuclear power generation and by the mid-1980s, had at least four nuclear power complexes in operation. However, North Korea's reactors, built with the assistance of China and the Soviet Union, were disclosed to be "graphite-moderated" reactors, a type capable of producing weapons grade plutonium. This fact spurred the interest of U.S. intelligence forces who determined that North Korea's largest nuclear facility at Yongbyon, along with three smaller facilities, were indeed producing plutonium. By 1985 U.S. defense experts estimated that the newly discovered North Korean nuclear program had already generated enough plutonium for two nuclear weapons and was poised to rapidly expand production. In addition, intelligence showed the N. Koreans to be quickly developing their ballistic missile weapons delivery systems.

From 1985 to 1992, N. Korea "bought time" for its nuclear weapons program by entering into a series of international diplomatic agreements under which it promised to "deweaponize" its reactors and halt further production of plutonium. Typical Asian stalling tactics, proven very effective in the Vietnam Peace talks in France, some 30-odd years ago. The bad thing is, the method works. By 1994, however, N. Korea had violated the terms of most of the non-proliferation agreements and simply withdrawn from the rest. By refusing in 1993 to disclose to international arms control agencies how much plutonium it had produced, N. Korea virtually admitted that its nuclear weapons program had continued unchecked. When in June of 1994 the Unites States, S. Korea and several allied nations succeeded in getting the U.N. Security Council to evoke sanctions against them, the N. Koreans declared the sanctions an "act of war" and threatened to turn South Korea into "a sea of fire." Typical of a hardline regime, of any type. Sound similar to the Iranian statements a few days ago? Believing a diplomatic solution still possible, former President Clinton forged an agreement with N. Korean President Kim Il-sung that the North would temporarily halt its nuclear weapons program and return to non-proliferation negotiations in Geneva. The now-violated agreement became known as the "Agreed Framework."

Key components of the Agreed Framework included:

The U.S. and N. Korea would cooperate in fully replacing N. Korea's graphite-moderated reactors with light-water reactors (not capable of plutonium production) by 2003. Graphite-moderated reactors were to be shut down until converted. To offset energy lost due to the powering down of N. Korea's graphite-moderated reactors, the United States agreed to supply N. Korea with up to 500,000 tons of heavy oil for heating and electricity production annually, until all reactors had been converted. N. Korea agreed to return to compliance with all international nuclear non-proliferation agreements and to eventually stabilize, store and dispose of all spent nuclear fuel already produced. Both the U.S. and N. Korea would work to achieve full normalization of political and economic relations. North Korea failed to uphold its end of the Agreed Framework, spectacularly. Not only that, but when we( I.E. - The US government) TOLD the N. Koreans that we knew what was going on, they blamed America for their actions. I guess being a humanitarian means you should be repaid with a suitcase nuke in the heartland. These people still remember vividly the Korean War, and Asian memories are long indeed. To even expect that we can trust the N. Koreans is somewhat akin to playing Russian Roulette with five rounds in the chamber.

In addition to the oil supplied under the 1994 Agreed Framework, the United States, as early as 1997, began sending North Korea food medicine and other forms of humanitarian aid. The contributions of U.S. humanitarian aid to N. Korea began in 1997, in response to an appeal from the United Nations World Food Program. Unprecedented flooding during 1995 and 1996 had wiped out much of N. Korea's farm land, resulting in chronic food production shortfalls and widespread malnutrition. In other words, one of the worst famines in centuries. So we're giving them the supplies to fuel their economy, AND food. Based on a UN suggestion, no less. Oh, and guess what? You think the IRAQ scandal was bad, guess who was giving them military aid during this time? France. U.S. defense analysts, viewing the rapidly declining economic stability and impending starvation in N. Korea as a threat to peace in the region, recommended continuation of the humanitarian aid program. Ironically, defense planners also reasoned that the aid would help "buy" N. Korea's compliance with terms of the Agreed Framework.
By 2000, the United States contribution of food and other forms of humanitarian aid to North Korea had amounted to over $3 BILLION. North Korea's admission of its continued development of nuclear weapons, and the fact that they POSSESS them, in direct violation of the Agreed Framework, may bring an end to the flow of U.S. humanitarian and economic aid .. providing the spark to ignite a new Pan-Asian war led by the Imperialistic Chinese -and- N. Koreans that we are VERY ill-equipped to deal with.

Democrats fuck the country yet again, let's hope this situation can be defused.. I know I'm praying for it.

Ok next time instead of doing illegal activity like plagiarism, why don’t you read my post, and not spam it. Secondly since you rely on the brains of others, why do you talk? Thirdly stop spamming. Fourthy, I assume I am off ur ignore list?

I’m going on vacation

Where to and how long? China?

