Jump to content


Photo

North Korea got NUKES! =X


  • Please log in to reply
33 replies to this topic

#21 Bold

Bold

    -kenja sama

  • Retired
  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • 2789 posts
  • Location:Montreal, Quebec, Canada

Posted 14 October 2006 - 02:30 PM

QUOTE (babbo @ Oct 13 2006, 01:50 AM)
And regarding the first post, North korea could never become a super power just by getting nukes....france has nukes and just look at them >.>

Militarily speaking, France is considered as having amongst the top military forces in the world. During the last 20 years, they reduced the size a lot, but it is still a very large force with very impressive material.

Economicly speaking, they are more solid than some of their neighboors and they are considered by the OCDE in the group of the most developped nations.

So in the end, I really don't see what you mean by "look at France". At least support your statements with something to help understand in what way you meant it.

This is the thougthfull section. It is not the place to fire unsupported comments based on popular beliefs.
Follow your dreams, Never give up, Never be afraid,
Always remember, Fortune favors the bolds!

---
You like FTV? Leave a thanks for the team :)
---

Proud developer of the AB Syndicate
user posted image

#22 Konohamaru

Konohamaru

    -chan

  • Kouhais
  • PipPip
  • 61 posts

Posted 15 October 2006 - 12:08 AM

huh.gif
I think what babbo meant was 'is France ready to fight back in reply to a nuclear attack ?' It probaly doesn't look that way from their prudent involvement in peacekeeping operations and from the stance Chirac is taking on the internantional political scene.

He seems more eager to kiss the butts of Putine (from whom France needs to buy gas & minerals etc.), middle-east dictators (to whom we want to sell our planes) and chinese communist party (in order to get access to chinese labour force and market).

I mean, there are few leaders that take such independent political (as opposed to economical) decisions on the international scene as does Bush. Chirac is not one of them. No European leader is, actually. Chavez for instance, looks much bolder than even Blair.

So yeah, if another nuclear warhead falls there's a high probability for it to be 'made in USA' once again. Although I believe that Congress has to approve of it first: Bush will not be left alone in front of the red button, not after the disaster he's done in Iraq.

And now on topic biggrin.gif
It's kind of sad that when people speak of North Korea they only speak of the nuclear threat. I mean, c'mon: N-Korean nukes are just the fancy of a madman named Kim Jong-Yil. A 23 million country must have much more than that about it.
Those people are so much different from anyone else on this planet, as ever since WWII they've lived constantly under communist dictatorship. 2 dictators only !!!
Kim Il-Sung 1948-1984
Kim Jong-Il 1984-2006

The second one is starting to go crazy (like all dictators eventually do).
Proof: <<In August of 2006, the DPRK declared the armistice that ended the 1950-1953 Korean War "null and void.">>
and the recent nuclear drive...

But I can't help thinking that someone has to try and reach to those people and help them change the regime. A UN security council resolution like the one that's been adopted is just useless ... sad.gif I see more hope for world peace from
"Both North and South Korea signed the June 15th North-South Joint Declaration in which both sides made promises to seek out a peaceful reunification." - Wikipedia/North Korea

#23 darkdog

darkdog

    -dredg

  • Retired
  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • 1406 posts
  • Location:poutena @ portugal
  • Interests:anime (seriously!! i'm not kiddin'!), music (hard rock, alt rock, &quot;nu metal&quot;, progressive rock, etc etc) and sheep above all.

Posted 15 October 2006 - 12:27 AM

are you serious about that question? "if the US were making nukes"?
QUOTE ("wikipedia")
It maintains an arsenal of about ten thousand warheads to this day, as well as facilities for their construction and design, though many of the Cold War facilities have since been deactivated and are sites for environmental remediation.
(from wikipedia)

10 thousand warheads. and just because they're in the US' and not Korea's hands doesn't make me feel safe.

and i'll take this opportunity to post the lyrics of an awesome song by GlassJAw which talks about potential nuclear wars, and it's just awesome tongue.gif the song's called radio cambodia and it's awesome!^^ \m/
~ such a shame, my defenses have become my own restrictions... ~ [ lostprophets ]
~ my best days will never be behind me, my best days will never cease to find me.. ~ [XthrowdownX]
user posted image

#24 darkdog

darkdog

    -dredg

  • Retired
  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • 1406 posts
  • Location:poutena @ portugal
  • Interests:anime (seriously!! i'm not kiddin'!), music (hard rock, alt rock, &quot;nu metal&quot;, progressive rock, etc etc) and sheep above all.

