North Korea Admits to Having Nukes

[FeArANDLoAtHiNg]

SEOUL, South Korea — North Korea (search) publicly admitted Thursday for the first time that it has nuclear weapons, and said it wouldn't return to six-nation talks aimed at getting it to abandon its nuclear ambitions

Diplomats have said that North Korea has acknowledged having nuclear arms in private talks, but this is the first time the communist government has said so directly to the public.

-"We had already taken the resolute action of pulling out of the (Nuclear Nonproliferation Treaty) and have manufactured nukes for self-defense to cope with the Bush administration's ever-more undisguised policy to isolate and stifle the DPRK," the North Korean Foreign Ministry said in a statement carried by the state-run Korean Central News Agency.

DPRK refers to the country's official name, the Democratic People's Republic of Korea.

North Korea's "nuclear weapons will remain (a) nuclear deterrent for self-defense under any circumstances," the ministry said. "The present reality proves that only powerful strength can protect justice and truth."

Since 2003, the United States, the two Koreas, China (search), Japan and Russia have held three rounds of talks in Beijing aimed at persuading the North to abandon nuclear weapons development in return for economic and diplomatic rewards. But no significant progress has been made.

[Yazman]

Shouldn't this be in the news forum? (I don't really care, it's just that I noticed you didn't comment on it yourself, so I'm assuming it's just here for news reasons). Anyway:

I don't support North Korea but the fact North Korea actually has nukes now is good as it's one more country resisting the US (even if it is a psychotic stalinist dictatorship).

[POFO_Communist]

This is a real dillema for the fascist US government.

The very fact that the DPRK has developed a credible nuclear detterent and that the US dares do nothing about it militarily will bring further to light the American regime's weakness in dealing with so called 'rogue states' (that can defend themselves).

Perhaps in the near to distant future, when the ill-fated 'star wars' nuclear shield is successfully implemented by the fascists (if it ever is), they will waste no time in confronting the DPRK militarily. Until then, they can do nothing but contemplate the fact that if they were to try something, millions of ignorant americans could face certain death in the densely populated south-western coastal cities of the US.

Nobody wants it to come to this, but it is not the north korean regime that is sabre-rattling and threatening world peace, it is in fact the US regime, hence it is their responsibility not to let it happen.
If it does, despite all the rhetoric and mindless rants about freedom and liberty, all responsibility and fault for such an incident would rest on the US, because it will most certainly be the aggressor, as it has been from the onset of it's crusade for 'freedom' and 'democracy', two thin veils that hide a very obvious and undeniable purpose- Capitalist Imperialism.

[Bolshevist]

I watched this at CNN earlier on today. I looked through KCNA to find the statement where they admit on having nuclear weapons, but I couldn't find it.

kcna.co.jp

Does anyone else find it?

[DaCuBaN]

Smellls a little like horseshit (or scaremongering, or bravado, or all three) to me, but the link to the article can be found here (http://www.boston.com/news/world/asia/articles/2005/02/10/north_korea_admits_it_has_nuclear_arms/)

The article continues, for those of you who don't trust me enough to click the link:


A fourth round scheduled for September was canceled when North Korea refused to attend, citing what it called a ''hostile" US policy.

Today's statement came after President Bush started his second term last month by refraining from direct criticism of North Korea -- raising hopes that the North would return to the stalled nuclear talks.

President Bush sent an envoy to China last week to urge a renewed push to get North Korea back to stalled talks, US officials said yesterday. The envoy, Michael Green, an Asian specialist on the National Security Council, carried with him a letter for President Hu Jintao of China, the officials said.

But North Korea said it had little hope for improved ties during Bush's second term office.

''We have wanted the six-party talks, but we are compelled to suspend our participation in the talks for an indefinite period till we have recognized that there is justification for us to attend the talks," the ministry said today.

North Korea said it came to its decision because ''the US disclosed its attempt to topple the political system in the DPRK at any cost, threatening it with a nuclear stick."

Still, North Korea said it retained its ''principled stand to solve the issue through dialogue and negotiations and its ultimate goal to denuclearize the Korean Peninsula remain unchanged."
© Copyright 2005 Globe Newspaper Company.

