Forgot your password?
typodupeerror
The Military United States Politics

North Korea Announces 3rd Nuclear Test, Anti-US Aims 597

Posted by timothy
from the state-vs-state-and-state-vs-man dept.
As reported by Reuters, The New York Times, and Fox News, among others, North Korea's nuclear saber-rattling has reached a new peak. North Korean officials have made clear their intent to conduct a third nuclear test (earlier tests were in 2006 and 2009), as well as further rocket launches specifically designed to demonstrate missile reach extending to the U.S. From Reuters' story: "North Korea is not believed to have the technology to deliver a nuclear warhead capable of hitting the continental United States, although its December launch showed it had the capacity to deliver a rocket that could travel 10,000 km (6,200 miles), potentially putting San Francisco in range, according to an intelligence assessment by South Korea. 'We are not disguising the fact that the various satellites and long-range rockets that we will fire and the high-level nuclear test we will carry out are targeted at the United States,' North Korea's National Defence Commission said, according to state news agency KCNA."
This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.

North Korea Announces 3rd Nuclear Test, Anti-US Aims

Comments Filter:
  • by Antipater (2053064) on Thursday January 24, 2013 @12:26PM (#42681323)

    If I were China, I'd already be backing away from them.

    They already are. All this hubbub is in response to a UN vote censuring them for the December rocket launch. The vote was unanimous - China did not back them up or even abstain.

  • by h4rr4r (612664) on Thursday January 24, 2013 @12:47PM (#42681541)

    Their nukes are the still huge. Think old 40s nuclear test stands. You aren't walking that anywhere. It would never fit in a sub.

  • by guttentag (313541) on Thursday January 24, 2013 @01:17PM (#42681931) Journal

    The only way the civilized world is going to limit the cost of dealing with the ultimate war with N. Korea is to prepare S. Korea, with the help other friendly countries, to do a massive surgical strike to take out the entire N. Korean military and its facilities and have S. Korea able and supplied and armed with its own people who can move in to supplie staples and organization to the society.

    It's a tempting thought, but it's not going to happen unless a nuclear attack on S. Korea, Japan, or the U.S. is imminent. The people of North Korea may be impoverished, but the country has the fourth-largest active military in the world:

    China 2.285M
    United States 1.458M
    India 1.325M
    N. Korea 1.106M
    Russia 1.027M
    (Everyone else in the world has a military roughly half the size of N. Korea's or smaller. Other members of the security council listed below)
    France 0.353M
    United Kingdom 0.198M

    If you look at military reserve, which would be called up in the event of a strike against N. Korea, you add 8.2M people to the fray. That's nearly 10 million people who have been cut off from the outside world for generations and taught that the world is out to get them and their glorious leaders protect them. A lot of people will die, on both sides, and no one has the stomach for that -- and rightly so. Alternatively, saving our side casualties by using nuclear weapons would be unthinkable. So the people in power (the military) sabre rattle to maintain their grip on the country and to try to force aid from the rest of the world. It's not in their interest to attack us, because we would stop feeding them. But we can't afford to let them get in a position where a nutjob or nervous, clumsy individual accidentally launches a nuclear strike. Our job (as the rest of the world) is to ensure they don't gain the ability to threaten us with nuclear weapons, even if that means cutting back our aid to their poor impoverished citizens who think the aid comes from their leaders and don't know any better.

    But don't think for a moment that we're going to send two helicopters full of seals into Pyongyang, dump the glorious leader's body at sea and suddenly N. Korea will become a sunny land of welcoming people with a big rainbow over it. If the military leadership ever fails there, it's going to be chaos, and the people won't want our help.

    The real news here is this:

    • They're taking a confrontational stance with China, which is incredibly dumb, but may be an indication of increasing desperation within N. Korea's leadership. China doesn't see N. Korea as a favorite nephew. It maintains its relationship to assert its power in the region, because it fears that millions of refugees would spill over its border in a crisis, and because it believes it's the only superpower in a position to keep N. Korea on a leash. By being confrontational, N. Korea is threatening China's understanding of their relationship, and telling the world it's willing to bite the hand of everyone who feeds it. It's saying "we're crazy and out of control, so you'd better keep feeding us."
    • They're acknowledging that their "peaceful space program" was just a cover for ICBM testing. Which we already knew. But telling the world it lied about its peaceful intentions says, "don't trust us, you don't know what we might do." More sabre-rattling, ratcheted up to the point where they're hoping we'll have to give them more aid to stabilize them.
  • by CohibaVancouver (864662) on Thursday January 24, 2013 @01:18PM (#42681941)

    It would be FAR LESS than hundreds of thousands dead on the US side

    Sigh. It's not just about American deaths - It's hundreds-of-thousands of dead in South Korea - Our ally. It's not always just about you 'muricans.

  • by AK Marc (707885) on Thursday January 24, 2013 @03:13PM (#42683265)

    Did you forget already that there were no WMDs in Iraq?

    But there were. Of course, they were inoperable (and all stamped "made in USA"). And Iraq had a working WMD program. Though the output was solely propoganda to make people think he had them because if he was shown to be as impotent as he actually was, there would have been a revolt without US intervention. And Saddam had "links" to al Quaeda because Osama called and asked to train in Iraq, and Saddam told him "no". That is an "association," even if Saddam didn't help.

    What gets lost in the news is that everything is true or false based on perspective.

    What I can't get is that Clinton told the truth under oath (causing no harm, truth or lie) and got impeached, and Bush lied to kill millions, including Americans, and that's ok, he was obviously too stupid to know what he was doing.

    It all goes back to the anti-intellectual slant in the US. The dumb aren't responsible for their actions, but the smart should be held to a higher standard.

Little known fact about Middle Earth: The Hobbits had a very sophisticated computer network! It was a Tolkien Ring...

Working...