It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

USA goes decline

page: 1
0

log in

join
share:

posted on Oct, 3 2006 @ 08:12 AM
link   
This is a sign, a huge sign:
I just heard news from CCTV report, that say North Korea will test nuke in later days.
What does this mean? I feel out immediately, this means US has no ability to stop rest two of evil axes obtain nuke, at least one of them.
I warned in this forum before, if US do not show its jingoist to Iran which means if Iran do not give up nuclear inrichment completely, he would have to face a destructive war, then North Korea wiould got a wrongly sign that revealed US wouldn't treat the nuke difusing seriously.
At that time, I think this will happen in next year, but now we already have to face it!
This is an extreme mistake! The global secrurity are going to broken down if such ruffian regime as Tehran and Pyongyang get nuke weapon. This also means the war against terrorist has gone lost, if though Sadarm had been overthrowed but reat two win this war by help from Moskva and Beijing. There is no doubt, three war we winning only one but losing two means we lost. Or we could say going to lost...

Here is a countermeasure:
Washington should unveil its tough and unyielding line against Tehran clearly at once. The US force do have capability to win two large war in different place, at least have strong confidence for this, and are going to use it if Washington need it.
For North Korea aspect, we must tell zhongnanhai clearly enough, if North Korea obtain nuke, anything will happen in Taiwan even let Taiwan get nuke possibly, Japan also would have nuke before Taiwan for sure.
For Moskva, they have already take trouble out of Tbilis, if they do not wanna take humiliation, they wouldn't be a troublemaker on Iran nuclear crisis.

I admit this thread may not be suit for this board, but for emergent event like this, please allow me to say, I also obtest mod would move this to any board that adapt this topic. thanks in advance.


[edit on 3-10-2006 by emile]




posted on Oct, 3 2006 @ 08:25 AM
link   
i have no doubt the US has the ablity to fight 2 large wars at once, but i do question whether america can now 'afford' to fight 2 large wars at once finanically, aswell it costs keeping troops in alfganistan & iraq, its not only that but public support, its a lose/lose situation i'm afraid.

korea & iran have got vietnam all over them, if they want nuclear weapons you can't stop them (well korea you can't) as it seems they have them already...ive always said korea is going to be the start of WW3 (if it happens)..japan have more or less said already they are going to attack if north korea goes ahead with a nuclear weapon test, where does that leave neibouring china?

i do agree with these nations to be honest, the way america is acting on a global scale after 9/11 is madness (not only in a military sence) but security and attitude/respect to other countrys in general, nations like those above are bound to feel threated and wanting methods to protect themselfs, therefore the only opinion after a nuclear attack on your country is a nuclear weapon of your own.

*long live the cockroaches*


[edit on 3-10-2006 by st3ve_o]



posted on Oct, 3 2006 @ 09:06 AM
link   
So let evil getting nuke is not stupid



posted on Oct, 3 2006 @ 09:17 AM
link   
the thing is though mate, who are 'WE' to say who is evil and who is not


i'm sure many americans have questioned things about their own government, you yourself probably do or you wouldn't be on these 'conspiracy' message boards...i certainly do question things about the british government and wonder if they are as straight as they appear to be


[edit on 3-10-2006 by st3ve_o]



posted on Oct, 3 2006 @ 09:33 AM
link   
the US have to stop NK from getting nukes at ALL cost!
you know what happen if NK gets nukes? It will sell them to other thirdworld nations, and may be even to middle east countries. as a possible out come, the US may allow its allies to have nukes too, and this will pretty much run out of control!

US must stop NK. I think it's very important to have china and russia supporting us in this case, especially china, since NK admires and listens mostly to china.

emile
US can't threaten china in case, that will only make the situation worse, we have to please them and russia in order to have them on the US side

and as for NK, we have to both please and threaten it.

[edit on 10/3/2006 by warset]



posted on Oct, 3 2006 @ 11:46 AM
link   
Actually I hope North Korea tests a nuclear weapon. With the new Japanese PM wanting a bigger and more capable military as well as closer ties with Washington and a revision of the constitution a nuclear test would be helpful in speeding that up (think what a stronger Japan means for the PACRIM area). With a questionable South Korean president who is facing strong opposition for his plans to distance SK from the US military, a nuclear test would be key in making that opposition much stronger. Countries who oppose the US on dealing with NK will also have their hand weakened substantially, there will be clear evidence of North Korea having nuclear capability and the will to use it. So, nuclear test? By all means.



posted on Oct, 3 2006 @ 02:11 PM
link   

Originally posted by WestPoint23
Actually I hope North Korea tests a nuclear weapon. With the new Japanese PM wanting a bigger and more capable military as well as closer ties with Washington and a revision of the constitution a nuclear test would be helpful in speeding that up (think what a stronger Japan means for the PACRIM area). With a questionable South Korean president who is facing strong opposition for his plans to distance SK from the US military, a nuclear test would be key in making that opposition much stronger. Countries who oppose the US on dealing with NK will also have their hand weakened substantially, there will be clear evidence of North Korea having nuclear capability and the will to use it. So, nuclear test? By all means.