Posted 15 October 2006 - 12:44 AM

like it's on the article, "it MAINTAINS an arsenal of about 10 000 warheads TO THIS DAY". Or, with further detail:
QUOTE (wikipedia)
Current status

The United States is one of the five recognized nuclear powers under the Nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty. It maintains a current arsenal of around 9,960 intact warheads, of which 5,735 are considered active or operational, and of these only a certain number are deployed at any given time. These break down into 5,021 "strategic" warheads, 1,050 of which are deployed on land-based missile systems (all on Minuteman ICBMs), 1,955 on bombers (B-52 and B-2), and 2,016 on submarines (Ohio class), according to a 2006 report by the Natural Resources Defense Council. Of 500 "tactical"/"nonstrategic" weapons, around 100 are Tomahawk cruise missiles and 400 are B61 bombs. A few hundred of the B61 bombs are located at eight bases in six European NATO countries (Belgium, Germany, Italy, the Netherlands, Turkey and the United Kingdom), the only such weapons in forward deployment.
Around 4,225 warheads have been removed from deployment but have remained stockpiled as a "responsible reserve force" on inactive status. Under the May 2002 Treaty on Strategic Offensive Reductions, the U.S. pledged to reduce its stockpile to 2,200 operationally deployed warheads by 2012, and in June 2004 the Department of Energy announced that "almost half" of these warheads would be retired for dismantlement by then.


oh, and they still have facilities to design and build more weapons too.
~ such a shame, my defenses have become my own restrictions... ~ [ lostprophets ]
~ my best days will never be behind me, my best days will never cease to find me.. ~ [XthrowdownX]
user posted image

#25 darkdog

darkdog

    -dredg

  • Retired
  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • 1406 posts
  • Location:poutena @ portugal
  • Interests:anime (seriously!! i'm not kiddin'!), music (hard rock, alt rock, &quot;nu metal&quot;, progressive rock, etc etc) and sheep above all.

Posted 15 October 2006 - 12:58 AM

my opinion (which i don't fully understand if it's your opinion as well) is that the US shouldn't be telling the world they can't have nukes when the US have thousands of nukes themselves.. they shouldn't tell the world who the good guys and who the bad guys are, when they start preemtive wars themselves.

all this to say: i don't think N.Korea should have nukes, but it's so much harder to fully ban nukes when some countries have so many of those.. i definitely believe that none should have them.
~ such a shame, my defenses have become my own restrictions... ~ [ lostprophets ]
~ my best days will never be behind me, my best days will never cease to find me.. ~ [XthrowdownX]
user posted image

#26 Konohamaru

Konohamaru

    -chan

  • Kouhais
  • PipPip
  • 61 posts

Posted 15 October 2006 - 01:04 AM

Well, I don't know what the madman thinks, but to my mind it's not in his interest to make use of the bomb.

In researching the H-bomb he probably seeks some consideration/respect/fear from neighbouring countries. But what he is getting instead is disapproval even from allies like China and Russia. He will eventually realize that an economical dwarf of a country (1) that is completely isolated (2) cannot think itself as a superpower, even though it posesses non-conventional weapons.

[MODERATOR's NOTE: Posts under here that were not of the thougthfull level were removed under here.]

Edited by Bold, 15 October 2006 - 02:10 PM.


#27 Bold

Bold

    -kenja sama

  • Retired
  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • 2789 posts
  • Location:Montreal, Quebec, Canada

Posted 15 October 2006 - 03:18 AM

QUOTE (Konohamaru @ Oct 14 2006, 08:11 PM)
The second one is starting to go crazy (like all dictators eventually do).
Proof: <<In August of 2006, the DPRK declared the armistice that ended the 1950-1953 Korean War "null and void.">>
and the recent nuclear drive...
That is not a proof of insanity. Bad judgement, reprehensible action, probably. Insanity, hardly.

