| Forum Index > General Forum |
|
hahaimhenry
Canada368 Posts
"aimed at strengthening its [North Korea's] self-defence nuclear deterrent in every way". Man I haven't looked too deeply in this but, first they launched a supposed satellite which many people believe to be a missile, now this? I hope they realize America can turn them into a gigantic parking lot in seconds. Thoughts? | ||
AltaiR_
Korea (South)922 Posts
| ||
|
koreasilver
9109 Posts
| ||
|
sith
United States2474 Posts
now. | ||
|
The Storyteller
Singapore2486 Posts
| ||
|
Clasic
Bosnia-Herzegovina1437 Posts
| ||
|
clazziquai
6685 Posts
On May 25 2009 13:20 Clasic wrote: Rofl. Does this happen every month or what? When North Korea fades away in News coverage.....imo they want attention :x | ||
|
hahaimhenry
Canada368 Posts
| ||
|
koreasilver
9109 Posts
| ||
|
The Storyteller
Singapore2486 Posts
On May 25 2009 13:23 koreasilver wrote: Anyone that thinks North Korea is an actual threat at all are just misinformed. I mean, North Korea of today is the equivalent of a diabetic, epileptic dog that has lost all his teeth. But all it takes is one nuclear bomb for a huge amount of devastation... or, for that matter, a conventional missile strike to completely upset the region and drag the US, China, Japan and South Korea into a messy conflict. | ||
|
DownMaxX
Canada1311 Posts
On May 25 2009 13:23 koreasilver wrote: Anyone that thinks North Korea is an actual threat at all are just misinformed. I mean, North Korea of today is the equivalent of a diabetic, epileptic dog that has lost all his teeth. ..who is almost capable of launching a single long-range nuclear weapon to damage almost any nation before being taken to the pound. | ||
|
koreasilver
9109 Posts
| ||
|
HeadBangaa
United States6512 Posts
| ||
|
psion0011
Canada720 Posts
On May 25 2009 13:33 HeadBangaa wrote: China could end this bullshit with a snap of the fingers, but they won't because they are retarded, or are basking in this east vs west bullshit. Yes, a snap of the fingers will erase the 100,000 missiles they have in range of seoul. And east vs west? This is east vs east. | ||
|
Hippopotamus
1914 Posts
If China does nothing then: On May 25 2009 13:33 HeadBangaa wrote: China could end this bullshit with a snap of the fingers, but they won't because they are retarded, or are basking in this east vs west bullshit. So China's pretty fucked and should just stick to making cheapass goods for the rest of the world. | ||
|
HnR)hT
United States3468 Posts
| ||
|
ProberoO
United States88 Posts
On May 25 2009 13:13 hahaimhenry wrote: I hope they realize America can turn them into a gigantic parking lot in seconds. Thoughts? I laughed a little. The only nice thing about a nuclear war is that death can be instantaneous. Save the poor souls that live through it and suffer from radiation effects etc. | ||
|
koreasilver
9109 Posts
On May 25 2009 13:39 Hippopotamus wrote: If China does anything then China is an evil totalitarian state trying to extend its influence in the far east to ultimately take over the world and attack America. If China does nothing then: So China's pretty fucked and should just stick to making cheapass goods for the rest of the world. China already has a large influence over North Korea, and China has supposedly been taking over some of North Korea's land the past little while. On May 25 2009 13:40 HnR)hT wrote: Incidentally, does anybody know why there are American troops in Korea still? Political and symbolic reasons, probably. | ||
|
psion0011
Canada720 Posts
It would literally ruin south korea's economy if they suddenly reunified. | ||
|
HnR)hT
United States3468 Posts
I'm sure that, if polled, the vast majority of Americans would be in favor of ending all military presence in South Korea. So the reason for its continuation can't be domestic politics. Does the US get some kind of tangible benefit in return for the expenditures on SK's security? Is it part of some kind of geopolitical gambit directed at Russia and/or China? | ||
|
HeadBangaa
United States6512 Posts
If they slapped NK on the wrist, this shit would cease and desist, yes it is that simple. | ||
|
HunterX11
United States1048 Posts
On May 25 2009 13:49 psion0011 wrote: Why would anyone want to take over NK? Nobody wants their shit because they'll be inheriting 25 million starving peasants with absolutely zero skills. It would literally ruin south korea's economy if they suddenly reunified. It will certainly make German reunification look like a picnic, but also remember that the North is resource-rich and the South is the "poor" part of the peninsula. | ||
|
Zato-1
Chile4253 Posts
On May 25 2009 13:18 koreasilver wrote: They just want attention and help. Obviously they themselves know that they aren't in the position to get into an actual war with anyone. Do not speak of 'them'. It's 'him', and that is Kim Jong Il. Attention he wants. Help? Not so much. He'd rather be respected and feared than be offered a helping hand and take it. Don't assume he has his nation's best interests in mind just because he's their ruler. | ||
|
jjun212
Canada2208 Posts
On May 25 2009 13:40 HnR)hT wrote: Incidentally, does anybody know why there are American troops in Korea still? i just thought it was because korea sent troops to the middle east to maintain good relations and the US is just honouring that. (even though they had troops there anyway) it'd be rude to take them out? | ||
|
Zato-1
Chile4253 Posts
On May 25 2009 13:22 hahaimhenry wrote: Well if they want attention, they're doing a pretty good job. The fact that nuclear weapons are in play gets anybody interested/frightened. But seriously they have nothing to face up against.. I dont't know.. the world? The world? You wish. Half of South American countries are too busy staring at their belly buttons and promoting populist agendas. Africa is a joke as far as influence on asia is concerned. China and Russia like having a more extreme communist nation playing the part of the irrational, unreasonable, unstable threat because it makes them look reasonable by comparison, and their influence over NK and their vetoes in the UN security council give them leverage with the US. Half of Europe is too scared that Russia will cut off their gas supply to lift a finger, and the UN is a toothless dog. As long as China and Russia support NK, the US will have precious few allies- South Korea certainly, Georgia probably (not that it matters), Colombia in South America, maybe Canada or some european countries. | ||
|
QuoC
United States724 Posts
On May 25 2009 14:38 Zato-1 wrote: The world? You wish. Half of South American countries are too busy staring at their belly buttons and promoting populist agendas. Africa is a joke as far as influence on asia is concerned. China and Russia like having a more extreme communist nation playing the part of the irrational, unreasonable, unstable threat because it makes them look reasonable by comparison, and their influence over NK and their vetoes in the UN security council give them leverage with the US. Half of Europe is too scared that Russia will cut off their gas supply to lift a finger, and the UN is a toothless dog. As long as China and Russia support NK, the US will have precious few allies- South Korea certainly, Georgia probably (not that it matters), Colombia in South America, maybe Canada or some european countries. wow, i mean, i don't know much about the world politics and whatnot.. but you SURE know what everyone's thinking, huh? maybe you should run for president. of the world. anyways, i always wondered.. i know we obviously (US) have technologies to detect & stop a nuclear missile (if we don't, i don't know if we can even be considered a powerful country) but as everyone agrees with how we can turn them into a desert within seconds, can't they do the same IF the missile does hit our country and take out half of the states? I mean.. I don't know where all our technologies and whatnot are (I'm sure we hide them pretty well, probably underground somewhere) but once a nuke -no pun intended >_>- hits us and wipes out half of our states (let alone any weapons that gets demolished at that point), won't we basically go from the top of the most powerful countries to the bottom? just wondering. | ||
|
InToTheWannaB
United States4770 Posts
| ||
|
InToTheWannaB
United States4770 Posts
On May 25 2009 13:40 HnR)hT wrote: They are there to die. No joke thats there reason. If anyone ever attacked SK they have to kill US troops to do it. Then we can declare war. Same reason we had 20k troops in berlin for 50 years. You did not think those 20k troops were there to put up a fight vs like 5,000,000 russians did you? No they are just there to die lol.Incidentally, does anybody know why there are American troops in Korea still? | ||