[DaCuBaN]

millions of ignorant americans could face certain death in the densely populated south-western coastal cities of the US.

Not so. The DPRK's recent missile tests were (allegedly - like everything surrounding the country I'm left in two minds as to who is telling the truth) over Japan and into the pacific ocean (just ballistics, I might add). They do not appear, if this is true, to have the capability to reach even Alaska, yet alone Seattle, Los Angeles etc.

You've got to remember of course, this was published in a US paper. Check the spin:


Since 2003, the United States, the two Koreas, China (search), Japan and Russia have held three rounds of talks in Beijing aimed at persuading the North to abandon nuclear weapons development in return for economic and diplomatic rewards. But no significant progress has been made.


Should that not read "removal of sanctions"? ;)

[Iso-Socialist]

"The true power of the nuclear weapon is not nuclear at all... But physiological"

Even if their missiles don't have the capability to reach the US, then they can still launch them at both South Korea and Japan. The US can not lose those "pawns" or the'll lose in economically and politically in Asia. Same goes for Iran, if they develop a nuclear warhead, the US can lose Israel... It's only "pawn" in the middle east. Who's going to help the US in those regions after that? Russia? Europe? Hah!

The US's allies don't seem to support them anymore (excluding the UK and Australia). Bush came to Nova Scotia a while back, bickering like a little girl who just got dumped on how Canada should help protect the Freedom of north america by building the "Star Wars" missile defence system. Bush also promised to push forward the re-opening of the border for canadian beef... a bribe? heh.

Are we witnessing the fall of the great American empire?

[DaCuBaN]

Are we witnessing the fall of the great American empire?

I'm partial to a little prophecising myself, but let's not get carried away. She probably has another 100 years in her at my best guess.


Even if their missiles don't have the capability to reach the US, then they can still launch them at both South Korea and Japan. The US can not lose those "pawns" or the'll lose in economically and politically in Asia.

I would say their target would more likely be China. South Korea is filled with US troops, and as such would make an excellent target, but I suspect they wouldn't choose that location. Japan perhaps could become the target, but again I see this as unlikely - they are not a military threat, and again most of the US installations could be removed by conventional weaponry; since the second world war, Japan have been under military sanction, and other than the fact they share similar economic ideologies, they are most certainly not "friends". You cannot visit a single place in Japan without finding a memorial to the atrocities of Hiroshima and Nagasaki; there is no love lost there.

My money would be either on what these reports (and apparently they are covered in the Japanese newspapers, or so my colleagues here tell me) actually say - nuclear proliferation as a deterant to the US - or as a reminder to China over who their "old pal" really is...

We'll see - but be careful about prophecising the downfall of any entity. Sun Microsystems tried that one with Microsoft, and we're living in the aftermath of that attempt.

[Iso-Socialist]

100 years? Maybe several decades but I wouldn't say a century. Yes, the US has no technological or economical rivals in the comming or even the next decade, how ever we do have a few possibilities... The EU (if and when it does become a nation) they have a powerfull currency, strong purchasing power, high end technology, strong military, and several "pawns". China who's economy is growing like fire, India with the same story as china... But their in a cold war, which calls for build up of everything in each sector (military, economy, technology, and so on).

I do agree with your post, not with your time table. :)



- One must not under-estimate his enemy, nor should he over-estimate him.

[Scottish_Militant]

http://news.bbc.co.uk/nol/shared/bsp/hi/image_maps/05/1/1106133295/img/image.gif

At-a-glance: 'Outposts of tyranny'

Condoleezza Rice, President George W Bush's nominee for secretary of state, has hinted at the direction of future US foreign policy by identifying six "outposts of tyranny" around the world.

:rolleyes:

[highway star]

I have some drawbacks on this topic:Nuclear Program of North Korea. Nuclear missle program is very expensive and North Korea isn't very rich. If North Korea can do this, people live in with new hard conditions in there. Also, has North Korea got this technology? I don't think so... They say that Russians, Chinese will help them about missle. Which Russians? Which economically depending on IMF? Which Chinese? Which is the new land of imperialism?
I think North Korea has primary problems. The life level of its people... Look! Has Cuba nuclear missle? I agree that socialist countries must defend itselves. We are in a capitalist world and capitalism is more wild. But its very expensive. There is priority works...
(My English isnt perfect. So maybe i have some mistakes. Sorry...)