The US refusal for some reason to negotiate with Pyongyang face to face is not conducive to peace, one reason I suppose the US may not want to talk to NK face to face is to make NK doesn’t fool the US into doing something (which is possible imo because the American’s don’t understand NK’s). The American government is playing a game of which it has no idea of how to play; you may here idiot pundits call the regime in NK “crazy”, “eccentric”, “irrational”, which like most insults points to a fundamental misunderstanding/ ignorance of your enemy.

Yeah, this is something that scares me about our administration. They continue to think that these countries will think like us so we can counter and manipulate a country’s response to our threat, but that just ain’t gonna happen. It pisses me off that they could be so ignorant and underestimate them.

America has been outmanoeuvred big time ladies and gents she’s been played.

I don't feel as if the U.S. has been played. Having more and more countries gain the ability of nuclear weaponry is inevitable. There's not much that can be done to stop it. Throw as many sanctions on a country as you want, that'll only hurt those – mainly citizens -- that the government in question decides to realter funds to maintain their nuclear research. Since other powers gaining nuclear weaponry is inevtitable, the only thing the U.S. has been able to do is slow down that progress as there's not much else that can be done. The U.S. just wants to keep it's dominance in the world and once the time comes when all countries -- or at least those that won’t put up with our crap -- have nuclear weaponry, the U.S. will no longer be able to bully other countries around as they do.

Remember it was Bush state of the Union address that he named three nations as targets for American hegemony project PNAC, Iraq, Iran, and North Korea. After March 2003 when the US invaded Iraq and made good on its promise from that state of the union address do you honestly believe that Kim would sit back and do nothing? I know I wouldn’t have, and since negotiations with the Bush team is truly a waste of time I would intensify my nuclear capabilities, something North Korea has done. Now the question that some idiot pundits are saying is “why would NK attack us if we will totally destroy them?” I think North Korea realizes it would be wiped off the face of the Earth, and it’s a price worth paying to them if it means that Los Angeles is destroyed

Yup, and glad to see someone thinking clearly and actually realizing what would happen.

And now the thing that pisses me off is that Los Angeles would be a target -- a city that highly disagrees with the Bush Administration. This is just another friggin example of how the god-damned ignorant and god-loving POS red states dictate and put us in harms way due to their ignorance of voting in the Bush Administration. Hell, give me the nuke and I’ll gladly wipe out all the red states if that means those that shouldn’t be harmed won’t. How much more range do they need on their missles to hit the South instead of the West Coast and Northeast? Heres to them getting that ability in hopes of them choosing the South or Midwest as a target instead. I hope more threats come our way so that we’ll have some revolution and separate the blue from the red states. I’m all for a civil war if it means we get to kick and throw the ignorant into their own new country in the South so that their votes and beliefs will no longer be counted as the votes and beliefs of America as a whole. Quit putting others in harms way you redneck bastards.

Ahh, yes, that was very relieving. Glad to get that off my back. :p

- N

This is my last full day here on sci, I’m going on vacation but I felt it necessary to leave you with a good thread. :

Aww :( see you soon Undecided... dont leave us compleatly.

Democrats fuck the country yet again, let's hope this situation can be defused.. I know I'm praying for it.

How did they (note: I’m not a Demokrap or Republikkkan) screw the country by "failing" North Korean negotiations? Do you honestly believe that NK would have stopped their nuclear research? No matter what was done, it would have failed. Only an idiot would think that a country trying to research the most powerful weaponry available would actually stop. Not to mention that that’s the only real technological research that can actually put a stop to U.S. aggression. To think that NK, or anyone for that matter, would stop their nuclear research is like leaving a person in the desert all alone with a briefcase filled with a million dollars and only a sign that says "Do Not Take".

Not even the U.S., the one who wants others to stop their nuclear research, has stopped it’s own. We ourselves are always developing better nuclear capabilities. Heck, and it’s not like nukes are all that bad compared to conventianal bombs as we have bombs that are just as powerful and destructive, not to mention more gruesome than nukes. The only real thing to fear from a nuke is the EMP pulse that comes with it as these are the days where electronics run our lives.

The U.S. doesn’t care about right or wrong, we just care about dominance. Like that one picture in another thread said “A Nuclear Iran Threatens Our Ability to Invade Them”. That’s the only thing that matters. We want to keep our technological superiority and that’s it. These lesser countries can go ahead and commit attrocities against their own people and we won’t care, but if they have the ability to do harm to us, that’s the only time it’ll matter. By keeping other’s from being able to upgrade to more powerful techonology, it achieves the same results of maintaining our technological superiority except when we also don’t have those same “techonlogical peace talk” limitations applied to ourselves, that just helps us even more!

- N

That graphic sucks.

The radii do not originate in Korea, I can tell just by extrapolating them with my eyeball. Given the shoddy level of the artwork, it looks like it's a creation of one of the FAS-fansites like globalsecurity.org or something. The circles aren't even symmetrical or concentric. I could do a better job with five minutes in MSPaint. Jesus.