|
Jayme
United States5866 Posts
On May 25 2009 14:38 Zato-1 wrote: As long as China and Russia support NK, the US will have precious few allies- South Korea certainly, Georgia probably (not that it matters), Colombia in South America, maybe Canada or some european countries. China and Russia don't support NK... it's political suicide to do so. China has no desire to have ANOTHER nuclear power that close to them. Russia.. well Russia is slowly but surely trudging back to its soviet union type government. | ||
|
hymn
Bulgaria832 Posts
And if North Korea has nukes at least we are going to see if the US in fact have anti-missile defense or they are just talking big time. | ||
|
hymn
Bulgaria832 Posts
On May 25 2009 15:52 Jayme wrote:Russia.. well Russia is slowly but surely trudging back to its soviet union type government. Now, how did YOU reach that conclusion? It looks to me that Russia is going to stay in this state of a democracy where there is the party of Vladimir Putin unopposed. But the Russians are definitely NOT oppressed like in the 1950's. From what I've seen they look proud and happy to be a strong nation again. They've got freedom of speech and etc. It's not like a man's going to say "Putin sux ass!" and he's going to jail... | ||
|
HeadBangaa
United States6512 Posts
I may be wrong, but that's what other slavs have even told me. | ||
|
ondik
Czech Republic2908 Posts
On May 25 2009 16:17 hymn wrote: They've got freedom of speech and etc. It's not like a man's going to say "Putin sux ass!" and he's going to jail... lol.. um.. NO | ||
|
aqui
Germany1023 Posts
| ||
|
aqui
Germany1023 Posts
On May 25 2009 15:00 QuoC wrote: wow, i mean, i don't know much about the world politics and whatnot.. but you SURE know what everyone's thinking, huh? maybe you should run for president. of the world. anyways, i always wondered.. i know we obviously (US) have technologies to detect & stop a nuclear missile (if we don't, i don't know if we can even be considered a powerful country) but as everyone agrees with how we can turn them into a desert within seconds, can't they do the same IF the missile does hit our country and take out half of the states? I mean.. I don't know where all our technologies and whatnot are (I'm sure we hide them pretty well, probably underground somewhere) but once a nuke -no pun intended >_>- hits us and wipes out half of our states (let alone any weapons that gets demolished at that point), won't we basically go from the top of the most powerful countries to the bottom? just wondering. i would like to see THAT missle. | ||
|
baal
10533 Posts
On May 25 2009 13:17 AltaiR_ wrote: kim jong il is trying to be the threat he was 5 years ago. as soon as things get out of hand us will intervene and people will hate america more. the end. The US wont intervene, there is no much to gain to fight such a war, especially when they have nuclear capabilities, no event will trigger any kind of intervention besides like the launch of a nuclear strike which wont happen, Kim is a megalomanic insane man but he still doesnt want to commit country-suicide by doing it. | ||
|
IdrA
United States11541 Posts
On May 25 2009 16:48 ondik wrote: You say that NK is just trying to scare world to get more economical help and that fall of NK would economically destroy SK. But tell me one thing - when crazy Kim Jong Il is on his deathbed, what keeps him from one simple order "nuke them with all we got"? Don't you think his mind is sick enough and full of hate to do it? guy on a death bed orders you to commit suicide whats your reaction gonna be? his generals arent retards either | ||
|
hymn
Bulgaria832 Posts
On May 25 2009 16:36 HeadBangaa wrote: Are you so sure about that last statement, hymn? I thought public demonstrations against government figures caused people to disappear, even in modern Russia? I may be wrong, but that's what other slavs have even told me. Well I've talked to only like 3-4 Russians. It is completely possible they all support the party of Putin. I guess we can wait for a Russian to respond and tell us the real deal. | ||
|
hymn
Bulgaria832 Posts
Would you please care to elaborate a bit cause this looks childish to me. Do you have proof about someone actually saying that he hates the Russian government and then the whole system starts to make his life as miserable as possible? I've read articles in some Russian newspapers that don't approve of some moves of Putin and so on. The papers are still alive. I agree, it's not the same level of freedom like in the Western democracies but they do have the right of free speech. | ||
|
HnR)hT
United States3468 Posts
On May 25 2009 16:17 hymn wrote: Now, how did YOU reach that conclusion? It looks to me that Russia is going to stay in this state of a democracy where there is the party of Vladimir Putin unopposed. But the Russians are definitely NOT oppressed like in the 1950's. From what I've seen they look proud and happy to be a strong nation again. They've got freedom of speech and etc. It's not like a man's going to say "Putin sux ass!" and he's going to jail... Russia is ruled by a KGB thugocracy. Russians have not come to terms with their historical crimes, and the Russian state promotes official patriotism that deliberately whitewashes Stalin and inculcates nostalgia for the USSR. Russian historiography, at least since the days of Nikolay Karamzin, has encouraged the mentality that the people exist to serve the state and not the other way around. More to the point, the entire immense organism known as "the Russian people," is sick and dying. Russia has even lower fertility rates than the white Europe, coupled with through-the-roof mortality rates due to primitive, underdevoloped health infrastructure and a culture of alcoholism and violence. The Putin government, despite superficial and largely symbolic measures, has utterly failed to combat such trends, being instead too busy enriching its individual members (by some estimates, Putin is now by far the wealthiest man in the world) and seeking, desperately and foolishly, to "matter" on the world stage "like in the good old days." All this implies, by the way, that in a matter of decades Russia will no longer be capable of playing its historical role as an ally and protector of Orthodox Christendom, and of Slavic peoples, in the Balkans and elsewhere. It is the conventional wisdom (among those who think about such things for a living) that, if the present trends continue, the 21st century will see Russia in its final death throes. | ||
|
HnR)hT
United States3468 Posts
| ||
|
QuickStriker
United States3694 Posts
| ||
|
Diomedes
464 Posts
On May 25 2009 13:23 koreasilver wrote: Anyone that thinks North Korea is an actual threat at all are just misinformed. I mean, North Korea of today is the equivalent of a diabetic, epileptic dog that has lost all his teeth. No, that was Iraq where Iraq once had the 8th military in the world but then years later couldn't even control it's own territory anymore. Where not even Kuwait was afraid but the US was trembling in fear. NK can devastate Seoul withh artillery and then sent their 1 million brainwashed soldiers across the DMZ. Won't happen. But if they do it's not going to be pretty. That's why SKorea is always pissed off at the aggressiveness of the US and Japan towards NKorea. You say that NK is just trying to scare world to get more economical help and that fall of NK would economically destroy SK. But tell me one thing - when crazy Kim Jong Il is on his deathbed, what keeps him from one simple order "nuke them with all we got"? Don't you think his mind is sick enough and full of hate to do it? I would be more worried about Kim Jong Il being the only sane person in NK. | ||
|
jello_biafra
United Kingdom6634 Posts
| ||
|
koreasilver
9109 Posts
