|
On April 13 2013 03:34 Zandar wrote:Show nested quote +On April 13 2013 00:17 FromShouri wrote:
I keep coming back to this thread thinking there are news updates and instead its just people pissing about communism and bull shit that has nothing to do with the fact that NK has gone completely silent and stopped issuing threats...which could mean 1 of 2 things:
They're backing down....
or
They're getting ready to attack.
Aye, because it's all in 1 thread now I can imagine it's easier for moderating. But for readers who want to click it when there is real news, it's a bit annoying. It pops up all the time on top of general, when there is no news but just discussion. I found it easier when people just made a new thread when something happened.
OP has done decent job updating recent (BIG) turn of events to OP, but you are right. At least i've reported some posts when it comes to completely off-topic and mods have been doing their work. I don't know whats their stance on where they draw the line as far as off-topic goes though.
If you really wan't to follow what is happening news by news without going trough all the discussion, i suggest to check out Yonhap's news coverage. Pretty much most of the news that is being posted here are from there or has been covered by Yonhap.
http://english.yonhapnews.co.kr/northkorea/0400000001.html
|
Thanks  Will do.
I still like to visit these threads on TL too though, the discussion is sometimes great.
It's just that in a giant thread like this, the discussion is often not about the OP update.
While with a new thread per newsitem, at least the first pages are usually about the OP and the thread won't be on top of general all the time.
|
On April 13 2013 03:24 DonKey_ wrote:Alot of this is extremely sensational given that so much of what they have included either a. doesn't work or b. is obsolete by modern warfare standards. ( like all the fixed AA guns trying to shoot down supersonic jets that fly at altitudes that are not even visible to them.) The NK air force in particular is in a very sorry state. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/North_korean_airforce
i agree, but it was a very interesting read nevertheless. Does anyone know where I can find more pages like this with picture/info on different country millitaries? I wanan see something like this about the US military
|
United States44287 Posts
On April 13 2013 04:09 BlueRoyaL wrote:Show nested quote +On April 13 2013 03:24 DonKey_ wrote:Alot of this is extremely sensational given that so much of what they have included either a. doesn't work or b. is obsolete by modern warfare standards. ( like all the fixed AA guns trying to shoot down supersonic jets that fly at altitudes that are not even visible to them.) The NK air force in particular is in a very sorry state. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/North_korean_airforce i agree, but it was a very interesting read nevertheless. Does anyone know where I can find more pages like this with picture/info on different country millitaries? I wanan see something like this about the US military
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/US_Army
|
On April 13 2013 04:10 KwarK wrote:Show nested quote +On April 13 2013 04:09 BlueRoyaL wrote:On April 13 2013 03:24 DonKey_ wrote:Alot of this is extremely sensational given that so much of what they have included either a. doesn't work or b. is obsolete by modern warfare standards. ( like all the fixed AA guns trying to shoot down supersonic jets that fly at altitudes that are not even visible to them.) The NK air force in particular is in a very sorry state. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/North_korean_airforce i agree, but it was a very interesting read nevertheless. Does anyone know where I can find more pages like this with picture/info on different country millitaries? I wanan see something like this about the US military http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/US_Army
While this is the most obvious answer there could be, i would suggest to check out Militaryphotos.net's forum. (http://www.militaryphotos.net/forums/forum.php)
For example, by googling "North-Korea militaryphotos.net" gives you this:
http://www.militaryphotos.net/forums/showthread.php?128528-Bluffer-s-guide-Fortress-North-Korea
And search in the website works just as well, and i've seen most of the known countries having their own "military thread" with pictures etc.
|
On April 13 2013 05:18 Grettin wrote:Show nested quote +On April 13 2013 04:10 KwarK wrote:On April 13 2013 04:09 BlueRoyaL wrote:On April 13 2013 03:24 DonKey_ wrote:Alot of this is extremely sensational given that so much of what they have included either a. doesn't work or b. is obsolete by modern warfare standards. ( like all the fixed AA guns trying to shoot down supersonic jets that fly at altitudes that are not even visible to them.) The NK air force in particular is in a very sorry state. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/North_korean_airforce i agree, but it was a very interesting read nevertheless. Does anyone know where I can find more pages like this with picture/info on different country millitaries? I wanan see something like this about the US military http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/US_Army While this is the most obvious answer there could be, i would suggest to check out Militaryphotos.net's forum. (http://www.militaryphotos.net/forums/forum.php) For example, by googling "North-Korea militaryphotos.net" gives you this: http://www.militaryphotos.net/forums/showthread.php?128528-Bluffer-s-guide-Fortress-North-KoreaAnd search in the website works just as well, and i've seen most of the known countries having their own "military thread" with pictures etc.
i read that thread long ago, its amazing what a internet forumer could do with google.