You are mad. You truly are. No question about it. No surprise, though.

My take on this is that its big talk yet again by NK. Somebody, preferably China, really has to start cracking down on NK because I am getting real tired of their constant sabre-rattling.

What I want to know is what is keeping North Korea from destabilizing. Is Kim Kong Il really that powerful? My initial guess was no due to his reliance on the Korean People's Army, but apparently my guess is mistaken.



posted on Oct, 3 2006 @ 06:07 PM
link   
Sabre rattling?
I thought this was the first time KOREA publically declared they will conduct a nuclear test?

And this will change the political stance of the western world.

anyone who bascially wants nukes.. can go and research them..

because the west doesnt have the stomach to face a problem that isnt current.

North Korea wont launch an attack if htey successfully gain a nuke.
It just gives them the gaurantee that if anyone TRIES anything with them... it'll either be do or die.. no minor skirmishes.
Nkorea ust shows the curroption inside the USA.

We were prepared to send 150,000 + troops into a possible chemical/biological/nuclear war with Iraq simply to remove these weapons from a man who never threatend us with them...

yet, a country that is very hostile and unpredictable can declare there aims, accomplish them, and publically ridicule the US over them.. without facing any action.

Its obvious the US picks and chooses whom to have issue with, especially when post-conflict can result in large amounts of spoils of war for the US.



posted on Oct, 3 2006 @ 07:45 PM
link   
seeing as the only way a soverign nation can keep the united states and co out their backyard dictating to them what they can and what they cant do is by having a weapon capible of such mass distruction as a deturrent.

unless of course they want to be liberated by the yanks sorry ment americans
and become a country run by a puppet or a poodle


bravo another nuclear armed nation run by a moron (like we need more)



posted on Oct, 3 2006 @ 07:52 PM
link   
Well, with all due respect if 9/11 never took place, I do not believe Bush would've been able to buy over the average dumbass living in BFE rural country USA to back the war in Iraq. All cities vote Democratic or left, its only counties and other things below a city in size that vote Republican or right consistently, at least in my state of Virginia.

I've seen the map of the 2004 results, county by county and city by city. As we all can figure out why, all the CITIES were blue, all the high population in close area density places were blue, the rest was red.

If the terrorists didnt attack on 9/11, the US people would have a harder tme putting things together and thinking "gee, saddam will gives these chemicals or biologicals to terrorists now to attack us in our cities" , which is what they thought that pushed them to back the war. The population wouldve been much more against it than they were, it wouldnt have happened.

Which is funny, because the terrorists do say Bush being president is a good thing because they think he is stupid and easily led on, i think they said in that one vid on CNN years ago..

[edit on 3-10-2006 by runetang]



posted on Oct, 3 2006 @ 08:02 PM
link   
as for North Korea, i fear them more than Iran.

not as an American but as a Human Being.

because Iran isn't as foolish/crazy as North Korea, at least in regards to their major highest authority or leaders. N. Korean leader is nuts! I mean, the Iranian 'President' is just a puppet for the highest Islamic Clerics, and the Supreme one. N. Korea needs no religous authority to decide on such matters, and theres definantly no morality in that.

plus, if you add in the fact that North Korea pretty much has this COMPLEX as a society or nation thinking that they are going to be nuked off the map on any given day; its really quite silly yet shocking to me. How could these people be so scared, and if its just because thats what they're fed then why is the major leadership so afraid. If they arent afraid and are just acting like it, they must have a goal. Surely they will NEVER be able to take on the USA 1 vs 1 in any style of war, conventional skirmish or nuclear, so why try to instigate your own destruction, soto speak.

If its not that it has to be a real true fear, which is unfounded IMO because the Japanese arent acting that way and we dropped atomic bombs on them. We havent used technology like it ever since, so what makes them think the US will decide one day out of the blue to remove their country from existance, not even considering the fact that the fallout allone would kill most of our allies in South Korea, and start a global nuclear war that would destroy the human race.

None of it makes any sense to me at all. Surely i am not smarter. Perhaps we really are doomed..

[edit on 3-10-2006 by runetang]



posted on Oct, 3 2006 @ 08:04 PM
link   

Originally posted by runetang

Which is funny, because the terrorists do say Bush being president is a good thing because they think he is stupid and easily led on, i think they said in that one vid on CNN years ago..

[edit on 3-10-2006 by runetang]


Well, they are correct.
He's a dumba55

But if i were them, id be more worried about the man who's duping him from within.