On May 25 2009 14:25 HunterX11 wrote: It will certainly make German reunification look like a picnic, but also remember that the North is resource-rich and the South is the "poor" part of the peninsula. Depends on what resources though, really. The South is much richer in agricultural goods for example. On May 25 2009 14:26 Zato-1 wrote: Do not speak of 'them'. It's 'him', and that is Kim Jong Il. Attention he wants. Help? Not so much. He'd rather be respected and feared than be offered a helping hand and take it. Don't assume he has his nation's best interests in mind just because he's their ruler. Lets just ignore the entirety of the North Korean elite, k. Even if KJI doesn't give a damn about the people, he still wouldn't toss bombs at enemy cities because the moment he does, he'll get fucked up. He'll care enough for his own good to not mess with anyone when his country is not strong enough to fight anyone. On May 25 2009 14:32 jjun212 wrote: i just thought it was because korea sent troops to the middle east to maintain good relations and the US is just honouring that. (even though they had troops there anyway) it'd be rude to take them out? American troops have had a continued presence in South Korea since the Korean War. A fair amount of the South Korean community has disliked the presence of American troops for quite a long while now, but nothing's really changed. On May 25 2009 22:52 Diomedes wrote: No, that was Iraq where Iraq once had the 8th military in the world but then years later couldn't even control it's own territory anymore. Where not even Kuwait was afraid but the US was trembling in fear. NK can devastate Seoul withh artillery and then sent their 1 million brainwashed soldiers across the DMZ. Won't happen. But if they do it's not going to be pretty. That's why SKorea is always pissed off at the aggressiveness of the US and Japan towards NKorea. I would be more worried about Kim Jong Il being the only sane person in NK. And then the South Korean military will take absolute air supremacy and win. I mean, the Northern artillery that can level Seoul, those have been there since like the 80s. Their navy is a joke, their air force is so outdated it's pretty much obsolete. The only thing they have going for them is just numbers; all of their technology is behind by quite a bit. Even on top of that, the new Southern President and government have been aggressive towards the North. The attitude of the Southern government towards the North varies depending on what party is in power. | ||
|
Random()
Kyrgyz Republic1462 Posts
On May 25 2009 16:17 hymn wrote: Now, how did YOU reach that conclusion? It looks to me that Russia is going to stay in this state of a democracy where there is the party of Vladimir Putin unopposed. But the Russians are definitely NOT oppressed like in the 1950's. From what I've seen they look proud and happy to be a strong nation again. They've got freedom of speech and etc. It's not like a man's going to say "Putin sux ass!" and he's going to jail... Well, if you just choose so, you can badmouth Putin all you want. However, if you have some proof of his and his gang's atrocities, you better be careful, otherwise you get shot by "uknown people for unknown reasons", poisoned, or jailed, e.g. Paul Klebnikov, Anna Politkovskaya, Alexander Litvinenko, etc. etc. | ||
|
ondik
Czech Republic2908 Posts
On May 25 2009 22:10 hymn wrote: Would you please care to elaborate a bit cause this looks childish to me. Do you have proof about someone actually saying that he hates the Russian government and then the whole system starts to make his life as miserable as possible? I've read articles in some Russian newspapers that don't approve of some moves of Putin and so on. The papers are still alive. I agree, it's not the same level of freedom like in the Western democracies but they do have the right of free speech. Just what i can remember now -> Anna Politkovska murdered, Alexander Litvinenko poisoned and died. Both were critisising Putin and Kreml a lot. Freedom of speech -> recent gay parade, Kasparov arrested during protests toward government. And these are just big name and cases which couldn't be hidden under censorship. | ||
|
Night[Mare
Mexico4793 Posts
| ||
|
Random()
Kyrgyz Republic1462 Posts
On May 25 2009 22:24 HnR)hT wrote: Russia is ruled by a KGB thugocracy. Russians have not come to terms with their historical crimes, and the Russian state promotes official patriotism that deliberately whitewashes Stalin and inculcates nostalgia for the USSR. Russian historiography, at least since the days of Nikolay Karamzin, has encouraged the mentality that the people exist to serve the state and not the other way around. .... All this implies, by the way, that in a matter of decades Russia will no longer be capable of playing its historical role as an ally and protector of Orthodox Christendom, and of Slavic peoples, in the Balkans and elsewhere. It is the conventional wisdom (among those who think about such things for a living) that, if the present trends continue, the 21st century will see Russia in its final death throes. Bah, You will not grasp her with your mind Or cover with a common label, For Russia is one of a kind – Believe in her, if you are able. Russia lived through world's most horrible war, Russia lived through Stalin's shit, Russia lived through communism/socialism bullshit, and you say some puny KGB remnants are now going to kill her? On a serious note, what you say has some merit, but "Russia is going to die" is just emotional/ sensationalist crap by people who, ironically, do that for a living. Russia in a much better state now than it was under Yeltsin, or as the Soviet Union under Khruschev, Brejnev and the like. | ||
|
Piste
6172 Posts
| ||
|
HnR)hT
United States3468 Posts
On May 25 2009 23:35 Random() wrote: Bah, You will not grasp her with your mind Or cover with a common label, For Russia is one of a kind – Believe in her, if you are able. Fedor Tiutchev, my 3rd favorite Russian poet (after Pushkin and Merezhkovsky). Good job. Russia lived through world's most horrible war, Russia lived through Stalin's shit, Russia lived through communism/socialism bullshit, and you say some puny KGB remnants are now going to kill her? On a serious note, what you say has some merit, but "Russia is going to die" is just emotional/ sensationalist crap by people who, ironically, do that for a living. Russia in a much better state now than it was under Yeltsin, or as the Soviet Union under Khruschev, Brejnev and the like. It's not sensationalist crap, it's the iron law of demographics. Russians are quite literally dying out faster than any other people. It's a horrible historic injustice, because of the things you mention, but it is true. | ||
|
Maenander
Germany4926 Posts
On May 25 2009 23:47 HnR)hT wrote: Fedor Tiutchev, my 3rd favorite Russian poet (after Pushkin and Merezhkovsky). Good job. It's not sensationalist crap, it's the iron law of demographics. Russians are quite literally dying out faster than any other people. It's a horrible historic injustice, because of the things you mention, but it is true. Their manpower might be dwindling a bit, but that´s not necessarily such a bad thing. The russians as a whole have a lot of land and therefore resources, in a world that needs those resources desperately. Noone can take that land away from a nuclear superpower. If that wealth is distributed well amongst the declining population, the future for the average russian might look bright. | ||
|
hymn
Bulgaria832 Posts
On May 25 2009 22:24 HnR)hT wrote: Russia is ruled by a KGB thugocracy. Now that's not nice. I can go on and say that the US is ruled by the banker dynasties like Rothschild and Rockefeller and you can't argue cause we both ain't got proofs. On May 25 2009 22:24 HnR)hT wrote: Russians have not come to terms with their historical crimes, and the Russian state promotes official patriotism that deliberately whitewashes Stalin and inculcates nostalgia for the USSR. Russian historiography, at least since the days of Nikolay Karamzin, has encouraged the mentality that the people exist to serve the state and not the other way around. It is like this - people serving the state. Wasn't it Kennedy who said "Ask not what America has done for you, but what can you do for America"? Wasn't the US army the one with posters "I want you!" in the days of the Vietnam war? The state needs its people and of course the people need the state but I firmly believe that in most states the government is in HUGE debt to its people. Aren't kids in the state taught to go to school and be nice citizens and pay their taxes without asking? On May 25 2009 22:24 HnR)hT wrote: More to the point, the entire immense organism known as "the Russian people," is sick and dying. Russia has even lower fertility rates than the white Europe, coupled with through-the-roof mortality rates due to primitive, underdevoloped health infrastructure and a culture of alcoholism and violence. I took the time to read http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Demographics_of_Russia］this[/url], please do the same. Looks like they are recovering. On May 25 2009 22:24 HnR)hT wrote: The Putin government, despite superficial and largely symbolic measures, has utterly failed to combat such trends, being instead too busy enriching its individual members (by some estimates, Putin is now by far the wealthiest man in the world) and seeking, desperately and foolishly, to "matter" on the world stage "like in the good old days." GDP of Russia $2.076 trillion (2007 est.) GDP growth 8.1% (2007 est.) Russia matters on the world stage. It's like this - the whole