[DaCuBaN]

As I initially said, it's quite possible that it's nothing more than bravado. Certainly, this is true of Castro and the Cuban missile crisis - I very much doubt a single warhead would ever have touched US soil, nor anywhere.

Nope, only we limeys and yanks are dumb enough to do that. Socialists? Not a chance.


If North Korea can do this, people live in with new hard conditions in there. Also, has North Korea got this technology? I don't think so...

A few years ago, the DPRK launched several missiles over Japan and into the pacific ocean. The DPRK is confirmed to have nuclear power plants, and this is a big concern for many in the area, much as those in Japan are (to give an example, there was a richter-4 earthquake about 100Km north of Tokyo only yesterday). Technologically, it's not a big leap to take the enriched uranium used for power generation and prepare it for warhead use.

However, I agree that it's a waste of resources that could be better spent elsewhere. Again, socialists should know better - but paranoia and fear are strong driving influences, and with the US led by a religious fundamentalist and staunch free-marketeer, I'd be shitting bricks if I was in their "Axis of Evil" too.

The USSR "bankrupted" itself (or so I believe) through a space race they should not have had, and through an arms race that should not have happened. I fear that, if the DPRK is the socialist haven that many tell me it is, that it too will succumb to economic pressures, rather than be crushed through military force.

[bolshevik butcher]

I can't see the U$ invading North Korea, it actually has an army, and possibly nuclear weapons.

[Fidelbrand]

Nukes before Food - Legacy of DPRK's hereditory-monarchic-hermit-hell.

[Severian]

Two different people asked me the same question about this yesterday: "So, does the U.S. have a nuclear weapons program."

Me (confused): "What kind of question is that? Is water wet?"

Them: "So what's the big deal with North Korea?"

The CIA has guessed for years that north Korea probably has at least one or two nuclear weapons. They have definitely produced enough plutonium to make more than that.

[FeArANDLoAtHiNg]

I've heard that this latest revelation by North Korea may be just an attempt to get a better deal in negotiations. Also, North Korea says they'll agree to one-on-one talks with the US, but not the six-nation talks. But of course, the US won't agree to one-on-one talks.

But if North Korea does in fact have this technology, then I welcome it. I don't see a war starting out of it, nor a warhead actually being launched. If anything it seems as if it could be a successful deterrant, keeping the United States the hell out of their business.

[Hiero]

By Korean Central News Agency, verified through the DPRK mission in the United
Nations -Geneva, Switzerland-

Pyongyang, February 10 (KCNA) - The DPRK Ministry of Foreign Affairs released a
statement Thursday to clarify its stand to cope with the grave situation created
by the US hostile policy toward the DPRK.

The statement says:

The second-term Bush administration's intention to antagonize the DPRK and
isolate and stifle it at any cost has become quite clear.

As we have clarified more than once, we justly urged the US to renounce its
hostile policy toward the DPRK whose aim was to seek the latter's "regime
change" and switch its policy to that of peaceful co-existence between the two
countries. We have closely followed with patience what policy the second-term
Bush regime would shape after clarifying the stand that in that case it would be
possible to solve the nuclear issue, too.

However, the administration turned down our just request and adopted it as its
policy not to co-exist with the DPRK through the president's inaugural address
and the state of the union address and the speech made by the secretary of State
at the Congress hearing to get its approval, etc.

The remarks made by senior officials of the administration clarifying the
official political stance of the US contained no word showing any willingness to
co-exist with the DPRK or make a switchover in its policy toward it.

On the contrary, they have declared it as their final goal to terminate the
tyranny, defined the DPRK, too, as an "outpost of tyranny" and blustered that
they would not rule out the use of force when necessary.

And they pledged to build a world based on the US view on value through the
"spread of American style liberty and democracy."