Anyway, the ranges are all wrong. Even with an Arctic circle overflight, you need at least 8,000km of range to hit the CONUS. 5,000 will get you barely into Alaska. That inner 2700km radius extends from a point of origin in Yukon or something. And the 4,000 km circumference is barely 500km outside of the 2700km one. If they're intended to represent ranges from the same point of origin, they are patently false.

Here is something better. This is from the UK Ministry of Defence:

http://www.mod.uk/img/issues/missiledefence/missiledef_fig3_lge.gif

Note the concentricity of the ranges, and the uniformity of the circumferences. As you can see, the ranges involved are much more. Given the corrected distance envelopes, they still have a long way to go before they can declare themselves a bona fide ICBM-capable power with the ability to threaten the CONUS.

Edit: As for the rest of your post, good work. Enjoy your vacation.

after the collapse of the Soviet Union, and the COMECON bloc NK was left to its own devices...

what must thatve felt like, to the govt, there or the people? Itd be like Britain or smaler democratic country being left alone in a communist world... horrible.

they have been extend the range of the basic Scud from around 200 km to around 2000km with the modified Taepo Dong 1 missile.

But we dont know if they can build a nuke which will fit in a rocket like that. The 1st atombombs were a lot bulkier surely + hard to deliver - perhaps if the Koreans wnated to nuke San francisco theyd have to sensd a submarine ona suicide run into the harbor, carrying the bomb.

since negotiations with the Bush team is truly a waste of time I would intensify my nuclear capabilities, something North Korea has done. Now the question that some idiot pundits are saying is “why would NK attack us if we will totally destroy them?” I think North Korea realizes it would be wiped off the face of the Earth, and it’s a price worth paying to them if it means that Los Angeles is destroyed,

If they feel theyve got nothing left to lose + old IlJong decides to kick off before his country goes under, might he not start with conventonal war before using nukes? The NK aremy and airforce could cause a lot of trouble for SK, for Japan, even Russia if they were told to just attck wherever America has friends. Theyve got a navy who could realy mess up shipping in the far east - plus China might help them, who knows.. ?

Perhpas the US or Russia wouldnt atom bomb NK unless they got hit the same way 1st.

Stokes' map is much better yes.

what must thatve felt like, to the govt, there or the people? Itd be like Britain or smaler democratic country being left alone in a communist world... horrible.



But we dont know if they can build a nuke which will fit in a rocket like that. The 1st atombombs were a lot bulkier surely + hard to deliver - perhaps if the Koreans wnated to nuke San francisco theyd have to sensd a submarine ona suicide run into the harbor, carrying the bomb.

since negotiations with the Bush team is truly a waste of time I would intensify my nuclear capabilities, something North Korea has done. Now the question that some idiot pundits are saying is “why would NK attack us if we will totally destroy them?” I think North Korea realizes it would be wiped off the face of the Earth, and it’s a price worth paying to them if it means that Los Angeles is destroyed,

If they feel theyve got nothing left to lose + old IlJong decides to kick off before his country goes under, might he not start with conventonal war before using nukes? The NK aremy and airforce could cause a lot of trouble for SK, for Japan, even Russia if they were told to just attck wherever America has friends. Theyve got a navy who could realy mess up shipping in the far east - plus China might help them, who knows.. ?

Perhpas the US or Russia wouldnt atom bomb NK unless they got hit the same way 1st.

Stokes' map is much better yes.


Russia and china have a 200 years of peace pact .. I think it was made in 2001 cant remember, so if war erupted I think it would move either east or south. although there are few military posts in that area of russia.. I think if north korea decided to expand north they would quickly occupy a majour section of siberia before russia managed to mobilise and get there. Even then with the training of NK's soliders I suspect it would be a very long war.

How did they (note: I’m not a Demokrap or Republikkkan) screw the country by "failing" North Korean negotiations?
By being all carrot and no stick. It is the flaw of most leftists at this point... I don't know why they trust communist dictators... I'm guessing brain damage. :rolleyes:

By being all carrot and no stick. It is the flaw of most leftists at this point... I don't know why they trust communist dictators... I'm guessing brain damage. :rolleyes:

Kim ia just a dictator he isnt even a real communist. his way is closer to stalinist , so lets call NK Kimist.

"North Korea announced that they have nuclear weapons and they have no plans to give them up. The White House, acting quickly, announced their plan to invade Iran." --Craig Ferguson
http://politicalhumor.about.com/library/bldailyfeed3.htm

But we dont know if they can build a nuke which will fit in a rocket like that.

According to the CIA she (NK) has verified her nuclear designs:

North Korea's nuclear-weapons tests have been sufficiently sophisticated to "validate" the design of Pyongyang's nuclear weapons, the CIA said in a previously unpublicized document.
--------------------------------------------
"Press reports indicate North Korea has been conducting nuclear-weapon-related high-explosive tests since the 1980s in order to validate its weapon design(s)," the CIA said. "With such tests, we assess North Korea would not require nuclear tests to validate simple fission weapons."
------------------------------------------
"Would North Korea have to conduct a nuclear-yield test in order to have a credible deterrent? The answer is no," he said. The CIA letter means the agency thinks the North Koreans "have got the bomb now, rather than that they will have the bomb," he said. The document signifies that "North Korea could nuke Hiroshima without having to conduct a test in advance."