EU is shitting it's pants when Russia says "Fuck you, we cut the gas!". When Russia invaded Georgia much like NATO stated Kosovo's independence what did NATO do? They said "Be nice, guys!". But they did nothing. In fact they left Russia do what Russia wants to do and offered no resistance. More - Russia can and I am sure they are going to veto when Georgia applies for NATO and I am just going to wait and see. And I do believe NATO's going to let them veto and do nothing. Just because Georgia is not worth risking a conflict with Russia. On May 25 2009 22:24 HnR)hT wrote: All this implies, by the way, that in a matter of decades Russia will no longer be capable of playing its historical role as an ally and protector of Orthodox Christendom, and of Slavic peoples, in the Balkans and elsewhere. It is the conventional wisdom (among those who think about such things for a living) that, if the present trends continue, the 21st century will see Russia in its final death throes. Actually the last trends show that Russia is doing good economically. I agree it can all crash down in a matter of years but still claiming that Russia's dying in 30 years is not serious. I mean... I read some article of Zbigniew Brzeziński where he claimed that in the 21 century there would be 5 languages in the world: English (you know where), Russian, Spanish (South America), Deutsch (in Europe!!), Chinese and some African language for Africa. This is clearly going to be wrong. | ||
|
HnR)hT
United States3468 Posts
Obey thy God, and never mind, O Muse, the laurels or the stings: make it thy rule to be unstirred by praise as by abuse, and do not contradict the fool. | ||
|
Random()
Kyrgyz Republic1462 Posts
On May 25 2009 23:47 HnR)hT wrote: It's not sensationalist crap, it's the iron law of demographics. Russians are quite literally dying out faster than any other people. It's a horrible historic injustice, because of the things you mention, but it is true. Well, I don't see why do you think this trend is bound to continue forever. People have recovered from much worse. | ||
|
eMbrace
United States1300 Posts
| ||
|
{CC}StealthBlue
United States41117 Posts
| ||
|
RedTerror
New Zealand742 Posts
On May 26 2009 07:55 eMbrace wrote: Really North Korea, launch your nuke. It will probably be a failure, and either way -- North Korea will no longer exist the moment your press the button. Don't worry about the nuke it probably would be a failure? | ||
|
Zozma
United States1626 Posts
| ||
|
eMbrace
United States1300 Posts
On May 26 2009 08:25 ViruX wrote: Don't worry about the nuke it probably would be a failure? I was being a bit sarcastic. My basic point is, North Korea knows that they will cease to exist the moment they do anything offensive with nuclear weaponry. | ||
|
Klive5ive
United Kingdom6056 Posts
On May 26 2009 08:32 Zozma wrote: In the event of a nuclear war, I only pray that I can make one "Nuclear launch detected" joke on TL before dying horribly. But no-one would be here to read it. Then it's as if it never happens. If a tree falls in the wood.. does it make a sound? If a man washes a plate without his wife seeing.... did he really do it? etc.. | ||
|
eStoniaNBoY
Switzerland439 Posts
Nice GDP numbers. When oil and gas prices were at record levels. Also "natural resources" full of country lacks the machinery and investments to even get their Oil and metals out of the ground because their infrastructure sucks so bad. That's why they have British Petroleum paying up for Oil rig technology with other foreign investors. That's why they play good boys when economy slumps. To get foreigners to invest to get that Oil and metals out of the ground because it's too difficult for themselves. They usually con the investors afterwards as it has happened over and over again. State takes over the investments because they "haven't payed their taxes correctly". "GDP of Russia $2.076 trillion (2007 est.) GDP growth 8.1% (2007 est.)" Once again nice numbers. When the whole housing bubble and economy bubble in the World peaked with record Oil, metal and gas prices. By these factors the growth was pathetic. Not to mention when growth started to take off Hodorkovski was jailed and YUKOS taken away from him. Oh crap. Did I even mention the TNK- British Petroleum drama? The British Council and british diplomats who were sent back to UK and the one's who didn't get their visa's renewed? Because after forming 50-50% deal they "hadn't payed their taxes"? What a shame... The "Russia Almighty" lost tens of billions of dollars after the Georgian war. Investors fled after being afraid to get "Hodorkovyi'd". Other than stopping Nabucco gas pipeline for a year or two they achieved nothing. There will be NATO military training once again in Georgia soon. Go check it out since I won't bother checking the date. http://www.spiegel.de/international/business/0,1518,574898,00.html Russian economical power during low Oil prices, low gas prices and low metal prices accompanied with Financial Crisis is remarkable! Take a look > ! http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/business/7798861.stm Did I mention the Turkmenistan gas? Take a look! > http://www.energytribune.com/articles.cfm?aid=1046 Russia just transports it through gas pipelines to Europe. And charges more since Turkmenistan leader happens to be pleased to get corrupt money involved and their country free since if they don't sell their gas to Russia then they would experience "Checnya" or "Georgia". Last time I heard Turkmenistan leader wasn't pleased with the gas prices once again >( Let me quote : http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/europe/7116218.stm "Russia has agreed to pay Turkmenistan up to 50% more for its gas, Russia's gas export monopoly, Gazprom, has said. Analysts say the increase will push up prices for Ukraine, which has had past disputes with Russia over gas supplies. Gazprom buys almost all the gas exported by Turkmenistan and sells it on to other countries. The higher price will help gas-rich Turkmenistan to speed up construction of a new Caspian Sea pipeline through Kazakhstan to Russia." Do I need to mention the Russian - Ukraine gas disputes that seem to happen during the Winter when termometers show minus degrees? Or that it will cut out Western - Europe from gas? http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Russia-Ukraine_gas_dispute Gazprom is in heavy debts and are losing their position with South Stream ( a pipeline making Europe more depending on Russia's gas ). South Stream's opposition is Nabucco gas pipeline going through Georgia and backed by EU and United States ( reason why Russia attacked Georgia and the reason US is so interested in Georgia and is willing to back them this far ) so Russia never really got anything from attacking Georgia. Russia has lost tons of their oligarchs and will do so for a long time since Putin doesn't back most of them. Oleg Deripaska is one of the prime examples how things went for Russia's oligarchs. I won't bother posting more since HnR)hT got the other things right. I'm glad that there are people who can look at things how they are at the moment and are not scared just because of "Cold War" happened to be. The only fear that the world should have is that Russia is not a stable country. There are still Chernobyl type nuclear power plants in Russia and it's known that they need foreign aid to deal with nuclear waste and to disarm their old nuclear and chemical weapons. It's sad though because there are lots of great people there and they have lots of resources. Too bad that these things constantly happen to them Don't bother to exchange dollars to rubles if you go to Russia. I did perfectly fine with dollars only >) | ||
|
Chef
10810 Posts
| ||
|
CursOr
United States6335 Posts
the largest military in the world, with hundreds of warheads, and the ONLY history of actually using nuclear weapons on civilians- is now telling them they cant have them. that- is bullshit. also- how many countries had north korea invaded in the last 40 years? how many countries has the US invaded? imo we should stfu. | ||
|
RedTerror
New Zealand742 Posts
On May 26 2009 10:13 cUrsOr wrote: maybe the nations without nuclear arsenals should tell them to disarm. the largest military in the world, with hundreds of warheads, and the ONLY history of actually using nuclear weapons on civilians- is now telling them they cant have them. that- is bullshit. also- how many countries had north korea invaded in the last 40 years? how many countries has the US invaded? imo we should stfu. Well said. Here is a famous oxford union debate our former prime-minister gave http://publicaddress.net/default,2424.sm#post there are some funny and some serious bits. | ||
|
Probe.
