If you were North Korea...

And you'd seen countries completely unconnected to AQ invaded and unable to respond due to lack of nuclear capability (Iraq), seen other countries up to their kness in AQ etc but with nukes left completely alone (Pakistan) wouldn't you have arranged a test too?

I know the guy running NK is a bit of a loon, only got the job 'cause of his father (how many countries....?) and it's a destabilising move for the region but surely he's only done this in the face of US threats.

It's been hilarious here listening to US aggression apologists (Bolton etc) trying to explain why NK is so bad and yet Isreal, India and Pakistan are 'different cases'.

Isn't this all the fault of the US and their ongoing crusade to attack countries just to appease rabid minority groups at home?

I don't know that we can necessaryily blame the US for the fact that North Korea has a nuclear weapons program. But, I do think that they're playing a game that they know the US can't win. The really interesting thing will be to see how this all plays out.

I mean, as of today, NK has come out and said that UN imposed sanctions (or anyone else imposed for that matter) will be seen as an act of war. Now how do you react to that?

See I think NK have actually been quite smart and called the US's (and the UN's) bluff. See Bush and Rice etc can talk big, but at the end of the day what can they do? To invade (the extreme response) would only succeed in challenging a country to use weapons that you object to them having.

They've don't seem to have any diplomatic standing on which to negotiate - NK seem quite prepared to stand independent.

And yet, to do nothing would undermine all the big world-police talk that America's been spouting - and you can blame them for that. If they do nothing then that gives the go ahead to any group who wants to start a nuclear program because they know that when push comes to shove, the US will back down.

Quite the dilema.

The United States knows full well that the North Koreas cannot yet attack the United States with Nuclear Weapons. Up until they can Military action is sitting on the table.

they have been testing missiles for a long time and have the capibility to attack the west coast of the united states with nukes if required.

anyhow this is a great deturrent for the united states

Originally posted by doctorfungi
The United States knows full well that the North Koreas cannot yet attack the United States with Nuclear Weapons. Up until they can Military action is sitting on the table.

Really.........................................?

Don't know what planet you're on, but do the rest of us subscribe to your somewhat lopsided views? I don't think so.

By detonating a nuclear device, North Korea has said a very big ' you!' to the US and the UN and has warned that proposed sanctions will be seen as an act of war.

You state that NK is not in a position to attack the US. What or Who gives you such an insight to the psyche of the NK leader?

If NK has The Bomb, what is to stop them giving a nuclear device to one of the thousands of terrorist groups that would like to kick the US off the face on the earth?

Nothing!

The Intelligence services knew all about 9/11 but could do little to stop it from happening and instead, concentrated on saving their pathetic collective asses.

I wouldn't phrase this if you were North Korea.

As I bet the North Korean people would like a meal........... and to live a life comparable to South Koreans.

So if I was in charge of North Korea and still want to accept aid from China since I can't feed my own people, so I can keep a million men in arms. So I can flatten Seoul with my artillery peices in less than a day.......That is deterrent enough, so lets build some nukes.

Nukes will give you some security, but it also raises many other security issues. Now you will have another neighbor Japan that will probably go nuke in the next twenty years.


Sooooo China thank you for supporting a country like North Korea all of these years.

South Korea supported by the US all of these years. Look at the economic powerhouse.

Now if the US did not help in the Korean war the whole Korean peninsula would be just like North Korea.

And if China did not want to support North Korea. Millions of North Koreans would not be dead and we would not be having this conversation.

The US does not have to support NK. That is what NK wants. They want money and goods. That's why the US is trying to get NKs neighbors involved in the negotiaions. It would be extremely difficult to invade NK. They have been preparing for an invasion for over 50 years. But, on the other hand it would be difficult for NK to mount and sustain an attack anywhere outside of their own country. They have no navy or airforce to speak of. They have a well trained and tough army but most of the training has focused on fighting an invading army.

I think that the world needs to decided how to deal with NK, not just the US. NK is the worlds problem, not just the US. If I were the president of the US, I'd withhold any and all aid to NK, and further, I'd let it be known that if you trade with NK that you can no longer trade with the US. That would serve notice to China that they have to deal with the sitation.

Originally posted by bodrul
they have been testing missiles for a long time and have the capibility to attack the west coast of the united states with nukes if required.

anyhow this is a great deturrent for the united states

...their missiles disntegrate not long after they take off....if they had a nuke on board...well, lets just say the only threat is that they may feed the fishes plutonium.

US negotiators and the administration can spin all the big talk they would like, but military option is not only not on the table, but not even near the playing field with respect to a response.