|
On April 13 2013 05:31 jinorazi wrote:Show nested quote +On April 13 2013 05:18 Grettin wrote:On April 13 2013 04:10 KwarK wrote:On April 13 2013 04:09 BlueRoyaL wrote:On April 13 2013 03:24 DonKey_ wrote:Alot of this is extremely sensational given that so much of what they have included either a. doesn't work or b. is obsolete by modern warfare standards. ( like all the fixed AA guns trying to shoot down supersonic jets that fly at altitudes that are not even visible to them.) The NK air force in particular is in a very sorry state. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/North_korean_airforce i agree, but it was a very interesting read nevertheless. Does anyone know where I can find more pages like this with picture/info on different country millitaries? I wanan see something like this about the US military http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/US_Army While this is the most obvious answer there could be, i would suggest to check out Militaryphotos.net's forum. (http://www.militaryphotos.net/forums/forum.php) For example, by googling "North-Korea militaryphotos.net" gives you this: http://www.militaryphotos.net/forums/showthread.php?128528-Bluffer-s-guide-Fortress-North-KoreaAnd search in the website works just as well, and i've seen most of the known countries having their own "military thread" with pictures etc. i read that thread long ago, its amazing what a internet forumer could do with google.
Definitely and thats not "all" the site has to offer. There are lots of threads that are just specified to showcase X country's military, which are amazing just as well.
|
On April 13 2013 00:09 anGe wrote:Show nested quote +On April 12 2013 23:33 aksfjh wrote:On April 12 2013 22:49 anGe wrote:
I would assume a nuclear nuke would have a huge radioactive track. But again I'm not an expert. It's not like you can point a sensor at it and take the radioactivity measurements from a distance. The rockets are propelled by "normal" rocket propellent, and just about the only thing you can tell with them is the area they're going to land in (which gets narrower the longer the launch goes on) and maximum payload. Do you have proof of that? It's not against you I'm just wondering. Because I would think a nuclear nuke has a huge radioactivity signature that modern radars can detect.
Well, off the top of my head, you'd have to detect the distinct radioactive energy signature of the uranium or plutonium that's being used in the nuke. Most of the ways you do this involve high energy photons (in forms of X-rays) that you fire through the material and examine on the other side. High energy radiation has the drawback of having an incredibly short range, so most detection methods are sub-100m, or even sub-10m.
A quick Google search yielded this PDF, which talks about developing a system that can detect nuclear material at a "long range of about 1 km." When talking about shooting down a missile, the choice to do so has to come much sooner than anything close to 1 km away.
The best way I can think of determining whether the payload of a missile is nuclear or not has to deal with examining balance of forces, related to thrust, weight, and weight distribution. There's no surefire way to do this, since design can always be modified to hide or obfuscate the contents in some way. In other words, they could literally fire a missile full of scrap and make it look nuclear if they really wanted to.
|
On April 13 2013 12:52 aksfjh wrote:Show nested quote +On April 13 2013 00:09 anGe wrote:On April 12 2013 23:33 aksfjh wrote:On April 12 2013 22:49 anGe wrote:
I would assume a nuclear nuke would have a huge radioactive track. But again I'm not an expert. It's not like you can point a sensor at it and take the radioactivity measurements from a distance. The rockets are propelled by "normal" rocket propellent, and just about the only thing you can tell with them is the area they're going to land in (which gets narrower the longer the launch goes on) and maximum payload. Do you have proof of that? It's not against you I'm just wondering. Because I would think a nuclear nuke has a huge radioactivity signature that modern radars can detect. Well, off the top of my head, you'd have to detect the distinct radioactive energy signature of the uranium or plutonium that's being used in the nuke. Most of the ways you do this involve high energy photons (in forms of X-rays) that you fire through the material and examine on the other side. High energy radiation has the drawback of having an incredibly short range, so most detection methods are sub-100m, or even sub-10m. A quick Google search yielded this PDF, which talks about developing a system that can detect nuclear material at a "long range of about 1 km." When talking about shooting down a missile, the choice to do so has to come much sooner than anything close to 1 km away. The best way I can think of determining whether the payload of a missile is nuclear or not has to deal with examining balance of forces, related to thrust, weight, and weight distribution. There's no surefire way to do this, since design can always be modified to hide or obfuscate the contents in some way. In other words, they could literally fire a missile full of scrap and make it look nuclear if they really wanted to.
Does it really matter if they can detect it being nuclear or not? They will still shoot anything down that has a trajectory heading into Japan or S. Korea. Obviously they would want to shoot it down as early as possible either way.
|
On April 13 2013 03:51 Grettin wrote:Show nested quote +On April 13 2013 03:34 Zandar wrote:On April 13 2013 00:17 FromShouri wrote:
I keep coming back to this thread thinking there are news updates and instead its just people pissing about communism and bull shit that has nothing to do with the fact that NK has gone completely silent and stopped issuing threats...which could mean 1 of 2 things:
They're backing down....
or
They're getting ready to attack.