As to the warhead…chances are she does have them since her and Pakistan have been working together to get them, and Iran as well.


if the Koreans wnated to nuke San francisco theyd have to sensd a submarine ona suicide run into the harbor, carrying the bomb.

Actually put it in a container, and then blow it up at the port. NK I believe could very well do that, or according to the DoD NK has been supposedly testing with ships being able to launch a scud or some type of missile, just a normal ship.

The NK aremy and airforce could cause a lot of trouble for SK, for Japan, even Russia if they were told to just attck wherever America has friends.

The NK AF would not cause much problems for anyone, NK wouldn’t even dare invade Russia and she has no beef with Russia. NK’s only real strength lies in its artillery, missiles, and massive army. Otherwise she doesn’t stand a chance.

Theyve got a navy who could realy mess up shipping in the far east - plus China might help them, who knows.. ?

No they can’t, the best they can do is probably blockade some South Korea ports.

Also instead of Russia, China would be more likely then another country to do something to NK to preserve the regime in NK, or to avoid having SK reach the Yalu.

[i] I think if north korea decided to expand north they would quickly occupy a majour section of siberia before russia managed to mobilise and get there. Even then with the training of NK's soliders I suspect it would be a very long war/i]

Actually that’s completely false, Far Eastern Russia is one of the most militarized regions in the world.

Kim ia just a dictator he isnt even a real communist. his way is closer to stalinist , so lets call NK Kimist.
If you like, communism has been so tarnished in everyone's mind that there is nothing left to protect. Communism is dead.
======================================
As to their nukes... I doubt they have multi warhead technology... we've had effective ABM protection against single warhead ICBMs since the 70s.

Here is a multi warhead ICBM...

The MX Peacekeeper.
between 8 and 10 warheads... I think... its something like that...
http://www.fas.org/nuke/guide/usa/icbm/lgm118_4.jpg
thermal tiles break off after it leaves the silo...
http://www.fas.org/nuke/guide/usa/icbm/pk-pica.jpg
here are the warhead on re-entry... they can land in all sorts of programmable patterns... The main idea is that each ICBM breaks into about 10 projectiles that have to be individually destroyed. This is how we nullified the ABM shield around Moscow.
http://www.fas.org/nuke/guide/usa/icbm/Peace_Reentry-kmr.jpg
We have Peacekeeper silos all over the planet. Nuclear war with the US upon that basis alone is idiotic. We can shoot down single warhead ICBMs and have had that capability for more then 30 years. Our current ABM research is into how to stop multi warhead varients.

we've had effective ABM protection against single warhead ICBMs since the 70s.

Where? In fantasy land? The United States has no defence against ballistic warheads.

We can shoot down single warhead ICBMs and have had that capability for more then 30 years. Our current ABM research is into how to stop multi warhead varients.

Are you on crack? I am sure Stokes can rape this for me while I am gone.

Karma thats a pritty photograph .... However, the NMD system being fielded to counter the SS-25, and any similar or less sophisticated threats that may emerge from China, Iran, North Korea, and elsewhere, will probably have cumulative costs between $800 billion and $1.2 trillion by the time it reaches completion in 2015. <<< 2015 thats in 10 years pal not 30 years ago.
If thats not enough, the Bush administration's dream of a viable NMD has been rendered fantasy by the Russian test of the SS-27 Topol-M. The Topol-M has high-speed solid-fuel boosters that rapidly lift the missile into the atmosphere, making boost-phase interception impossible unless one is located practically next door to the launcher. The SS-27 has been hardened against laser weapons and has a highly maneuverable post-boost vehicle that can defeat any intercept capability as it dispenses up to three warheads and four sophisticated decoys.
To counter the SS-27 threat, the US will need to start from scratch. And even if a viable defense could be mustered, by that time the Russians may have fielded an even more sophisticated missile, remaining one step ahead of any US countermeasures. The US cannot afford to spend billions of dollars on a missile-defense system that will never achieve the level of defense envisioned. The Bush administration's embrace of technology, and rejection of diplomacy, when it comes to arms control has failed.
If America continues down the current path of trying to field a viable missile-defense system, significant cuts will need to be made in other areas of the defense budget, or funds reallocated from other nonmilitary spending programs. With America already engaged in a costly war in Iraq, and with the possibility of additional conflict with Iran, Syria, or North Korea looming on the horizon, funding a missile-defense system that not only does not work as designed, but even if it did, would not be capable of defending America from threats such as the Topol-M missile, makes no sense.
The Bush administration would do well to reconsider its commitment to a national missile-defense system, and instead reengage in the kind of treaty-based diplomacy that in the past produced arms control results that were both real and lasting. This would not only save billions, it would make America, and the world, a safer place :rolleyes:

And lets face it if nuclear war startseveryone will die anyway.. there will be no victor

Here is a funny skit of the american AMD system in construction.. seriously read it tis funny: http://www.gdm93.dial.pipex.com/missile.htm

As to their nukes... I doubt they have multi warhead technology... we've had effective ABM protection against single warhead ICBMs since the 70s.
They surely don't have MIRV's. However, we have no defense against an ICBM strike. We had Safeguard, back in 1973, which was a two-tiered net that protected our ICBM silos around Grand Forks and Minot AFB in the Dakotas. Safeguard was operational for all of one day. Since then, there's been a lot of talk about building one, but nothing's ever happened. Right now they're rolling out the NMD but in spite of claims made by the Bush administration, nobody realistically expects NMD to be operational until 2007 at the earliest.
We can shoot down single warhead ICBMs and have had that capability for more then 30 years. Our current ABM research is into how to stop multi warhead varients.
No and no. I explained the former above. For the latter, the current NMD incarnation is designed to stop crude, unitary (single warhead) missiles launched in strikes of one or two at a time. The only thing we have going for stopping a MIRV strike are boost phase defenses which catch the missile before it leaves the atmosphere, while it is still slow moving, and carrying all of its warheads. The quantities of the NMD interceptors we are deploying (20, total, perhaps more in the future) are paltry, and could never contend with a huge MIRV'd ICBM like the SS-18 (the Peacekeeper's Russian equivalent).

Anyway, there's no reason to pursue a defense against MIRV's, really. Everybody who has them is sane enough to not use them, and anybody who might use them won't have them for a while, or maybe (hopefully) never.

The NK AF would not cause much problems for anyone, NK wouldn’t even dare invade Russia and she has no beef with Russia. NK’s only real strength lies in its artillery, missiles, and massive army. Otherwise she doesn’t stand a chance.

Sounds like NK isnt as fearsom asthe Bush administraton makes out - bit of a paper lion really? its a pity that, to keep support + patriotism going strong at home, we need an evil enemy to be scared of... if the Kim regime falls, who wil be the new #1 bad guy in the world acording to the White house?

could be we are more likely to be nuked by 1 of our own icbm's launched by computer eror... :rolleyes:

Undecided , the military bases in vladivostok and around it including the radio systems and the navy are rusting and falling apart its not at all up to spec to hold back an invasion.

And lets face it if nuclear war startseveryone will die anyway.. there will be no victor

Thats how it wouldve been in the Cold war, coz both sides had so many nukes.. if it jsut a limitd war with a country like NK, who cant have morethan a few atom bombs, then I think you can win unless a biger power takes their side. after all, lots of nukes were set off as tests in the 50s + 60s befoe it was outlawd above ground.. they didnt ruin the planet or make everyone mutants. A few wellplaced nukes + North Korea will be beaten - theyd have to start it though.

There goes another paranoid post. So, when is NK going to attack USA? I just think that it is Phucking pathetic that any **COUNTRY** would even think about attacking USA. So, hold on to your fears, NK Is not going to attack any one. There is only one country in the world which will freely attack any country they want and any time....yup you all guessed it right. ;) They have proved it in our recent history, oh and now the next episode will be IRAN since they do not have nukes they will be attacked very soon. It is very funny it is always arab country which gets their ass kicked when ever North Korea admits of having nukes........lmao. It is hilarious to me. :D

It is very funny it is always arab country which gets their ass kicked when ever North Korea admits of having nukes........lmao. It is hilarious to me. :D

Its because the arab countrys have LOTS of 1 thing very special to us in America - OIL!! NK has to import the stuff, they cant go controling our supply.

skywalker,

thats kind of the whole point isnt it. you do something about them before they have nukes, because once they have em, it makes everything a lot harder. e.g. NK

We have Peacekeeper silos all over the planet. We can shoot down single warhead ICBMs and have had that capability for more then 30 years. Our current ABM research is into how to stop multi warhead varients.[/QUOTE]

Do they work as well as this example in New Scientist? Aparently the tests proved they couldn't destroy a test missle much less a real one. They blamed the software for the malfunction but already eight more have been put into silos and another dozen are in production when it isn't even proven to be effective. Brilliant isn't it? :rolleyes: Check out the New Scientist site. www.newscientist.com/article.ns?id=dn7018. If this doesn't work just go to New Scientist and hit US Missle Defense Test Flounders Again.

The New Scientist article is bullshit. The simple fact that they cite a guy from the UCS as their "contact" makes the whole piece suspect. Both organizations are activist groups with a vested interest in seeing the NMD effort fail, and this maniacal desire has distorted their ability to remain objective.

Jenny even a few more nuclear explosions can trigger changes in climate, warmnig , cooling , instability, higher rate of cancer as the Backround radiation count rises , thats why there are sanctions on testing of nuclear material.