IMO the big picture is being missed here, SK and China who's really been the sole (no pun intended there) bread and butter of the North haven't to this point REALLY put constraints on NK and are probably unlikely to do so anytime in the near future.

Dont be so certain that exactly what NK's agenda is wont be realized. I think their agenda is probably to ensure that they ARE at the negotiating table, but on their own terms. While the US and allies hands are tied from any military response they have positioned themselves to get precisely what they want, and it looks as though they're going to get it.
Even President Bush's (latent) concession that they are now a nuclear armed state (by saying so I'm referring to him saying that if they were to use or export the technology would bring dire consequences upon them), dictates that they certainly are a force to be reckoned with.

Personally, I wouldn't be surprised if we were to see in the not-so-distant future NK with a larger voice at the UN dinner table, and their greater recognition, madman in power or not.


AB1

...if I were in charge of North Korea I would....



...allow the people to have free and fair representation...

...allow people to speak freely without fear of reprisal...

...allow people unrestricted movement throughout the nation...

...eliminate the political detention centers where my people torture, starve, rape, & murder one another...

...cease terrorist activities against my southern neighbor...

...end the forced abortion of children...

...stop testing chemical weapons on my civilians...

...limit arms spending & create grants to poor families...

...implement policies to help get my people out of abject poverty...

...engage in profit based trade to allow the population to reap the benefits...

...and not threaten other countries with armageddon.

As bad as the current American regime is, this guy and his cronies are worse by about a thousand orders of magnitude. And to propose that their cause is just, out of spite for the Bush Administration, is to enable his oppressive policies against his own citizens. How you can support such a vile villian is beyond me.

To suggest that America has brought this on themselves is preposterous. This is a spoiled child with big guns running rampant without parental supervision. You'd take grave offence if I were to suggest that Germany's attempted de-population of London and other British population centers during the Second World War were justified because they were defending themselves from the might of the waning British Empire. And you'd be angry with good reason if I were to suggest that.

Similarly, Americans should be up in arms at your suggestion. You're allowing your hatred of the Bush Regime to blind you from the villiany of this nuclear bully. Supporting him is just as wrong as condoning Bush's policies.

Personally I think that Kim Jong believes that his army/firepower is much greater than it really is.. Just look at how Saddam thought that he had heavy firepower which he really didn't in the end. And Saddam wasn't a looney like Kim Jong is IMO.

I believe this describes in a good way, what I mean about him.

I think Uncle Kim is an egomaniacal buffoon. His missile tests have been embarassing failures for the whole world to see. Then he decides to do a nuke test that experts are now saying seems to have failed. More like a nuclear premature ejaculation than an atomic weapons test. Another major embarassment for the whole world to see. He's clearly not a happy camper at the moment despite his arm waving and bluster.

Even IF the test had been successful NK is a loooong way from translating that test into a practcal, reliable, ballistically deliverable nuclear weapon. And longer still from being able to assemble any meaningful stockpiles. So on the heels of this latest screw-up what does he do? Threaten that he has atomic, nuclear and neutron weapons and the missiles to deliver them to the US mainland. Really? Then why the tests?

Disseminating nuclear technology, materials and weapons to terrorists is a real and frightening prospect. But as unhinged as Uncle Kim sometimes seems to be, even he knows that any launch towards US interests would result in the immediate and utter anhilation of his wine cellar, Elvis memoribilia and DVD collection --- not to mention anything else of substance in NK.

I don't think the Uk is entirely without blame - these days it's difficult to put a cigarette paper between UK and US foreign policy, but this region is clearly outside the UK's sphere of influence so our contribution is usually ' we back what the yanks just said, so there!' I wish it were different but it isn't. This isn't a UK vs US thread.

Without the 'axis of evil' attacks wouldn't NK have just kept its capability to itself? The test was just in response to US threats.

NK is a rogue nation because ... it doesn't listen to the UN, like USA/UK, Israel?

It developed Nuke capability without agreeing to international agreements .... just like Pakistan, India and Israel did?

It might export a bomb / material / tech to someone else .... just like Pakistan and Israel actually did?

The point is not 'isn't NK a wonderful place with great leadership?' - clearly it's neither, the point is The US has lost any moral legal high ground it once had and is now bullying a country into a response then using that response for further bullying.

Originally posted by Strangerous
NK is a rogue nation because ... it doesn't listen to the UN, like USA/UK, Israel?

It developed Nuke capability without agreeing to international agreements .... just like Pakistan, India and Israel did?

Here is where the "disconnect" lies. It's ok my friend, most people aren't aware of it.

I'm sure you know what the Nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty is, most people do. However, there is something that most people, who argue the same point as you, are not aware of.