The true intention of the second-term Bush administration is not only to further
its policy to isolate and stifle the DPRK pursued by the first-term office but
to escalate it. As seen above, the US has declared a new ideological stand-off
aimed at a "regime change" in the DPRK while talking much about "peaceful and
diplomatic solution" to the nuclear issue and the "resumption of the six-party
talks" in a bid to mislead the world public opinion.

This is nothing but a far-fetched logic of gangsters as it is a good example
fully revealing the wicked nature and brazen-faced double-dealing tactics of the
U.S. as a master hand at plot-breeding and deception.

The DPRK has clarified its stand that it would not pursue anti-Americanism and
treat the US as a friendly nation if it neither slanders the political system in
the DPRK nor interferes in its internal affairs. It has since made every
possible effort to settle the nuclear issue and improve the bilateral relations.

However, the US interpreted this as a sign of weakness, defiled the dignified
political system in the DPRK chosen by its people and wantonly interfered in its
internal affairs. The US, turning down the DPRK's request to roll back its
anti-DPRK hostile policy, a major stumbling block in the way of settling the
nuclear issue, treated it as an enemy and, not content with this, totally
rejected it, terming it "tyranny." This deprived the DPRK of any justification
to negotiate with the U.S. and participate in the six-party talks.

Is it not self-contradictory and unreasonable for the US to urge the DPRK to
come out to the talks while negating its dialogue partner? This is the height of
impudence.

The US now foolishly claims to stand by the people in the DPRK while negating
the government chosen by the people themselves. We advise the US to negotiate
with dealers in peasant markets it claims they are to its liking or with
representatives of "the organization of north Korean defectors" on its payroll
if it wishes to hold talks.

Japan is now persistently pursuing its hostile policy toward the DPRK, toeing
the US line.

Moreover, it fabricated the issue of false remains over the "abduction issue"
that had already been settled in a bid to nullify the DPRK-Japan Pyongyang
Declaration and stop any process to normalize diplomatic relations with the
DPRK. How can we sit at the negotiating table with such a party?

It is the trend of the new century and wish of humankind to go in for peace,
co-existence and prosperity irrespective of differing ideology, system and
religious belief.

It is by no means fortuitous that the world people raise their voices cursing
and censuring the Bush administration as a group pursuing tyranny prompted by
its extreme misanthropy, swimming against such trend of the world.

We have shown utmost magnanimity and patience for the past four years since the
first Bush administration swore in.

We can not spend another four years as we did in the past four years and there
is no need for us to repeat what we did in those years.

The DPRK Foreign Ministry clarifies as following to cope with the grave
situation created by the US hostile policy toward the DPRK:

First. We have wanted the six-party talks but we are compelled to suspend our
participation in the talks for an indefinite period till we have recognized that
there is justification for us to attend the talks and there are ample conditions
and atmosphere to expect positive results from the talks.

The present deadlock of the six-party talks is attributable to the US hostile
policy toward the DPRK.

There is no justification for us to participate in the six-party talks again
given that the Bush administration termed the DPRK, a dialogue partner, an
"outpost of tyranny", putting into the shade the hostile policy, and totally
negated it.

Second. The US disclosed its attempt to topple the political system in the DPRK
at any cost, threatening it with a nuclear stick. This compels us to take a
measure to bolster its nuclear weapons arsenal in order to protect the ideology,
system, freedom and democracy chosen by its people.

It is the spirit of the Korean people true to the Songun politics to respond to
good faith and the use of force in kind.

We had already taken the resolute action of pulling out of the NPT and have
manufactured nukes for self-defence to cope with the Bush administration's
evermore undisguised policy to isolate and stifle the DPRK.

Its nuclear weapons will remain nuclear deterrent for self-defence under any
circumstances.

The present reality proves that only powerful strength can protect justice and
truth.

The US evermore reckless moves and attempt to attack the DPRK only reinforce its
pride of having already consolidated the single-minded unity of the army and
people and increased the capability for self-defence under the uplifted banner
of Songun. The DPRK's principled stand to solve the issue through dialogue and
negotiations and its ultimate goal to denuclearize the Korean Peninsula remain
unchanged.