Stokes, that may be true about the non objectiveness of the article. I don't know. I've always thought it to be a decent publication of the latest in science. Even with the article being nonobjective, it doesn't take away from the fact that the test failed. I just think that all the bugs should be rid of before ordering more as that which doesn't work is useless and should be rid of.

Jenny even a few more nuclear explosions can trigger changes in climate, warmnig , cooling , instability, higher rate of cancer as the Backround radiation count rises , thats why there are sanctions on testing of nuclear material.

I supose, even a few bangs is worse than non at all. :)

Stil, isnt ordinary pollution much more important to the climate than nukes ever were?

Bakground count due to dirty nukes is terrible.. if it gets to high the amount of mutation will rise.. I think here in my town its 6 counts per minute and thats a quiet area of no where... if it rises to 10 or 15 the world will be screwed, the problem is ordinary pollution rises very slowly and can be brought down .. in an expensive but possible way. Nuclear radiation rises drastically with every explosiojn .. on a global scale and can not be brought down quickly, In chernoble the count is at 32 , the bread and food on people's tables is preserved because bacteria cannot survive in such an environment. :eek:

Arent there some bacteria though that can live withmore radiation than anything else?

If theres only 1 explosion or Chernobel type acident every few yrs or less, maybe the radiation for the world overall will fade away as fast as its produced. I mean theres natural radiation to, that doesnt bother us much exept when the ozone layer gets thin.. again, nukes havent caused that. Its a chemical thing.

Actually the nuclear tests during the development programs in the cold war raised the background count by 80% and chernoble is the reason many kids in europe have blood cancer because it was a "dirty" explosion which released particles with a very long halflife which get picked up by the wind. I'll admit Radon coming out of the ground is a big contributor to random radiation. :rolleyes:

Stokes, that may be true about the non objectiveness of the article. I don't know. I've always thought it to be a decent publication of the latest in science. Even with the article being nonobjective, it doesn't take away from the fact that the test failed. I just think that all the bugs should be rid of before ordering more as that which doesn't work is useless and should be rid of.
Fair enough. You'll have to forgive me if I get a bit defensive of my current profession. :D

why whats your current profession

From his avatar, maybe hes a nuclear scientist... like in the song by Timbuk 3, he has to wear shades when he thinks about his future... because NK are gonna zap us all up in explosions brighter than the sun.

lmao. well from his avatar he must be a bad one since its going off on him.

Fair enough. You'll have to forgive me if I get a bit defensive of my current profession. :D
No problem at all. I like it when people have opposing view it makes things more interesting. :D

There goes another paranoid post.

My post wasn’t paranoid it was based on easily accessible facts, and logical equations of the current Bush policy vis-à-vis North Korea.

So, when is NK going to attack USA? I just think that it is Phucking pathetic that any **COUNTRY** would even think about attacking USA. So, hold on to your fears, NK Is not going to attack any one.

That was the American mentalities prior to 9.11 don’t be sure about American superiority because it doesn’t exist in a globalized world. North Korea doesn’t have anything to lose once the war starts, I don’t think u get it, like a suicide bomber it has only one goal left in its life so it could give less of a shit about whether or not you “believe” the US will never be attacked, chances are it will eventually.

t is very funny it is always arab country which gets their ass kicked when ever North Korea admits of having nukes........lmao. It is hilarious to me. :D

Last time I checked Iran wasn’t an Arab country…so let’s see if the US can “kick” non-arab ass?

Welcome Back Undecided :)

I don’t think u get it, like a suicide bomber it has only one goal left in its life so it could give less of a shit about whether or not you “believe” the US will never be attacked, chances are it will eventually.

hate to say it - but your so right. Sometimes all the security in the world canot stop a lone killer determined to trade his own life for the targets - especialy if its a whole crowd of targets... :(

Last time I checked Iran wasn’t an Arab country… It is an Islamic country though, thats what our dear president worries about.

Jenny I hope the last line is you being sarcastic...
why does being an islamic country make a nation terrorist or threatening.

Jenny I hope the last line is you being sarcastic...
why does being an islamic country make a nation terrorist or threatening.
It doesn't but I think her point was that she sees the Bush agenda as being blatantly anti-Islam. You know, the whole zionist conspiracy claptrap.

Although I don’t believe in a Zionist conspiracy it’s a special interest group as well, and it would rather foolish to ignore their demands on the US gov’t. They provide millions in campaigning funds and they are a very powerful lobbying group, although I don’t believe there is a Zionist conspiracy, there is a Zionist power bloc that resembles that of the oil companies and even the balloon lobbying group…and one of the Zionist lobby’s interests of course is the neutralization of Islamic threats to Israel, real or imagined. I mean honestly why is the US putting sanctions on Syria when Syria doesn’t present a threat to anyone in this world apart from Israel?

"Zionist bloc"? we dont have a jewish super power determind to convert the rest of the world to Judiasm by force!