QUOTE (fayewong @ Oct 14 2006, 08:39 PM)
I meant active nukes ready to launch if there were another war to happen.
To this day, there are a lot of active nuclear warheads at various states of readiness in the US like in many other countries.

QUOTE (fayewong @ Oct 14 2006, 08:39 PM)
What you quoted are warheads and it didn't state nukes. It could just be referring to missles, rockets torpedos. We are talking about something that can destroy an entire city, not a mini-bottle rocket that can just destroy your house.
Just so you know. Nuclear weapons don't equal entire cities destroyed. Those are strategic nukes. Someone has actually had the idea to invent tactical nukes! Low yield warheads with limited ranges. They nuclear fission weapons can even be mounted in artillery shells to make tactical nulear shells. Those we imagined as a way to level the "playing field" for the US in a case of a war with the USSR. They VASTLY outnumbered the number of US tanks (I believe it was something between 8 or 10 to 1, but I am not 100% sure about those numbers). Tactical nuclear shells were supposed to allow someone to kill, either by direct explosion or radiation poisonning, a full USSR tank column using a single US tank ... ingenious would'nt you say ...

QUOTE (fayewong @ Oct 14 2006, 09:05 PM)
Yes, that's what I mean but I couldn't put it into intellectual words.  It was pointless of me to ask since most people reading this is for N. Korea to not have nukes.
It is not pointless at all. Not clearly identifying your position and not exposing it is actually far more pointless.

QUOTE (Konohamaru @ Oct 14 2006, 09:07 PM)
Well, I don't know what the madman thinks, but to my mind it's not in his interest to make use of the bomb.
Using a nuclear weapon would be a real sign of madness. Becase let's not try to hide from the truth. If someone were to launch such a weapon, we would all, and I mean all humans, die within the next few weeks. Either from direct explosions or from radiation poisonning. A nuclear attack, from anywhere on anywhere would trigger responses that would be fatal to the whole race.

QUOTE (fayewong @ Oct 14 2006, 09:19 PM)
Hey I'm back with another stupid question. Some people on page 1 said stuff about how U.S. can and can not use nukes. How do you know this information? You don't work for the government. and if U.S. could use it, why haven't they done so? They could've just blown up Afghanistan/Iraq/Pakistan/ (any other middle eastern country you feel should be blown up) and ended terrorism forever.  Lol, jk.
The discussion was about what they could, as in legally and physicly do. I can take my car, drive it to 200km/h and decide to smash it in a cement wall. If you told me I am over the speed limit, I would say "so what?!???".
Follow your dreams, Never give up, Never be afraid,
Always remember, Fortune favors the bolds!

---
You like FTV? Leave a thanks for the team :)
---

Proud developer of the AB Syndicate
user posted image

#28 malfion

malfion

    -dono

  • Kouhais
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 565 posts
  • Location:Hailing from Toronto Ontario, Canada..Malfion..
  • Interests:I like writing, reading, video games, the internet, anime obviously<br><br>Ask me for the specifics in a PM if you wish!

Posted 15 October 2006 - 03:31 AM

Why did they do it? For"power"?, to show that they dominate South Korea?, to prove that they are capable of what every other country can do? It started snowing in my area last week... could this have been a reaction from the test?
Isn't testing basically using the bomb in a controlled environment?
I'll put something here again, someday.

#29 Kit-Tsukasa

Kit-Tsukasa

    -desu

  • Retired
  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • 10929 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Interests:Watching anime since childhood.
    I wait for quality releases. Need recommendations? Just ask.

    Lurked Fansub TV since November 2004
    Joined Fansub TV Forums in December 2005
    Sempai in June 2006
    Fansub TV Team in October 2006
    10000th post in July 2011
    Fansub TV Leader in January 2011

    Interested in revitalizing Fansub TV Forums. Support requested.

Posted 15 October 2006 - 03:38 AM

QUOTE (malfion @ Oct 14 2006, 11:34 PM)
Why did they do it? For"power"?, to show that they dominate South Korea?, to prove that they are capable of what every other country can do?