Aye, because it's all in 1 thread now I can imagine it's easier for moderating. But for readers who want to click it when there is real news, it's a bit annoying. It pops up all the time on top of general, when there is no news but just discussion. I found it easier when people just made a new thread when something happened. OP has done decent job updating recent (BIG) turn of events to OP, but you are right. At least i've reported some posts when it comes to completely off-topic and mods have been doing their work. I don't know whats their stance on where they draw the line as far as off-topic goes though. If you really wan't to follow what is happening news by news without going trough all the discussion, i suggest to check out Yonhap's news coverage. Pretty much most of the news that is being posted here are from there or has been covered by Yonhap. http://english.yonhapnews.co.kr/northkorea/0400000001.html
I've been trying to avoid updating the OP with every single story about NK that pops up on the internet. There's usually several new articles about NK every day, but most of them don't seem to offer anything substantial. If yall would prefer, I could start uploading everything that gets posted by news agencies, but I've tried to keep the focus on their ballistic and nuclear weapons programs and their threats to use them.
|
On April 13 2013 15:21 tokicheese wrote:Show nested quote +On April 13 2013 12:52 aksfjh wrote:On April 13 2013 00:09 anGe wrote:On April 12 2013 23:33 aksfjh wrote:On April 12 2013 22:49 anGe wrote:
I would assume a nuclear nuke would have a huge radioactive track. But again I'm not an expert. It's not like you can point a sensor at it and take the radioactivity measurements from a distance. The rockets are propelled by "normal" rocket propellent, and just about the only thing you can tell with them is the area they're going to land in (which gets narrower the longer the launch goes on) and maximum payload. Do you have proof of that? It's not against you I'm just wondering. Because I would think a nuclear nuke has a huge radioactivity signature that modern radars can detect. Well, off the top of my head, you'd have to detect the distinct radioactive energy signature of the uranium or plutonium that's being used in the nuke. Most of the ways you do this involve high energy photons (in forms of X-rays) that you fire through the material and examine on the other side. High energy radiation has the drawback of having an incredibly short range, so most detection methods are sub-100m, or even sub-10m. A quick Google search yielded this PDF, which talks about developing a system that can detect nuclear material at a "long range of about 1 km." When talking about shooting down a missile, the choice to do so has to come much sooner than anything close to 1 km away. The best way I can think of determining whether the payload of a missile is nuclear or not has to deal with examining balance of forces, related to thrust, weight, and weight distribution. There's no surefire way to do this, since design can always be modified to hide or obfuscate the contents in some way. In other words, they could literally fire a missile full of scrap and make it look nuclear if they really wanted to. Does it really matter if they can detect it being nuclear or not? They will still shoot anything down that has a trajectory heading into Japan or S. Korea. Obviously they would want to shoot it down as early as possible either way.
I was just answering a curious question. Japan has threatened to shoot down any missile going in their general direction, and Korea and the U.S. seem just as willing.
|
|
|
U.S., China agree on North Korea denuclearization push
Reuters) - The United States and China agreed on Saturday to make a joint effort to push for the peaceful denuclearization of the Korean peninsula, following weeks of bellicose rhetoric from North Korea and rising tensions in northeast Asia.
U.S. Secretary of State John Kerry met China's top leaders in a bid to persuade them to exert pressure on North Korea, whose main diplomatic supporter is Beijing, to scale back its belligerence and, eventually, return to nuclear talks.
Before travelling to Beijing for the first time as secretary of state, Kerry had made no secret of his desire to see China take a more active stance towards North Korea, which in recent weeks has threatened nuclear war against the United States and South Korea.
Kerry and China's top diplomat, State Councillor Yang Jiechi, said both countries supported the goal of denuclearizing the Korean peninsula.
"We are able, the United States and China, to underscore our joint commitment to the denuclearization of the Korean peninsula in a peaceful manner," Kerry told reporters, standing next to Yang at a state guesthouse in western Beijing.
But North Korea has repeatedly said it will not abandon nuclear weapons which it described on Friday as its "treasured" guarantor of security.
Yang said China's stance on maintaining peace and stability on the peninsula was clear and consistent.
"We maintain that the issue should be handled and resolved peacefully through dialogue and consultation. To properly address the Korea nuclear issue serves the common interests of all parties. It is also the shared responsibility of all parties," he said, speaking through an interpreter.
"China will work with other relevant parties, including the United States, to play a constructive role in promoting the six-party talks and balanced implementation of the goals set out in the September 19 joint statement of 2005."