>> Stokes - thats not quite what I meant, its just the president realy doesnt trust Islamic fundamentlists (not many Americans do)

"Zionist bloc"? we dont have a jewish super power determind to convert the rest of the world to Judiasm by force!

Zionists by definition aren't Jewish, so there's no fear from that. Secondly they aren't doing anything different then oil interests in the US, or drug companies, but instead of profits its aid, and support for Israel.

what are Zionists then? People hooked on the Matrix movies..?

I dont see the problm with wanting non profit aid, or support for Israel.

Zionists are Zionists, nationalists who believe pseudo-science of a jewish race to justify their breaking of a promise to god never to go back, and as a result is a atheist ideology to brink "racial Jews" back to their "homeland".

what are Zionists then? People hooked on the Matrix movies..?
Hahahaha.

Zionists are Zionists, nationalists who believe pseudo-science of a jewish race to justify their breaking of a promise to god never to go back..

so in a way, theyre like the Germans who also believed in a Jewish race - except theyre proud to be that race, not hating it thinking its inferior + needing to be wiped out.

The original Zion - was that supposd to be a real place at one time, or a spiritual city in the next worl for jews?

so in a way, theyre like the Germans who also believed in a Jewish race - except theyre proud to be that race, not hating it thinking its inferior + needing to be wiped out.

Ur right their like the Germans but in a different sense,the Germans believed that they descinded from the Aryan race, like the Jews believe they descended from the Hebrew, when neither have enough to justify that if any. So like the Germans Zionists claim the land theirs because of their pseudo-racial connection. Nazi's supported Zionism by making ppl think Jews are racial, when they are not.

in a perfect world there are no races :)

"That was the American mentalities prior to 9.11 don’t be sure about American superiority because it doesn’t exist in a globalized world. North Korea doesn’t have anything to lose once the war starts, I don’t think u get it, like a suicide bomber it has only one goal left in its life so it could give less of a shit about whether or not you “believe” the US will never be attacked, chances are it will eventually."

Come now unde. You dont honestly believe that NK would attack the U.S. Lets get real here. An ICBM attack on the U.S. would justify a full launch in reprisal. There would be no North Korea or for that matter much of Asia left. If Kim Suck Dong II was getting that trigger happy, I have a funny feeling the Chinese would take care of him.

Crazy is sort of right , no one would ever use nukes as it would lead to total destruction.

Not if the enemy was a little place like NK and only had a few bombs - the US or China could take them out wit out it being a world wide diaster.

um ye... a nuclear explosion spreads in a circular fashion... it dosnt stop at borders, you expect china to nuke somthing so close to its own border? If the US Even launched a nuke the world would flip and point fingers. and I have said this more than once , that radiation spreads through the atmosphere.. all the fallout would spread to alot of countries and cause alot of problems.

If a blast hit NK the south would be unlivable and depending on how big and the wind pattens it could spread as far as Darwin, Australia. Yes the world would point fingers, the question is with the various gov's we have at the moment and the probability that the US would try to cover it up as an acident in NK what would the world DO?

Australia? Prevailing winds across the peninsula originate from the Gobi desert in the west, which would send this alleged fallout plume towards Japan.

Anyway, it would take a huge ass weapon exploded on purpose in a specific way to create that level of contamination. Not likely.

Winds come from anywhere in different seasons, and even a small weapon could easily contaminate the area.

I gues the spread of damage + fallout depens on how BIG the nukes you use are.. about 50 kilo tonns could flaten Pyongyang without much blast reaching into SK, surely. I know realy powerful bombs exist but we dont have to use them when smallr ones will do - and no one would use nukes AT ALL unless there was realy no choice, esp. not China as Odin rightly said.

I gues the spread of damage + fallout depens on how BIG the nukes you use are.. about 50 kilo tonns could flaten Pyongyang without much blast reaching into SK, surely. I know realy powerful bombs exist but we dont have to use them when smallr ones will do - and no one would use nukes AT ALL unless there was realy no choice, esp. not China as Odin rightly said.

How do you feel about the fact that the US has nukes and are willing to use them 'if threatened'?, do you feel that its reasonable to threaten iran with the use of nuclear weaponary, when that is precisely what bush's 'excuse' is? :bugeye:

Jenny there is no nuke that is so small that the fallout wont spread such a tiny distance.


here are contamination levels of the states from nuke testing in them ilitary facilities in nevada and new mexico.
http://www.survivalring.org/fallout%20patterns%20US%20tests.jpg

Chernobyl radioactive material spread across the northern hemosphere:
http://www.hf.faa.gov/Webtraining/Intro/intro_images/in12_Fig2_2007351_3.jpg

OK Odin, Im no nuclear scientist.

I know tho that what hapened at Chernobyl was just a radiaoactive fire, not an explosion. What size of atom bomb would create the same amount of fallout?

It would have to be a damn big one. Hiroshima and Nagasaki produced hardly any fallout that lasted more than a day and Bravo's fallout took years to kill you, if at all. Chernobyl killed you damn fast.