I think North Korea got nukes so that they can make a name for themselves. That way they are not alienated from society or not shown as a threat in the world unlike Iran at the moment (from the perspective of the US and UN). Just because North Korea has China as an ally doesn't mean that other countries are scared. China is still a developing country and is currently not ready to go into any sort of battle. Therefore, North Korea decided to make "weapons of mass destruction" to show the world what they are capable of and to be included as a part of the world rather than being tossed aside like garbage.

#30 malfion

malfion

    -dono

  • Kouhais
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 565 posts
  • Location:Hailing from Toronto Ontario, Canada..Malfion..
  • Interests:I like writing, reading, video games, the internet, anime obviously<br><br>Ask me for the specifics in a PM if you wish!

Posted 15 October 2006 - 03:44 AM

This is a major issue. It came from nowhere. I see how they want to be recognized and apparently, they don't look like they plan on using them for domination. How did the news of the tests get out?
I'll put something here again, someday.

#31 lazycam

lazycam
  • Kouhais
  • 6 posts
  • Location:Durham, NC
  • Interests:modern architecture, dwell, anime. currently watching NHK and Black Blood Brother's. If you have any good recomendations let me know.

Posted 15 October 2006 - 03:49 AM

North Korea is a small country blowing off some steam. With China and Japan in the area, we have nothing to worry about. I'd like to believe ALL people are relatively rational, Kim Jong Ill and his leadership. I just hope we (USA) don't act on our impulses again.

#32 malfion

malfion

    -dono

  • Kouhais
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 565 posts
  • Location:Hailing from Toronto Ontario, Canada..Malfion..
  • Interests:I like writing, reading, video games, the internet, anime obviously<br><br>Ask me for the specifics in a PM if you wish!

Posted 15 October 2006 - 03:52 AM

QUOTE
I just hope we (USA) don't act on our impulses again.


Lol,
Bush( With head out of window): We're coming for you *****! We've got your number!
Other countries: Not again!

QUOTE
North Korea is a small country blowing off some steam. With China and Japan in the area, we have nothing to worry about. I'd like to believe ALL people are relatively rational, Kim Jong Ill and his leadership.


Lets hope so man.. lets hope so...
I'll put something here again, someday.

#33 lazycam

lazycam
  • Kouhais
  • 6 posts
  • Location:Durham, NC
  • Interests:modern architecture, dwell, anime. currently watching NHK and Black Blood Brother's. If you have any good recomendations let me know.

Posted 15 October 2006 - 04:10 AM

QUOTE
Lol,
Bush( With head out of window): We're coming for you *****! We've got your number!
Other countries: Not again!


Sometimes I wish Arnold Schwarzenegger were president. Then all this unnecessary aggression would make sense. blink.gif

#34 fourier

fourier

    -chan

  • Kouhais
  • PipPip
  • 90 posts
  • Location:The OC
  • Interests:things and such

Posted 15 October 2006 - 05:22 AM

QUOTE (darkdog @ Oct 14 2006, 05:30 PM)
10 thousand warheads. and just because they're in the US' and not [North] Korea's hands doesn't make me feel safe.

lol

The president, for the first four years had to worry about getting re-elected, and always cares for the long term reputation of his party. They president generally cares at least somewhat about the safety of the people, he had to to get elected. The president alone doesn't have the power to launch a nuclear weapon. There are enough people in between him and the launch button, that if he were to do anything rash, it would be stopped.

Kim Jong Il is a ruthless dictator with absolute control over everything that happens in his country and he's all but crazy.

I feel better with the 10,000 warheads in American hands.


Oh yeah, to whoever said that nobody should have nukes, what'll happen once we've all discarded our nukes, and a less than friendly country builds one in secret? Perhaps 10,000 is a little over the top, but I don't mind having them around.

Hmm, maybe Gungrave has temporarily hardened me to violence.

I think that the bomb really was a nuke though, and we are gonna be stupid enough to invade, and we're all gonna die in a nuclear war.
oliovur




0 user(s) are reading this topic

0 members, 0 guests, 0 anonymous users