United States877 Posts
On May 25 2009 15:00 QuoC wrote: wow, i mean, i don't know much about the world politics and whatnot.. but you SURE know what everyone's thinking, huh? maybe you should run for president. of the world. anyways, i always wondered.. i know we obviously (US) have technologies to detect & stop a nuclear missile (if we don't, i don't know if we can even be considered a powerful country) but as everyone agrees with how we can turn them into a desert within seconds, can't they do the same IF the missile does hit our country and take out half of the states? I mean.. I don't know where all our technologies and whatnot are (I'm sure we hide them pretty well, probably underground somewhere) but once a nuke -no pun intended >_>- hits us and wipes out half of our states (let alone any weapons that gets demolished at that point), won't we basically go from the top of the most powerful countries to the bottom? just wondering. There's no device that can stop a nuclear missle after it has been launched. But basically it takes time for a missle to hit and when we see one or if any country with nuclear missles sees one heading towards them, you better believe they're taking the rest of the world with them when they die. | ||
|
sith
United States2474 Posts
On May 26 2009 10:13 cUrsOr wrote: maybe the nations without nuclear arsenals should tell them to disarm. the largest military in the world, with hundreds of warheads, and the ONLY history of actually using nuclear weapons on civilians- is now telling them they cant have them. that- is bullshit. also- how many countries had north korea invaded in the last 40 years? how many countries has the US invaded? imo we should stfu. Yes, because things are as simple as you make them out to be. I could write a 15 page paper on the things wrong with your post, but it wouldn't touch your mindset, so I'll leave it alone. | ||
|
psion0011
Canada720 Posts
On May 26 2009 11:05 Probe. wrote: There's no device that can stop a nuclear missle after it has been launched. But basically it takes time for a missle to hit and when we see one or if any country with nuclear missles sees one heading towards them, you better believe they're taking the rest of the world with them when they die. Literally every single thing you wrote is wrong. | ||
|
Random()
Kyrgyz Republic1462 Posts
On May 26 2009 11:05 Probe. wrote: There's no device that can stop a nuclear missle after it has been launched. But basically it takes time for a missle to hit and when we see one or if any country with nuclear missles sees one heading towards them, you better believe they're taking the rest of the world with them when they die. Of course there is such a device, it's just another missile to intercept the larger ICBM. Or a huge laser on a Boeing-747 o_O. These systems aren't perfect, but they exist for quite some time. | ||
|
Rakanishu2
United States475 Posts
Taking Kim Jung Il out of power is something I think most people will agree with. It's just a matter of time before he pushes someone (probably China) too far, and he gets taken out. | ||
|
D10
Brazil3409 Posts
| ||
|
CursOr
United States6335 Posts
of course they should be. i just happen to think that so should all the other countries. my point is that the US isnt in a position to be telling people about their weaponry or military posturing atm. its okay when we do something, its just not okay when they do it. | ||
|
D10
Brazil3409 Posts
Their crazy ass government as sauron Nuclear technology as the ring Whoever quit the war as the asshole who didnt destroy the ring Elrond = Japan Boromir = US Gandalf = ? | ||
|
hymn
Bulgaria832 Posts
Yes, Russia is unstable, I don't deny this. But every time Russia's been unstable some stuff happens and somehow unites them and they pull through. Like in 1917 the people grasped Lenin's ideas for good or for bad. Like in 1941 when the Wehrmacht seemed to be unopposed and having fun towards Moscow, Leningrad and Stalingrad the Red Army successfully defeated them in the course of 2 years cause after the Kursk bulge it has been more of "beat the Germans till they say it's enough" rather than a war with huge nazi counter-attacks and stuff. Like after the USSR collapsed Russian people freely elect Putin. I don't know what for, I guess they are always in the need of a Messiah of a sort. And Putin makes Russia looks as stable as possible IMO. And remember it took Stalin and the CPSU like 23 years to convert Russia from agricultural country to a superpower that dictates half the world what is right and wrong. The price was absurdly high but they did it and that's it. Let's not just say Russia's dying cause fertility can rise pretty quickly with the proper management from the state. As for the investors fleeing after the Georgia conflict - they'll come back, I am sure, profit is too big for them not to. Now, don't get me wrong - I hate wars as a tool of achieving goals but I also understand that military power is essential in achieving those goals. I'd like to see Europe and the Western democracies establish a world order without religious fanaticism and people bombing themselves for beliefs from 1400 years ago. And I don't think the Western world can do this without Russia. And also Russia can't go on forever blackmailing EU with the gas and oil. They have to come to terms with each other. And I believe they will so that small insignificant countries like North Korea, Iraq, Serbia, Bulgaria and etc won't have the option to play big but just accept the terms. I mean - North Korea - a midget of a state, threatening the world with nuclear weapon. WTF?!? I mean - really - WTF?!? Who are they do to this? Governed by a bunch of retards whose only thought is to get that nuclear weapon so that they can blackmail the world. And is someone sane thinking that if North Korea launches a rocket and the US reply, Russia's bombing the US?!? And China bombing the US too? And India? No way IMO. The world would sacrifice North Korea and that's it. Enough offtopic ffrom me.  | ||
zatic
Zurich15324 Posts
On May 26 2009 11:25 Random() wrote: Of course there is such a device, it's just another missile to intercept the larger ICBM. Or a huge laser on a Boeing-747 o_O. These systems aren't perfect, but they exist for quite some time. Haha do you actually believe this stuff works? It's like deflecting a bullet with another bullet. Even in controlled tests where they KNEW the trajectory of the incoming missile beforehand they missed like what 4 out of 5 times? There are a total of It is still a fact: There is no defense against a ballistic missile attack, yet. Doesn't really matter though, as as I have mentioned elsewhere it's completely stupid to deliver a nuke by ICBM for a state like NK. Just ship it in a container and detonate once it's arrived in Oakland. Way easier than building a huge ass ballistic missile and actually launching it without breaking the warhead. If you don't trust UPS with your nukes put it on a fishing trailer and sail down to LA. Plenty of time to press the button should the coast guard board you while you try to enter port. *) EDIT: lol just read up on this, the 10 missiles were installed before there was even one single successful test under somewhat close to realistic conditions. US Navy - your tax billions at work! | ||
|
DarkYoDA
United States1347 Posts
We know a global disarmament of nuclear weapons is the ideal outcome and then on the other hand countries already having these weapons are expected to put away this strong deterrence. Let's be very practical: You are going to have people trying to build nuclear weapons through time. It's a known fact the five nations that retains their nuclear technology only as a matter of deterrence and since it's not one country, but five of them, that's like an "equilibrium" in this matter where they keep each other in check. Allowing one country alone to have it is too dangerous. Based on some of the arguments here, it's so naive to argue this as a validation for N.Korea to develop nuclear weapons. I can tell you if the world is going to end, it's not going to end by a global genocide in the manner the world wars did again because human as a species, only experienced WWII about 60 years ago. We have a precedence to be wary of avoiding the dynamics leading to a WW. However, as a species we've yet to "learn" if we should allow all nations in the world to have nuclear weapons. Our guess is, it's bad for us. Tthere are 200 countries in the world and if we don't control this, one day, before even the universe takes this earth one country will end it for us first. I'd like to see what those who speaks loftily arguments about this again. But then being proud as we are, we as a human race stays proud even when a bomb is landing on our heads. To balance this view, asking any one of the five countries already having nuclear weapons to disarm is also rather impossible because you need all the five countries to disarm and everyone will want to protect their long standing interests. Imagine US being the only country allowed to have nuclear weapons and if they become a tyrant one day it's bad for everyone so some others need to keep them in check, who already have the weapons. Both sides of the coin points to this equilibrium given human nature. p/s: Those who read this post as my advocation of the US having the right to tell people off because they did better, that obviously isn't what I said and you probably missed the essence of my point, which is - No one is going to be "right", in the definition many has given in this thread .This is already somewhat the best way to handle this matter AT THE MOMENT, which balances realism from idealism. Peace out! | ||