In todays political arena.. GW bush is merely a figure piece. How can a man who can barely structure a sentance lead the world in debate on issue of the upper most importance?

The world does not need to fear bush, the world needs to fear the US Administration.



posted on Oct, 3 2006 @ 08:14 PM
link   
on an optimistic note, maybe the EU will lead the way in economic reform and standard of living in the future. Maybe the left wing bloq recently formed in the Central/South Americas will help itself while gaining ties with the EU and increasing their standard of living and connection to the world market and politics. Maybe Russia will remain peaceful, or become more peaceful I should say, and slowly 'liberalize' itself over time, to a point where it becomes part of the EU.

after the amount of years it would take for all that to happen, much to the disgust of the right-wingers, the USA will either have to 'liberalize', or as id put it 'socialize' itself with better policies for it's people as well as foreign policies to be able to remain the "world superpower". It will no longer be the only one no matter what it does, and will find itself in an increasingly hostile world. If the US becomes progressively more leftward leaning in global politics and internal politics, it'll draw the approval of the EU as well as this young South/Central Americas bloq, as well as everyone else for that matter. In other words, if America continues to cowboy gun it, it will not last.

I think that adaptation, when it occurs over time, will allow all of these world bodies to connect as 1 body. Global Socialism .. its the only solution to Humanity.



posted on Oct, 3 2006 @ 08:14 PM
link   
I think South Korea, China, and Russia and Japan need to deal with North Korea. It is in their back yard, and of course everyone wants the US out of things, but there are some who always want the US involved (like North Korea itself). The only true responses you will get out of Russia and China and Japan is if Kimmy fires a rocket and it hits one of their cities.



posted on Oct, 3 2006 @ 08:20 PM
link   
Isnt that the ideal thing tho?
So what if they HAVE them..

as long as they dont ever USE them on a city there's no need to do anything.

If Kim gets them.. big deal.. the baby finally got a hold of his rattle..

If he walks around hitting people with it.. then we are justified to hit back.



posted on Oct, 3 2006 @ 10:06 PM
link   
Definately a tricky situation, it will be interesting to watch it develop.

Nuclear weapons aren't exactly some magic bullet, because if they are ever used, the retaliation is final.

Having them means your country is in iminately more danger when the war starts, not less. I'm sure the Pakistani and Indian people were sleeping peacefully when their countries nearly went to war a few years ago, the possibility of nuclear destruction in both countries surely made their people feel better, right?

Mankind has a long history of war, it is a good bet it has a long future as well. Nuclear weapons simply raise the stakes for the innocent, who are usually the first to die in war.



posted on Oct, 3 2006 @ 10:16 PM
link   
In truth, this situation with North Korea and their claiming they will do something, such as test a nuke--something they have claimed before they would do and did not--amounts to more "cries for help."

North Korea is steadily sinking lower and lower into the Kim pit of hell, which amounts to more North Korean dying of hungers, experimentations, etc. Furthermore, Kim is slowly losing favor with the Chinese....

[edit on 3-10-2006 by Seekerof]



posted on Oct, 3 2006 @ 10:53 PM
link   
We didn't sleep peacefully darksided..
We were really scared..and still are..
The nuclear framework in the subcontinent to prevent accidental launch/retaliation etc etc is not at all sound. And here the exchange duration is a few minutes.
The only reason why India didn't go into Pakistan occupied Kashmir Israel/Lebanon - style in 1999 and 2002 was because of the fear of nuclear retaliation. The plans were there, the overwhelming conventional edge was there, the spec ops teams slated to take out those terror camps were on operational readiness. India could have been in and out of PoK in under 48 hours.
But Pakistan (we presume) would not have sit tight. If they perceived that they wouldn't be able to win in Kashmir they would have opened fronts in south to force a balance.
And before you know it would've been full-fledged war. Going from a full-fledged war to nuclear weapons release is very easy, especially when Pakistan would not have been able to sustain the war machine for over a week(no oil reserves, no cash reserves etc etc)..

Nuclear weapons aren't metaphors to peace/war. They're the end.



posted on Oct, 3 2006 @ 11:00 PM
link   
Just like last time, if they launch it will probably be towards a Russian test range, or shot down by a Phalanx, or some prototype UCAV. My best guess.



posted on Oct, 3 2006 @ 11:49 PM
link   

Originally posted by ADVISOR
Just like last time, if they launch it will probably be towards a Russian test range, or shot down by a Phalanx, or some prototype UCAV. My best guess.



I don't think there have been many (if any?) nuclear tests in which the wholse system: missile + warhead detonation has been tested at one go.. too many things could go wrong in such cases especially with long range missiles.
N-tests are mostly separately carried out and nowadays underground. The last surface detonation was by China way back in the late seventies?



new topics

top topics



 
0

log in

join