There are 193 States recognised by the United Nations, and 188 have signed the NNPT. Five states, including Pakistan, India, and Israel, never signed it and are therefore not held to the terms of the treaty. North Korea however, did sign it, but withdrew from it in 2003 when it announced its intent to enrich uranium.

Few things say "Rogue Nation" like a nation, who is bellicose towards its southern neighbor, withdrawing from the NNPT and declaring their intent to create nuclear weapons.

The trouble is,in a conflict with the south/USA North korean soliders would fight to the last man i think.They have been totally brainwashed for 50 years to believe that America wishes to kill them all.
I read about how Japanese families actually killed their own babies in WW2,fearing that the advancing Americans would rape/kill/eat their children.They had this drilled into them by their then crazy rulers.
I think Kim has indoctrinated his people even more,if that is possible.
Also the north have somwhere in the region of 250 000 artillery pieces within range of Seoul.If they all went off,it would have them same kind of effect as nukes in terms of death and destruction.
My number one concern about this situation is this:GWB repeatedly said a nuclear DPRK was unacceptable.Now if this test was a nuke,and GWB decides to go the sanctions route as looks likely,What message does that send to the world?

All those countries worried about US "intervention" will go "hey quick,get some nukes then the US will leave us alone.quick text kimmy jong ask if hell sell us a few!!"

So we now find ourselves in the bizzare situation that GWB could spark the next Nuclear arms race by actaully NOT having another war....Ironic or what?

Originally posted by Strangerous
I know the guy running NK is a bit of a loon, .... but surely he's only done this in the face of US threats.

A 'BIT' of a loon?

Strangerous .. the guy is a total WHACK. He thinks he's God. And he isn't defending his country against 'US threats'. He wants to rule Asia (minus China). He is an meglo-egomaniac.

In the Clinton years we sent him food and money and left the guy alone. We trusted without verification. What did he do? He shifted all the food and money to his military; allowed the NK peasants to starve; and continued on with his nuclear bomb making plans in secret.

Clinton didn't threaten him. Clinton bent over backwards with donations and trust.
Bush ignores him and leaves him to the countries in that area to deal with.

Those policies aren't 'threats' ...

BTW,Theres a lot of interesting video on north korea on youtube.I watched a lot the other night.Even though some would say the footage is biased,its hard to fake the whole feel of the place...there are military type traffic police,doing robotic hand signals on a huge road,with about 2 vehicles on.In the city.Totally surreal and horrible at the same time.
The clips of homeless children in the snow and the story about an escapee from a gulag stick in my head.The escapees crime?It was because his grandfather was a dissident...All relatives,and later generations grow up in the gulag,for the "crime"of the grandfather.INSANE.
In Pyonggang,it always seems foggy-pollution maybe?Also theres a dust all over everything-it almost looks as though the occupants of the city left a 30 years ago.I presume this is because there is no street cleaning workers.
I dont know if i should say this but,if ever there was a country who needs outside help to rid them of thier evil rulers-DPRK is it.But how?The entire population love,and would happily die for their dear leader.Kim has total control over the minds and bodies of all in north korea.
Women recently died at the train station explosion in DPRK,burned to death after running into the flaming buildings to recover pictures of the dear leader.That is mind control.How sick.
Oh and Kims bodygaurds/special forces look pretty damned hard to me.I know their weapons are out dated,but those guys are dangerous.See this link:

www.youtube.com...

Check out the look of glee on kims face as he watches one of his monsters take a pummeling.LOCO

Originally posted by Reality Hurts

Here is where the "disconnect" lies. It's ok my friend, most people aren't aware of it.

I'm sure you know what the Nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty is, most people do. However, there is something that most people, who argue the same point as you, are not aware of.

There are 193 States recognised by the United Nations, and 188 have signed the NNPT. Five states, including Pakistan, India, and Israel, never signed it and are therefore not held to the terms of the treaty. North Korea however, did sign it, but withdrew from it in 2003 when it announced its intent to enrich uranium.

Few things say "Rogue Nation" like a nation, who is bellicose towards its southern neighbor, withdrawing from the NNPT and declaring their intent to create nuclear weapons.

Actually I'm well aware of it thanks. You see a moral/ethical difference between never signing the treaty and signing it, announcing your withdrawl and then breaching the terms? - I'm sorry I see no difference.

When this difference is used for justification of friendly relations/aid on the one hand and sanctions/possible military action on the other then I really think the plot/argument has been lost.

As I said a nuclear NK is clearly far from ideal but then so is nuclear Isreal, Pakistan or India - why not sanctions for all?

[edit on 12/10/2006 by Strangerous]