Reuters
|
Pandemona
Charlie Sheens House51493 Posts
Well, now its about to start.
North Korea will be launching within a week i would say. Back them into a corner, and they will fire. South Korea better prepare! China is involved!
|
Is there a way to find the original statement? This seems to be much closer to the US position than China's, despite mentioning talks and 'the shared responsibility of all parties'.
I understand that China had supported the denuclearization of North Korea, but it still seems strange to repeat it just when your ally is threatening to start a nuclear war.
|
On April 14 2013 03:55 hypercube wrote:
Is there a way to find the original statement? This seems to be much closer to the US position than China's, despite mentioning talks and 'the shared responsibility of all parties'.
I understand that China had supported the denuclearization of North Korea, but it still seems strange to repeat it just when your ally is threatening to start a nuclear war.
China won't support NK in a war.
Sure NK is allied to China, but China has no interest in it. At all.
It would make China hated by the rest of the world and involve them in a very costly war (both in ressources and human casualties). Also while China doesn't have the most friendly government, its not a mad one like NK.
However, if there is an open war against NK, I have a feeling China would rush in to desarm/occupy NK as quickly as possible (probably with not much consideration for collateral) instead of letting the US create another pawn in the region. Not mentioning its even easier for them, they have the money, the strength and they are just next to NK.
|
Many of your forget that if NK is gone, America no longer has a legitimate excuse to keep so much equipment and personnel in the region. Without NK rattling the cages every few years, there is international pressure for the U.S. to move all that stuff away from China.
|
On April 14 2013 04:23 aksfjh wrote:
Many of your forget that if NK is gone, America no longer has a legitimate excuse to keep so much equipment and personnel in the region. Without NK rattling the cages every few years, there is international pressure for the U.S. to move all that stuff away from China.
One more reason for China to snipe NK in case of a war. Which anyway is far from certain anyway despite the threats (I really doubt it will come to it yet)
|
On April 14 2013 01:38 Grettin wrote:U.S., China agree on North Korea denuclearization push+ Show Spoiler +Reuters) - The United States and China agreed on Saturday to make a joint effort to push for the peaceful denuclearization of the Korean peninsula, following weeks of bellicose rhetoric from North Korea and rising tensions in northeast Asia.
U.S. Secretary of State John Kerry met China's top leaders in a bid to persuade them to exert pressure on North Korea, whose main diplomatic supporter is Beijing, to scale back its belligerence and, eventually, return to nuclear talks.
Before travelling to Beijing for the first time as secretary of state, Kerry had made no secret of his desire to see China take a more active stance towards North Korea, which in recent weeks has threatened nuclear war against the United States and South Korea.
Kerry and China's top diplomat, State Councillor Yang Jiechi, said both countries supported the goal of denuclearizing the Korean peninsula.
"We are able, the United States and China, to underscore our joint commitment to the denuclearization of the Korean peninsula in a peaceful manner," Kerry told reporters, standing next to Yang at a state guesthouse in western Beijing.
But North Korea has repeatedly said it will not abandon nuclear weapons which it described on Friday as its "treasured" guarantor of security.
Yang said China's stance on maintaining peace and stability on the peninsula was clear and consistent.
"We maintain that the issue should be handled and resolved peacefully through dialogue and consultation. To properly address the Korea nuclear issue serves the common interests of all parties. It is also the shared responsibility of all parties," he said, speaking through an interpreter.
"China will work with other relevant parties, including the United States, to play a constructive role in promoting the six-party talks and balanced implementation of the goals set out in the September 19 joint statement of 2005."
Reuters
Here is another interesting exceprt from that article:
China's Xinhua news agency said in a commentary that Washington had itself been "fanning the flames" on the Korean peninsula with its shows of force.
"It keeps sending more fighters, bombers and missile-defence ships to the waters of East Asia and carrying out massive military drills with Asian allies in a dramatic display of preemptive power," it said.
Chinese state television quoted Premier Li Keqiang as telling Kerry that rising tensions on the Korean peninsula were in nobody's interests, in apparent reference to both Washington and Pyongyang to dial down the war of words.
"All sides must bear responsibility for maintaining regional peace and stability and be responsible for the consequences," the television report paraphrased Li as saying.
"Disturbances and provocation on the peninsula and regionally will harm the interests of all sides, which is like lifting a rock only to drop it on one's feet."
Sounds like China holds the US responsible for a lot of North Korea's rhetoric, and is taking the side of peace rather than siding with the U.S.
|
Well we're getting close to april the 15th. Im starting to get really curious if they are actually going to war of if they'll chicken out. From the looks of it, it can go either way. I wouldnt be scared of north korea if i lived in south though. The fact that south is being backed up by the us gives them alot of comfort in the event of a war.
|
|
|
|
|
|
EPT