[Hodgeh]

Originally posted by Clenched [email protected] 10 2005, 08:54 PM
I can't see the U$ invading North Korea, it actually has an army, and possibly nuclear weapons.
While NK's Army may be vast (appox. 1 million+), it's an issue of quantity over quality. Provided US carriers arrive on station and Japan allows the US to fly air sorties off Japanese soil, the US would quickly gain air superiority, allowing for a counter-attack or invasion likely to be spearheaded by South Korean forces.

The first order of business would be the neutralization of NK's massed artillery stationed near the DMZ around Seoul. There's enough firepower there to level Seoul, and the first air strikes would likely be targeted there. Then would come attacks on NK's logistics systems. An Army of 1 million soldiers requires a hell of a lot of support (read: food, something NK is short of already).

As for the issue of NK possessing nuclear arms, it's my opinion that NK does not actively posses deployable nuclear weapons. Minus the massive "train" explosion on NK ground last year, there hasn't been any significant seismic activity suggesting nuclear tests (which in itself would be a bad idea with NK's land area prediciment).

Should NK actually posses a workable nuclear weapon, I would guess that they would fire one of their new longer range missles and detonate it over Tokyo and simotaneously deliver a demand that Japan not allow US forces to use Japanese bases. NK would threaten a nuclear strike should Japan not comply.

[Revolutionarythought]

The United States is not stupid enough to attack North Korea. They will have no qualms about isolating North Korea and starving the people though.


-S

[DaCuBaN]

What I will never understand is why Japan "plays ball" with the US (or UK, for that matter) at all; We developed (hand in hand, before any of you brits try to get magnimonious about it) the manhattan project and tested it in New Mexico, bringing this horrible scourge upon the world.

We then - after knowing precisely what it could do - launched not one, but two atomic bombs on Japan - at that point in the war a dying nation. Does anyone remember what President Truman called Hiroshima? "Hiroshima, a Military base". Does anyone remember what he called Nagasaki? I doubt it, because it was never broadcast to the public that it had been attacked.

The governments of the US and UK have time and time again been proved to be murdering, lying, cheating and self-righteous arseholes - we can only assume that Japan, emulating the culture so closely as it does (along with China now) has adopted the same attitude. Certainly, looking at the pictures of the supposed "Six party talks" (DPRK on one side of the table, everyone else on the other giving them a grilling) we can "assume" nothing else. It's enough to make you want to strap a bomb to your chest and run screaming into the Whitehouse!

[Hodgeh]

We, the US, trashed Japan's economy and logistics during the course of WW2. We then single handedly rebuilt their nation into the foremost economic power in East Asia during the second half of the 20th century. We are also a very lucrative trade partner. That's why Japan plays nice with the US.

[Hodgeh]

Originally posted by [email protected] 12 2005, 03:34 AM
The United States is not stupid enough to attack North Korea. They will have no qualms about isolating North Korea and starving the people though.


-S
Even in retaliation to NK aggressions? Or, say NK sells nuclear material to a terrorist organization, which in turns detonates a nuclear advice or dirty bomb of some sort on US soil.

The country would be clammering as a whole for immediate attacks on NK. Think Afghanistan.

Even still, keeping with the Bush Adminstration's preference for pre-emptive attack, there's a possibility for an Israeli-style strike on NK's nuclear facilities.

[Intifada]

Why is it that only the US and her chosen allies are allowed to possess WMD?

[FeArANDLoAtHiNg]

Because the US is the "policeman of the world". Ha! Anyone who trusts the United States to police the world fairly and justly is a fool.

[CommieBastard]

Originally posted by [email protected] 12 2005, 06:03 PM
We, the US, trashed Japan's economy and logistics during the course of WW2. We then single handedly reuilt their nation into the foremost economic power in East Asia during the second half of the 20th century. We are also a very lucrative trade partner. That's why Japan plays nice with the US.
Japans economic recovery was only helped by the US, the responsibility lies enitrely with the foresight, open-mindedness and genius of a generation of Japanese economic planners.