My main concern has always been this. The people who control the nukes of any country, and the ones with the most to lose. If a country with nuclear weapons is going to fail, then there is the risk the guy at the top decides he has nothing left to lose.

I would also not be worrying about retailiation. 2-3 Nukes could cripple any nation. Yes, we could pummel them into the ground afterwords. (and hope China isn't too jumpy when they see the missles heading in thier general direction) But that hardly changes the fact that LA, Chicago, and Houston, have been destroyed. Those 3 citys would be in NK's projected range, and have a combined population nearing 10 million.

It would have to be a damn big one. Hiroshima and Nagasaki produced hardly any fallout that lasted more than a day and Bravo's fallout took years to kill you, if at all. Chernobyl killed you damn fast.

The nagasaki and hiroshima bombs cointaminated those areas for several several years,

And jenny even the smallest nuclear explosions spread hundreds of miles.

If you want to talk about sending a nuke to korea.. they have vast tunnel systems.. and it would take alot to reach them at those depths.


/\ its those sorts of opinions that lead to countries getting nuked, when you forget the facts and the past nukes seem to be a great option dont they?

Those 3 citys would be in NK's projected range, and have a combined population nearing 10 million.

The north koreans are atleast 2 decades behind on making the taepo dong 2 missile in any efficient form in which it wont be shot down.

But that hardly changes the fact that LA, Chicago, and Houston, have been destroyed. Those 3 citys would be in NK's projected range, and have a combined population nearing 10 million.

If they could reach CHicago wit a nuke, they could reach a hellofa lot more citys too.. perhaps theyd prefer to take out Las Vegas, thats a real symble of American capitalism..

they have vast tunnel systems.. and it would take alot to reach them at those depths.

how do we know that? The NK govt. wouldnt boast about their secret hidey holes, would they?

how do we know that? The NK govt. wouldnt boast about their secret hidey holes, would they?

they dont, that information comes from secret reporters and deserters who tell stories about vast underground tunnel systems.

Contamination at Hiroshima and Nagasaki was really only militarily hazardous for 12-18 hours after the blasts. Reconstruction of Hiroshima and Nagasaki began within seven days after the attacks. At that point GZ was habitable 24/7/365.

The weapons used, particularly at Hiroshima, are two of the dirtiest types of bombs ever created (in a yield/ejecta ratio) but they were airbursts. They were exploded high enough in the air that their fireballs did not impinge upon the earth's surface. Therefore, less debris was churned up and coated with fission fragments, leading to a secondary nuclear effect (fallout) that was barely remarkable at all.

Staged, tampered weapons and those which are delivered close to the earth, are all huge producers of fallout.

Hiroshima and nagasaki were extremely contaminated for years to come, visable with all the defects that appeared over time.

Perhaps the fallout was gone in 18 hours but people stil got radiation sicknes + cancers long after that.

Whatever they took up in those 18 hours stuck with them and was actually incorperated into their bones. That has absolutely nothing to with the ground though. A week after zero hour you could roll around on the ground, eat local food, and do whatever you want short of cannibalism and be perfectly fine.

ye but as soon as babys were born the mutations were terrible, not to mention the amount that cancer rates jumped by.

Hiroshima and nagasaki were extremely contaminated for years to come, visable with all the defects that appeared over time.
Er, no. As I said, reconstruction began within seven days after the attack and the city was habitable 24/7 after one week. Contamination on the ground was very slight, and nonexistent once they swept away the heavy metals that had radioactivity induced through neutron activation.

The physical defects of the inhabitants who were exposed to the weapon radiation stem from the instant of detonation, yet showed themselves over time because their symptoms take a long time to manifest themselves. They didn't show up over time because they were incurred over time.

There have been a total of exactly zero cases of generational genetic defects related to radiological contamination. This is because the threshold to cause genetic damage is above the threshold necessary to cause sterility.

Actually very slight contamination is needed to cause genetic defects in future generations. and the threshold for permanent infertility is 3 times that of a double in possible genetic defects. http://www.ag.ohio-state.edu/~rer/rerhtml/rer_24.html

Err Perhaps I'm missing something here but...

Kim seems happy doing his thing in his toy kingdom. If he wants to be left alone he only need hide his nukes in his own cities.
No delivery system required, no great number of nukes needed.
Still want to invade?

"Give me one reason why I shouldn't kill you."
"I'm wired to explode if anybody kills me"

The Secret of Monkey Island. :)
Dee Cee

If he wants to be left alone he only need hide his nukes in his own cities.

You think hes such a maniac he'd rather snuf out his own country than be pushed outta power?

perhaps Sadaam woulve done that if he had nukes..

You think hes such a maniac he'd rather snuf out his own country than be pushed outta power?

Well for forty odd years the USA were prepared to accept total destruction rather than bow to communist rule.......
Besides once you've sited your nukes and told the world about it chances are that nobody would be stupid enough to try and push you out of power anyway.

Dee Cee