CIA: North Korea Could Make 50 Nuclear Bombs a Year

page: 1
0

log in

join

posted on Nov, 22 2002 @ 09:30 PM
link   
[font=Tahoma]50 bombs a year? That would be a lot of nukes for little ol' N. Korea to need a against her southern neighbor and blood kin![/font]

www.newsmax.com...

[Edited on 23-11-2002 by Thomas Crowne]

[Edited on 23-11-2002 by Thomas Crowne]




posted on Nov, 22 2002 @ 09:32 PM
link   
Yes but do they have oil nope were not interested.
We need to be more firm and fair on our foriegn policy.



posted on Nov, 23 2002 @ 03:25 AM
link   
It's a terribly vague article, Thomas, and you do appear to have missed out the word "eventually" when you used the opening line as the topic-title.
We see it could be "several", it could be "two or more", it could be "six years" ahead.
It does make the Dems and Clinton look rather silly in 1994 when the PRK reactor-issue was broached.
Other than that, I can't see why it was printed.
It doesn't really do much for the current administration. Although America had no choice but to posture and prevaricate when Pyongyang coolly announced it had nuclear capability: (unlike - to pick a name at random - Saddam Hussein who continually announces the opposite), the USA was diplomatically outmanoeuvred there and was left with no little egg on its face.
I'll be interested to see if this "story" is folowed up, at all.



posted on Nov, 23 2002 @ 03:27 AM
link   
the N.K.'s do have some oil -that nice Mr Clinton gave them lots to ensure that they wouldn't produce weapons-grade plutonium.



posted on Nov, 23 2002 @ 06:16 AM
link   

Originally posted by Thomas Crowne
[font=Tahoma]50 bombs a year? That would be a lot of nukes for little ol' N. Korea to need a against her southern neighbor and blood kin![/font]

www.newsmax.com...
Crowne]


Does that still mean your willing to trade your super dooper mini car collection for my nuke pills??



posted on Nov, 23 2002 @ 08:36 AM
link   
This is the sort of CIA propaganda we have become used to.It really is rubbish and the annoying thing is there are important issues with North Korea's nuclear ambitions But articles like this are no better than the exagerated claims made by tabloid newspapers and this from a govermental organisation.The claim by the"British" that Iraq could have nuclear missiles within a year is a similar vein.

Speaking for myself.It simply leads me to be sceptical about anything that the security services tell the public.Which ultimately could be dangerous as when finally something that is really important is told to us it will be dismissed.
CIA remember the story of the boy that cried wolf!



posted on Nov, 23 2002 @ 08:38 AM
link   
Not until I'm sure N.K. has a reason to strike Alabama and the delivery system with which to do it.

Sensationalism, Estragon, Sensationalism. If Bryant Gumble can claim to have a smoking gun at Roswell, I can be a little omissive (is that a word?) in the header.



posted on Nov, 25 2002 @ 09:10 PM
link   
how many nukes does china have and how many can they produce



posted on Nov, 26 2002 @ 05:07 AM
link   
sod that, how many nukes does america have and how many can she produce?

- qo.



posted on Nov, 26 2002 @ 05:33 AM
link   

Originally posted by f16falcon
how many nukes does china have and how many can they produce


+/- 450 warheads.





new topics
 
0

log in

join