|
The Storyteller
Singapore2486 Posts
On May 26 2009 10:13 cUrsOr wrote: maybe the nations without nuclear arsenals should tell them to disarm. the largest military in the world, with hundreds of warheads, and the ONLY history of actually using nuclear weapons on civilians- is now telling them they cant have them. that- is bullshit. also- how many countries had north korea invaded in the last 40 years? how many countries has the US invaded? imo we should stfu. If the US stopped being "hypocritical" I would be shitting myself. It may be easy for Americans to say that the US should be less hypocritical, but as someone in Asia who is uncomfortably close to North Korea, I would much rather the US continue being Asia's policeman. No country without nuclear weapons wields enough power to get North Korea to listen. And of the countries that do have nukes but haven't used them before, Britain, France and India are not exactly in a position to dictate terms to North Korea. That leaves China and Russia... China and Russia handling North Korea and its nukes?! I'll take the US any day! | ||
|
Hiicantpk
Canada72 Posts
![[image loading]](http://www.dolighan.com/images/jpgs/may2609.jpg) Enough Said | ||
|
Random()
Kyrgyz Republic1462 Posts
On May 26 2009 19:17 zatic wrote: Haha do you actually believe this stuff works? It's like deflecting a bullet with another bullet. Even in controlled tests where they KNEW the trajectory of the incoming missile beforehand they missed like what 4 out of 5 times? There are a total of It is still a fact: There is no defense against a ballistic missile attack, yet. Doesn't really matter though, as as I have mentioned elsewhere it's completely stupid to deliver a nuke by ICBM for a state like NK. Just ship it in a container and detonate once it's arrived in Oakland. Way easier than building a huge ass ballistic missile and actually launching it without breaking the warhead. If you don't trust UPS with your nukes put it on a fishing trailer and sail down to LA. Plenty of time to press the button should the coast guard board you while you try to enter port. *) EDIT: lol just read up on this, the 10 missiles were installed before there was even one single successful test under somewhat close to realistic conditions. US Navy - your tax billions at work! I'm not claiming that US or any other nation is totally protected. It's not exactly a bullet vs a bullet, missile travel time is considerable, they are vulnerable when they are still on the rising trajectory from the launch site, they use rocket propulsion which you can track, etc. so it's technically possible, maybe not quite yet. But yeah, it is very true that unless you want to bomb the whole country at once, there are much more efficient methods of delivery. | ||
|
ParasitJonte
Sweden1768 Posts
As soon as they're in trouble North Korea feel the need to show their "strength". What else can they do? I mean really, do they have any other card to play? I have a strong feeling this will end in talks whereby North Korea is granted some form of aid (food, energy, whatever). It's obviously a strategy that works (it did last time, remember?) and it's the only viable one from their perspective. | ||
|
aRod
United States758 Posts
I mean international sanctions, trade embargos, are already withstanding and may expand, but is there any tangible benefit to testing a nuke? | ||
|
MoltkeWarding
5195 Posts
I'm wondering what N. Korea hopes to gain by testing a nuke. What about military development? A nuclear power must undergo nuclear testing. | ||
|
baal
10533 Posts
On May 26 2009 19:28 The Storyteller wrote: If the US stopped being "hypocritical" I would be shitting myself. It may be easy for Americans to say that the US should be less hypocritical, but as someone in Asia who is uncomfortably close to North Korea, I would much rather the US continue being Asia's policeman. No country without nuclear weapons wields enough power to get North Korea to listen. And of the countries that do have nukes but haven't used them before, Britain, France and India are not exactly in a position to dictate terms to North Korea. That leaves China and Russia... China and Russia handling North Korea and its nukes?! I'll take the US any day! dont be retarded, as soon as a country has a nuclear weapon it becomes untouchable, you want US to handle it? they wont handle it, as they havent handled Kim for decades now, if somebody invades North Korea they will make a crater out of Seoul. Thats the whole point of the nuke, Kim says fuck you "cant touch me" MC Hammer style. | ||
|
Torenhire
United States11681 Posts
On May 27 2009 03:47 baal wrote: dont be retarded, as soon as a country has a nuclear weapon it becomes untouchable, you want US to handle it? they wont handle it, as they havent handled Kim for decades now, if somebody invades North Korea they will make a crater out of Seoul. Thats the whole point of the nuke, Kim says fuck you "cant touch me" MC Hammer style. This. | ||
|
baal
10533 Posts
![[image loading]](http://www.liquidpoker.net/user_pictures/8920168110d118724462588c2e018a8d.png) | ||
|
OverTheUnder
United States2929 Posts
| ||
|
DarkYoDA
United States1347 Posts
On May 27 2009 03:47 baal wrote: dont be retarded, as soon as a country has a nuclear weapon it becomes untouchable, you want US to handle it? they wont handle it, as they havent handled Kim for decades now, if somebody invades North Korea they will make a crater out of Seoul. Thats the whole point of the nuke, Kim says fuck you "cant touch me" MC Hammer style. You're over-reading into it... What do you mean by handle? Watch how they handle them IF N.Korea really do nuke someone. But for now, handling them isn't a one step procedure. Handling them before and after they nuke a country are different issues altogether. [Edit] But I like that cartoon baal.. ;p | ||
|
Caller
Poland8075 Posts
http://www.vbs.tv/video.php?id=1438428757 It's a well done documentary imho. | ||
|
baal
10533 Posts
On May 27 2009 15:47 DarkYoDA wrote: You're over-reading into it... What do you mean by handle? Watch how they handle them IF N.Korea really do nuke someone. But for now, handling them isn't a one step procedure. Handling them before and after they nuke a country are different issues altogether. They are not going to nuke are you serious? wtf. | ||
|
DarkYoDA
United States1347 Posts
Well most observers feel Kim is just huffing and puffing... They could be wrong but we'll see... My gut feel is that he's really just displaying the size of his dick here rather than to having brass balls to do something hardcore. I dunno it's anybody's guess | ||
|
Passion
Netherlands1486 Posts
As long as NK is not under attack, they won't use their bombs. So until that happens, the biggest threat would be trade/the selling of their nuclear technology to people who have nothing to lose and are crazy enough to maybe actually use it. It seems unlikely, however, that any terrorist group would be capable of hosting and using it. | ||
|
DarkYoDA
United States1347 Posts
On May 27 2009 17:23 Passion wrote: Darkyoda, I don't think the plan ever was for North Korea to take over Asia as soon as they had a nuclear bomb. They have been under constant threat of attack (rightfully so or not) for a long time. I guess hopes are this will give them a break, or at least a lot more leverage. As long as NK is not under attack, they won't use their bombs. So until that happens, the biggest threat would be trade/the selling of their nuclear technology to people who have nothing to lose and are crazy enough to maybe actually use it. It seems unlikely, however, that any terrorist group would be capable of hosting and using it. As per my previous post, I agreeably don't think he's doing anything "real". For the part on selling to others? Who do you think will buy from them? Russia and China (who already have their nukes)? Other Asian countries? Who'll buy from them without serious political and economic considerations? I don't see how the costs of development can ever be offset by realistic or substantial proceeds from sale of nuclear arms to anyone. There's only one country I can think of that may buy from N.Korea but to avoid an uproar, I'll keep that point to myself. Even then I don't think that country will buy from them but develop it on their own. My point is, whether you take this as a good or bad way, he's merely trying to keep a tight grip on his country or some other pride related objectives and agreeably little chance of doing any real damage - In any way. | ||
|
DarkYoDA
United States1347 Posts