[bolshevik butcher]

Originally posted by [email protected] 12 2005, 10:50 PM
Why is it that only the US and her chosen allies are allowed to possess WMD?
Because dubya says so. Israel's the only country in the middle east with nukes.

[Intifada]

Because dubya says so. Israel's the only country in the middle east with nukes.

Dubya may say so, but the US has always been two-faced when it comes to foreign policy.

Your example of Israel really emphasises the hypocritical nature of the USA, the USA which stands for liberty and justice, while protecting democracy and human rights.

In the General Assembly of the United Nations, there have been around 450 resolutions calling upon the international community to fight for justice in Palestine.

This is a world record.

In the world of international politics, there have been similar situations to that of the conflict between Palestinians and Israelis. Yet there has always been a different outcome.

When Saddam Hussein invaded Kuwait in 1990, he was ordered to withdraw by the United Nations. When Saddam ignored this call, Iraq was attacked so badly that thousands upon thousands were killed.

When Israel decided to take full control of the West Bank and Gaza, it was also ordered to get out by the same UN Security Council. That was decades ago.

Instead of attacking Israel, the West, in particular America, has continued to reward the Zionists with billions of dollars in aid and arms, and helped it develop nuclear weapons. Moreover, Israel denies outside inspectors to examine nuclear facilities.

If this is not hypocrisy, I do not know what is.

US foreign policy is all about self-interest. They could not give a squirt of piss about the people who suffer at the hands of those they support.

[bolshevik butcher]

Originally posted by [email protected] 13 2005, 05:02 PM

Because dubya says so. Israel's the only country in the middle east with nukes.


US foreign policy is all about self-interest. They could not give a squirt of piss about the people who suffer at the hands of those they support.
Well summed up.

[Invader Zim]

I fail to understand the logic, or lack of there in, of those who say this is a good thing.

Firstly, the number of nations we have with nuclear weapon capabilities is too high.

Secondly, as much as I dislike the USA and its foreign policy, I trust them not too use its nuclear weapons. Sorry, but I just don't have that faith with North Korea.

[Severian]

Originally posted by [email protected] 11 2005, 07:59 PM
allowing for a counter-attack or invasion likely to be spearheaded by South Korean forces.
Unlikely, given the south Korean political situation.

On the other hand, the south Korean military is a lot stronger than during the Korean War, and can probably fend off any attempt to retailiate by counter-invading.


The first order of business would be the neutralization of NK's massed artillery stationed near the DMZ around Seoul. There's enough firepower there to level Seoul, and the first air strikes would likely be targeted there.

First would be the nuclear sites. The artillery near Seoul would be the second, and the third, and the tenth...it's a lot easier said than done. That's a lot of heavily dug-in artillery - it won't be taken out quickly. Seoul would definitely take a lot of damage first. Note that the U.S. has been redeploying its forces out of artillery range....


Then would come attacks on NK's logistics systems. An Army of 1 million soldiers requires a hell of a lot of support (read: food, something NK is short of already).

Good point, U.S. military doctrine does emphasize going after the "logistical tail", and that is a vulnerability here. That would probably make any effective counter-offensive impossible, and limit even defensive maneuvers....the whole NK army isn't going to surrender through hunger though.

I don't think the NK army would be wholly unbeatable, but everyone seems to agree they'd be a lot tougher than Iraq, or even Iran.



As for the issue of NK possessing nuclear arms, it's my opinion that NK does not actively posses deployable nuclear weapons. Minus the massive "train" explosion on NK ground last year, there hasn't been any significant seismic activity suggesting nuclear tests (which in itself would be a bad idea with NK's land area prediciment).

They haven't tested one...that doesn't mean they don't have one. Testing a nuke would be a considerable escalation of the situation.

(Which this statement isn't...it's not so different from things they've said in the past.)

They definitely have the plutonium - which is the hardest part. Had enough for one or two even before the '94 agreement was reached, and could have been working on weaponizing it ever since.

The U.S. broke the '94 agreement, and the north Koreans removed a lot more plutonium which had been under IAEA seal in Yongbyon. That's enough plutonium to build six to eight bombs, we definitely know north Korea has it, and they've had three years to turn it into a bomb.

