North Korea tests nuke!

V

V4Vendetta

New member
http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/15190745/

http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20061009/ap_on_re_as/koreas_nuclear

Suddenly I feel an urge to sleep with my gun close to my bed. I don't trust Kim Jong Ill anymore than I trust my dog Sadie to watch my food for me. This situation bears watching. I've heard that the radiation from nukes can make you vomit up your own organs:barf: :eek: :eek: .

Even if North Korea wouldn't attack us here, it might "donate" a nuke to a group like Al-qaida who would be estatic to use a nuke here.

I may be paranoid but like the saying goes, "It's only paranoia IF there's nobody is after you."
 
Last edited:
If someone, country or terrorist, detonates a nuke over here, your gun under your pillow will do you NO good. :cool:

This changes the world.
 
If they invade anybody, its not going to be the US. Really, the South Koreans have had 50 years to figure out how to defend themselves so I'm not concerned about them either, just the US personnel stationed there.
This isn't much of a suprise. He tried to get concessions with the missile tests, but when he didn't get them he found himself painted into a corner - keep his threat to launch the missles or back down and have the world think he didn't have working long range missles. We all know how well that worked out.
I think he sees this as a way of gaining leverage in negotiations again.
 
Yeah, painted into a corner. Funny you don't mention how the "concessions" offered by Madeline Albright and the Clinton administration, in the form of nuclear power plants, are what enabled him to build the bomb in the first place.

Chalk another one up to the Clinton Legacy.
 
Not concerned about the nuke itself. It's most likely too heavy to actually put on top any of NKs missiles and expect it to reach the U.S.

It will be interesting to see what action the regional powers are going to take; what will S.K., China, Japan, and Russia do? My guess is that short term, nothing significant will occur. There will be the usual indignant bloviating at the U.N. Much thumping of chests, and vows of sanctions that will either never actually occur, or be nothing more than symbolic, useless, Bravo Sierra.

Long term? Totally different. The west's inability to reasonably project power and influence will embolden other rogue nations, and organizations, to ratchet up their activities. At some point, it's reasonable to assume that N.K. will sell or give them the technology needed to manufacture low yield devices. I would guess that things will become rather interesting in the next 5 years.
 
'He said that if a nuclear test is confirmed, “We expect the U.N. Security Council to take immediate actions to respond to this unprovoked act.”'

And I suppose the UN's action will be to wet its pants and then issue a memo chastising North Korea, using the strongest possible language.

Tim
 
It's no secret that NK had nukes, it's been reported in the press for at least a few years, maybe as long as 5 years.
 
Funny, I don't feel any different. I never trusted Kim Jong-Ill to begin with, and anyone who didn't think he either had nukes or was working very hard on them ought to put down the crack pipe and go get some fresh air. Kim Jong-Ill Is a pathetic POS with a real bad case of "little-man syndrom". The only problem is that he runs a country instead of a stripclub. Sure would be nice to see him have a little "accident" playing with something he shouldn't be.
 
Let's invade Mongolia! Clinton has been out of office for 6 years. Kind of lame to use it as an excuse for a President who has been in office for 6 years.

Gary Studds nailed a page in the 80's - that's why Foley is the Democrats' fault.

Nothing we can do about - Bush postured and refused to talk directly to them. Good plan, it seems now, doesn't it.
 
And if Bush had invaded and liberated North Korea five years ago, the left would be whining about that too, and ignoring proof of WMD plans and programs, and complaining that North Korea wasn't an "imminent" threat to the US.

North Korea doesn't need to stick a bomb on a missile, they just need to stick it into a shipping container bound for the Port of Los Angeles.

Gary Studds nailed a page in the 80's - that's why Foley is the Democrats' fault.
Click to expand...
Wrong. That's why Democrats are hypocrites.
 
On Coast to Coast (I know, I know:rolleyes: ) a guest was talking about N. Korea having a fleet of 48 subs. 22-24 are capable of reaching the US and all can reach the Asian countries. An atomic warhead, on a missile launched from one of these subs, could easily reach the West Coast. Doesn't sound good.

badbob
 
That's why both parties are hypocrites.

The GOP uses Studds as a defense. The Dems should have thrown him out.

Both suck - that's the point.

Now, since Bush screwed up Iraq and folks righteously criticize him for that, that's now an excuse why he screwed up the real deal.

Gotta laugh at the Bush does no wrong folks.
 
I don't think they pose a direct threat to us at this time. They are a poor and starving country just trying to defend themselves. Who are we to tell them that they can't have a nuke. It isn't our choice and we don't have any say in the matter. We can't tell other countries what to do.

They know that they have nothing to gain if they hit us, because they will cease to exist.

If only they put more interest in helping their poor people as they do in weapons.
 
I didn't make this thread to bash Democrats or Republicans. I just wanted to post news that seems to me to be disturbing. As I said in my first post, suppose they didn't bomb the US directly but just allowed groups such as Al-qaida to have access to the nukes?

Who do you contact to build a bomb shelter for your house?:confused:
 
"They know that they have nothing to gain if they hit us, because they will cease to exist."

Which doesn't necessarily keep them from hitting us. The NK national leadership is so psycho that I wouldn't put it past them raise suicide-bombing to a higher level.

Tim
 
They know that they have nothing to gain if they hit us, because they will cease to exist.
Click to expand...


They also know that we are not willing to give up what we would lose upon their first strike before we vaporized them, so they can strongarm us into making further "concessions" (read, "donations") to them.


Why don't you see it from a different direction: They know that they have nothing to LOSE, if life over there is so bad and wracked by poverty?


-azurefly
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top