I know it's not a perfect one but sufficient to illustrate my point. Ever been in a game where you joined in a 7v1comp game and the comp is destroyed in minutes?.... Thereafter you realized the game hasn't ended... Someone didn't ally vic. So what do people feel? They take a look at each other's bases and see what they build. If someone is building a lot suddenly and taken care of both attack and defense you become extremely wary of that person. In some sense, this is the same in reality. The MAIN difference is that 5 countries now holds the right to nuclear weapons and of course, although it's not a perfect scenario but I've explained it's the best situtation for now. In such a game you also try to have a few strong players as well. In fact, everyone will build a strong army and 200/200 and wait. No one would (and rightfully so) just sit there and let other's build the weapons. Now we're talking about 8 players. This world we're living in has 200 countries. If we allow all 200 to build the ending is going to be the same as for such a game - annihilation of everyone except one or even none. Zero is bad too because if someone starts to build the other 199 countries will be caught pants down (just like 7v1c the 7 will all build up to defend). So there's a decent rationale for having a few countries having nukes and not everyone in the balance of deterrence and catastrophe. As with the case of 7v1c, we don't give a shit what the person says if he starts moving out of his base with his army, he's the person to target. I suspect Kim wants to be the target for attention sake and nothing else. Pardon me if you feel this is badly illustrated. There are merits on both ends. Whatever it is, I'm done with my viewpoint which I seldom participate in nowadays. I just feel there's no reason anyone should expect the extremities of the whole world having zero nukes or all have nukes as a sign of fairness. That's all. Peace out!;P | ||
|
spkim1
Canada286 Posts
Second, no one should really act... if N.Korea launches its missiles it will receive ten times more in the face and turn into soup...along with South Korea which is very close to it. And whoever's got family in South Korea like me would understand how serious this issue is, and how stupid the world (humans) are in stirring up this mess and how weapons makers should all go die | ||
|
zatic
Zurich15324 Posts
On May 27 2009 17:41 DarkYoDA wrote: Who do you think will buy from them? I don't see how the costs of development can ever be offset by realistic or substantial proceeds from sale of nuclear arms to anyone. There's only one country I can think of that may buy from N.Korea but to avoid an uproar, I'll keep that point to myself. Even then I don't think that country will buy from them but develop it on their own. I don't think once you are ready to sell nuclear weaponry you will have any problem to find buyers. In fact you can probably start a nice bidding war. | ||
|
baal
10533 Posts
On May 27 2009 18:29 zatic wrote: I don't think once you are ready to sell nuclear weaponry you will have any problem to find buyers. In fact you can probably start a nice bidding war. N. Korea wont sell a nuclear bomb, the man is a nutjob but if a nuke made by him detonates he knows North Korea will be a crater the next day, Kim doesnt want to start a nuclear war, he just wants big leverage, as he has always done it, pressure to get stuff in exchange etc. The EXURSS had over 5,000 nuclear heads, that were in hands of countries that were part of it, also countries like Pakistan and India who are in war and are extremely poor have them. If anybody wanted a Nuke, it would be much easier to get it from the ex-soviet union but nobody will ever sell a nuclear bomb because it would mean that the country who sells it will be destroyed in the same way. Best they can do is sell technology to countries wanting to develop one, but only countries can develop one because enriching U-238 is impossible for a rouge army its a process far to costly and complicated. So chill out, Kim wont use the bomb nor sell one, other shitty countries (pakistan?) have them too and in the middle of a war and they havent used them. | ||
|
eStoniaNBoY
Switzerland439 Posts
Nuclear weapons, very high tech electronics for missiles and space technology,special fuels, very valuable metals, tanks, helicopters, planes and many other stuff was sold by Soviet Generals like it was a common fair. Viktor Bout and Leonid Minin were little boys compared to some others, high rank generals who made a very nice fortune selling them. There were closed zones and cities in Soviet Union. "Pass and you get shot" like zones and nobody even knew what was going on there. Somehow some of these places have very high radioactive levels. M/S Estonia was taken down because it was smuggling Soviet technology to NATO and Isreal. 852 people died because of that. It is speculated that the techonology was VERY high tech communication/radar and missile system. There are far more superior systems than a weak nuclear bomb that North Korea is building. So the question you all should ask is why they are doing so? Is Taiwan next to be threatened? What about Iran? | ||
|
Bob123
Korea (North)259 Posts
On May 27 2009 19:48 eStoniaNBoY wrote: M/S Estonia was taken down because it was smuggling Soviet technology to NATO and Isreal. 852 people died because of that. It is speculated that the techonology was VERY high tech communication/radar and missile system. Source on this? | ||
|
zatic
Zurich15324 Posts
On May 27 2009 19:48 eStoniaNBoY wrote: M/S Estonia was taken down because it was smuggling Soviet technology to NATO and Isreal. 852 people died because of that. It is speculated that the techonology was VERY high tech communication/radar and missile system. Yeah, please give sources for this. Also, so what Soviets sold conventional weapons in the 90's like crazy, everybody knows this. Give me one example where nuclear weapons were being sold. Again, there is certainly not a lack of potential buyers. Maybe you should watch more movies. | ||
|
Hot77.iEy
Finland1486 Posts
| ||
|
HiOT
Sweden1000 Posts
I do hope this is a pr trick from the both news groups ( Aftonbladet and expressen ) | ||
|
D10
Brazil3409 Posts
I bet they have some secret mega project where the SC players that go to the army actually pilot mechas that can stop missiles. Boxer is the team cap. | ||
|
Bob123
Korea (North)259 Posts
My main worry about this thing is that it could be connected to the north korean dictator's health. It could very well mean that he is dying and ready to do his last big show. | ||
|
Lucktar
United States526 Posts
http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/asia-pacific/8071175.stm | ||
|
Disarray
United States1164 Posts
NKorea warns of attack, says truce no longer valid North Korea said Wednesday it was abandoning the truce that ended the Korean war and warned it could launch a military attack on the South, two days after testing an atomic bomb for the second time. The announcement came amid reports that the secretive North, which outraged the international community with its bomb test Monday, was restarting work to produce more weapons-grade plutonium. Defying global condemnation, the regime of Kim Jong-Il said it could no longer guarantee the safety of US and South Korean ships off its west coast and that the Korean peninsula was veering back towards war. The White House said it viewed Pyongyang's threats as "saber-rattling and bluster" that would only deepen its isolation, with spokesman Robert Gibbs saying that "threats won't get North Korea the attention it craves." US Secretary of State Hillary Clinton meanwhile stressed US commitments to defend South Korea and Japan, saying in Washington "that is part of our alliance commitment that we take very seriously." The United States still hoped the North would return to multi-party talks on ending its nuclear programme, she added. The North's latest display of anger was prompted by the South's decision to join a US-led international security initiative, established after the September 11 attacks to stop the spread of weapons of mass destruction. "Those who have provoked us will face unimaginable merciless punishment," said the military statement on the official Korean Central News Agency, blaming Washington and Seoul for the latest turn of events. The PSI, which now groups 95 nations, provides for stopping vessels to ensure they are not carrying weapons of mass destruction or the components to make them. The South announced it was joining on Tuesday. "Any tiny hostile acts against our republic, including the stopping and searching of our peaceful vessels... will face an immediate and strong military strike in response," the North Korean statement said. It said its military would "no longer be bound" by the 1953 armistice that ended hostilities in the Korean war -- in which the United States fought with the South -- because Washington had drawn its "puppet" Seoul into the PSI. With no binding ceasefire, it said, "the Korean peninsula will go back to a state of war." | ||
|
DarkYoDA
United States1347 Posts
| ||
|
ParasitJonte
Sweden1768 Posts
And then, we would all live happily forever. The end. | ||
|
ShloobeR
Korea (South)3809 Posts
wish i didnt work in one of seouls CBDs | ||
|
Kerotan
England2109 Posts
On May 26 2009 08:32 Zozma wrote: In the event of a nuclear war, I only pray that I can make one "Nuclear launch detected" joke on TL before dying horribly. Yah Seriously. In the words of Kurt Vonnegurt: "so we sat in the air raid shelter, and one of the men said, "I wonder what the poor are doing tonight" No one laughed, but it was funny" | ||
|
Kim_Hyun_Han
706 Posts
| ||
|
Z-BosoN
Brazil2590 Posts
What a shitty-ass country, weak sons of bitches thinking they are the shit because they finally figured out how to build missiles. Hope they phail and blow themselves up, so the other countries don't. Of course, when I say north korea I mean your government/policies etc. Don't mean the general population, so for any North Korean bros here I apologize. | ||
GTR
51411 Posts
 | ||
MrHoon
10183 Posts
I mean I just fucking moved here, cmon you fags. | ||
|
eStoniaNBoY
Switzerland439 Posts