And they probably bought some plans and maybe machinery from Pakistan's "nuclear supermarket".


Should NK actually posses a workable nuclear weapon, I would guess that they would fire one of their new longer range missles and detonate it over Tokyo and simotaneously deliver a demand that Japan not allow US forces to use Japanese bases. NK would threaten a nuclear strike should Japan not comply.

Or south Korea...how to invade north Korea without south Korean bases? Or the U.S. military forces themselves. (Fleets make a really good target.) The inaccuracy of Scuds and so forth ceases to matter when you've got nukes...

In any case, the U.S. ruling class seems honestly convinced they have nukes: most speculation in the big-business media has focused on whether they can deliver 'em: are they small enough to be put on long-distance missiles, can the Taepodong II reach Hawaii, Alaska, and maybe even California, etc. (probably not)

It's not a good idea to attack a nuclear power, so that really takes invasion off the table. Maybe even "surgical strikes" at nuclear sites.

U.S. policy seems to focus on pressuring north Korea by getting China and Russia to cut off or at least threaten to cut off aid and trade. Hence the focus on the 6-party talks.

So far they haven't succeeded in getting even south Korea to do so however...Seoul just announced their aid and trade programs with north Korea are going forward despite this announcement.

[bolshevik butcher]

Originally posted by [email protected] 13 2005, 05:35 PM
I fail to understand the logic, or lack of there in, of those who say this is a good thing.

Firstly, the number of nations we have with nuclear weapon capabilities is too high.

Secondly, as much as I dislike the USA and its foreign policy, I trust them not too use its nuclear weapons. Sorry, but I just don't have that faith with North Korea.
I agree with everything said in this statement, north korea is a stalinist dictatorship.

[Intifada]

Firstly, the number of nations we have with nuclear weapon capabilities is too high.


I agree completely, in fact, I believe that all nuclear weapons should be dismantled.


Secondly, as much as I dislike the USA and its foreign policy, I trust them not too use its nuclear weapons. Sorry, but I just don't have that faith with North Korea.

I do not trust North Korea, nor do I trust the US, but I can understand why the North Koreans have decided to arm themselves with WMD, if they do indeed possess them.

Owning WMD is a deterrent to any possible attack by the US or her allies.

[anarchialibertad]

Here is some lyrics from da best band in the world CRASS

They won't destroy the world, no, they're not that crazy.
You're dealing with the town hall. They're not that crazy.
No political solution so why should we bother?
Well whose fucking head do you think they're holding over?
FOUR. THREE. TWO. ONE. FIRE.

They can't wait to use it. They can't wait to use it.
They can't wait to try it out. They can't wait to use it.
They've got a bomb. They've got a bomb
And they can't wait to use it on me.

Twenty odd years now waiting for the flash...

Twenty odd years now waiting for the flash,
All of the oddballs thinking we'll be ash.
Well the four minute warning has run on into years,
Are we waiting for them to confirm our fears?
FOUR. THREE. TWO. ONE. FIRE.

They can't wait to use it. They can't wait to use it.
They can't wait to try it out. They can't wait to use it.
They've got a bomb. They've got a bomb
And they can't wait to use it on me.

They can build them small, call it tactical.
Stop the fallout, make it practical
To smash the misfits who foul up their scene
With the practical, tactical, killing machine.
FOUR. THREE. TWO. ONE. FIRE.

They can't wait to use it. They can't wait to use it.
They can't wait to try it out. They can't wait to use it.
They've got a bomb. They've got a bomb
And they can't wait to use it on me.
Me. Me. Me. Me. Me. Me. Me. Me. Me. Me. I. Me. Me. Me



They wont do shit because they dont have the balls to do it. Just another excuse to fuel the fear that runs our "perfect" society.

[Severian]

Originally posted by [email protected] 13 2005, 11:35 AM
Secondly, as much as I dislike the USA and its foreign policy, I trust them not too use its nuclear weapons.
You mean...........use them again?