On May 27 2009 20:18 zatic wrote: Yeah, please give sources for this. Also, so what Soviets sold conventional weapons in the 90's like crazy, everybody knows this. Give me one example where nuclear weapons were being sold. Again, there is certainly not a lack of potential buyers. Maybe you should watch more movies. Todays news. Russian officials arrested more than 10 people for trying to smuggle 20 tons of missile parts, including classified components for the S-300 air-defense system, the Federal Customs Service said, Bloomberg reported. The smuggling ring, comprising former and active Russian servicemen, was attempting to export the parts to countries including Bulgaria, Kazakhstan and Ukraine, the service said on its Web site today. The unidentified smugglers operated under the cover of top officers at the Sixth Air Force and Air Defense Army, according to the statement. Their detention is the latest in a series of similar cases uncovered by North-Western customs and involving weapons components bound for Latvia and an unspecified Asian country. Russian law enforcers are beefing up the fight against corruption, which President Dmitry Medvedev has called a threat to national security. The head of the Federal Customs Service, Andrei Belyaninov, is former chief executive officer of Rosoboronexport, the state-owned arms selling agency. The long-range S-300s are among the biggest-selling Russian missile complexes that have been delivered to China, Vietnam and Greece and contracted by Algeria, said Konstantin Makiyenko, deputy head of the Center for the Analysis of Strategies & Technologies, a Moscow-based research company. A number of Middle East countries, including Iran, are also interested in the system. http://www.unian.net/eng/news/news-318117.html | ||
|
konadora
Singapore66155 Posts
^above post o wow | ||
|
Rev0lution
United States1805 Posts
The best way to keep the North Koreans from doing some batshit insane move is to negotiate with the generals, they are the ones who run shit. As far as I know the generals came up with the demi-god idea themselves. I also heard from CNN ( yes, their MSM but reliable) that Kim Jong ill is preparing to go out with a bang, who knows what this maniac could do. | ||
|
eStoniaNBoY
Switzerland439 Posts
What are the numbers of North Korean demographics? Do they need more work force? | ||
|
Ancestral
United States3230 Posts
What do they even think they're gaining? Murdering and starving their own people through insanely hostile foreign policy, no access to information, brain washing... Is it really worth all that just to have big palaces and lots of comfort women? I was reading in a pro DPRK forum someone saying that North Korea would "sink the entire island of Japan" if it continued it's hostile imperialist stance towards the U.S. I think the entire forum was nothing but trolls, but it was on an official DPRK site. The sad part is that I'm sure at least some people believe that North Korea is actually a worker's paradise, and Kim Jong Il is a great leader, and they are extremely powerful and technologically advanced - mostly brainwashed North Koreans and hostile alter-globalists though I would guess. | ||
|
konadora
Singapore66155 Posts
South Korea, US and other countries give in because they can't be bothered. Both sides become happy. Few months later, North Korea bitches again. /repeat process | ||
|
Railz
United States1449 Posts
On May 29 2009 02:08 konadora wrote: North Korea threatens and demands aid. South Korea, US and other countries give in because they can't be bothered. Both sides become happy. Few months later, North Korea bitches again. /repeat process You're an ego-manic, power hungry dictator whose had power clamps on your society for years. You're now on your deathbed, you call your eldest son "girly" (which I assume is a bad name to call someone who might proceed you). What do you do. The process can't last forever, especially with a sickening KJI. | ||
|
Aurra
United States469 Posts
P+M? | ||
|
Idle
Korea (South)124 Posts
That said, I'm moving to Seoul in the fall and this makes me a tad uneasy. | ||
|
konadora
Singapore66155 Posts
On May 29 2009 02:13 Railz wrote: You're an ego-manic, power hungry dictator whose had power clamps on your society for years. You're now on your deathbed, you call your eldest son "girly" (which I assume is a bad name to call someone who might proceed you). What do you do. The process can't last forever, especially with a sickening KJI. End off with a bang, I guess? | ||
|
eStoniaNBoY
Switzerland439 Posts
On May 29 2009 01:42 Ancestral wrote: I was reading in a pro DPRK forum someone saying that North Korea would "sink the entire island of Japan" if it continued it's hostile imperialist stance towards the U.S. I think the entire forum was nothing but trolls, but it was on an official DPRK site. There are historical reasons why Japan`s neighbours are hostile towards Japan. The crimes japanese did against them are horrible. | ||
|
Aurra
United States469 Posts
I hope my cause of death is a nuke, how awesome would that look on an obituary. "Cause of death: He got nuked." | ||
|
zatic
Zurich15324 Posts
On May 29 2009 02:30 Aurra wrote: I was just thinking (which is rare for me). I hope my cause of death is a nuke, how awesome would that look on an obituary. "Cause of death: He got nuked." Are you sure you were really thinking? | ||
|
Aurra
United States469 Posts
I don't want to die in some pussy way like having a heart attack. Who even does that? I want to be flexing at a nuclear explosion or something awesome when I go. | ||
|
Shikyo
Finland33997 Posts
On May 27 2009 19:48 eStoniaNBoY wrote:M/S Estonia was taken down because it was smuggling Soviet technology to NATO and Isreal. 852 people died because of that. It is speculated that the techonology was VERY high tech communication/radar and missile system. There are far more superior systems than a weak nuclear bomb that North Korea is building. So the question you all should ask is why they are doing so? Is Taiwan next to be threatened? What about Iran? Hey, I read something like this in a thriller by a Finnish author called Ilkka Remes. Interesting ^_^ | ||
|
Railz
United States1449 Posts
On May 29 2009 02:38 Aurra wrote: I don't want to die in some pussy way like having a heart attack. Who even does that? Everyone in Death Note | ||
|
eStoniaNBoY
Switzerland439 Posts
On May 29 2009 02:51 Shikyo wrote: Hey, I read something like this in a thriller by a Finnish author called Ilkka Remes. Interesting ^_^ I`ll post some more for you then. There are just some thoughts gathered from people who have talked about what might of happened. Something to think about. I wrote this earlier so the alien part is aimed at the guy who said it is plain conspiracy and nothing more. Fact : weapons were smuggled with M/S Estonia. Swedish custom officials ( Lennart Henriksson i.e and Swedish court) and estonian officials have reported so. Question : The question is that were the weapons smuggled during that night? And what kind of a weapons were smuggled? Overall weapons were smuggled not once, but multiple times. So civilians were set in danger multiple times. Now this is a fact. Why did they let this happen? For who and why? What kind of a weapons would you smuggle using 900 civilians as a shield? Multiple times. Truckloads of AK47-s perhaps? Grenades? Water guns and ice creams? Walkie talkies? We don`t know nor will we ever know if the weapons were transported that night or if they were supposed to be transported in the near future (check the dates when confirmed smuggling took place and the date when M/S Estonia went down) or if it was just an act to show that "enough is enough" by Russians. Clearly the stakes were higher than 900 human lives and it was a criminal act by all means on both sides. And yet nobody is sent to prison for allowing it to do. Nobody. Even if you carry weapons once then it`s a crime behalf of the civilians, but this went on and on and on. You can search the conspiracy; need to concrete the wreck and the need to keep some of the information as a secret and "9/11, aliens" stuff on your own. There is a reason why relatives of the people who lost their lives and people who made it still fight for the truth. Swedish government has classified what kind of a weapons were transported. Now think why there was a need to cover it first with sand and then with concrete. I seriously doubt there are divers who would like to see ~700 dead bodies left in the wreck. | ||
|
ZerglingShepherd
Canada99 Posts
| ||
|
zatic
Zurich15324 Posts
You can state "facts" all day long, if you don't back them up nobody will believe you. So, just post your sources so we can check it out for ourselves then we will all believe you. | ||
|
DarkYoDA
United States1347 Posts
One more problem, you claimed this is a common occurence, why post something that barely resembles this claim which just happened today? Any past "vast" archives of GOVERNMENT selling NUKES in a big way to others AFTER the various major nuclear non-proliferation agreements? | ||
| ||
StarCraft 2 StarCraft: Brood War Britney Dota 2  30425Calm  5248Bisu 3518Shuttle 3112Sea  3087Rain 2556Horang2 1270Hyuk 1225Zeus 835actioN 569[ Show more ] League of Legends Counter-Strike Super Smash Bros Other Games singsing2225 B2W.Neo1393 XBOCT498 DeMusliM437 crisheroes363 Happy220 ToD118 KnowMe70 ArmadaUGS67 QueenE63 |
|
Road to EWC
Road to EWC
Road to EWC
Road to EWC
Road to EWC
Road to EWC
Road to EWC
Online Event
Clem vs ShoWTimE
herO vs MaxPax
Road to EWC
Replay Cast
[ Show More ] |
|
|
EPT