I might point out that the Bush administration's "Nuclear Policy Review" even proposed using nuclear weapons against non-nuclear states under 3 circumstances:
1. Retaliation for chemical or biological weapons use
2. For busting deeply buried bunkers....like north Korea has, more than anyone.
3. "Unexpected military developments", which could mean anything, including just plain losing a war.

This is, of course, a violation of the Nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty, as is the nuclear powers' failure to negotiate disarmament.


Sorry, but I just don't have that faith with North Korea.

Why not? They've done a lot less aggression than Washington. Even the Korean War is...more complicated than the usual version.

It's true that the more countries get nuclear weapons, the more likely it become that someone will use them....but it's the actions of the U.S., more than any other government, which ensure that more and more countries will seek them. For one thing, it's the only way to be sure of not being invaded.

[Anarchist Freedom]

I think its good that NK has nukes because they dont have the balls to use them. Nukes more or less have become a sign of hey dont fuck with us and we wont fuck you up.

[FeArANDLoAtHiNg]

"Trusting" the United States to not use nuclear weapons is something I probably would have agreed with in the past. But now, more than ever, its apparent to me that the US can't be trusted.

Although I still think it's highly unlikely that the US will use nuclear weapons, they're not to be trusted. If Bush will do some of the outrageous things he's been doing, why wouldn't he use nuclear weapons if he could develop some bullshit reason for it?

He'd just defend his actions with lies and say it was necessary for the defense of "freedom". And sadly, a lot of scared Americans would accept it.

[h&s]

Did anyome see the interview that Jack Straw gave about Nukes? he was going on all about the need for Iran and the DPRK to fall in line with the non-proliferation treaty, which I thought was hypocritical enough with the UK having nukes and everything, but he was giving the interview sitting next to Pervez Musharaf!! The president of a country in clear breach of the very same treaty Straw was stressing the importance of!
Hypocrasy or what? :rolleyes:

[Anarchist Freedom]

Wow thats really funny that people have balls to do that.

[bolshevik butcher]

There's nothing brave about nuking the U$ or any other countiries cities.

[Hodgeh]

Originally posted by Severian+Feb 13 2005, 07:14 PM--> (Severian @ Feb 13 2005, 07:14 PM)
[email protected] 11 2005, 07:59 PM
allowing for a counter-attack or invasion likely to be spearheaded by South Korean forces.
Unlikely, given the south Korean political situation. Say SK get's their act in gear and desires an invasion/counter attack. There's 2 options: 1, wait for US armor to be shipped or 2, attack themselves. Let me clarify, SK would be the 'muscle' in any sort of aggression, with US support.


The first order of business would be the neutralization of NK's massed artillery stationed near the DMZ around Seoul. There's enough firepower there to level Seoul, and the first air strikes would likely be targeted there.

First would be the nuclear sites. The artillery near Seoul would be the second, and the third, and the tenth...it's a lot easier said than done. That's a lot of heavily dug-in artillery - it won't be taken out quickly. Seoul would definitely take a lot of damage first. Note that the U.S. has been redeploying its forces out of artillery range.... Eh... simaltaneous attacks...


Then would come attacks on NK's logistics systems. An Army of 1 million soldiers requires a hell of a lot of support (read: food, something NK is short of already).

I don't think the NK army would be wholly unbeatable, but everyone seems to agree they'd be a lot tougher than Iraq, or even Iran. Naturally...



As for the issue of NK possessing nuclear arms, it's my opinion that NK does not actively posses deployable nuclear weapons. Minus the massive "train" explosion on NK ground last year, there hasn't been any significant seismic activity suggesting nuclear tests (which in itself would be a bad idea with NK's land area prediciment).

They haven't tested one...that doesn't mean they don't have one. Testing a nuke would be a considerable escalation of the situation. Think NK would risk deploying one of their weapons with no testing whatsoever?

And they probably bought some plans and maybe machinery from Pakistan's "nuclear supermarket".;]


Should NK actually posses a workable nuclear weapon, I would guess that they would fire one of their new longer range missles and detonate it over Tokyo and simotaneously deliver a demand that Japan not allow US forces to use Japanese bases. NK would threaten a nuclear strike should Japan not comply.

Or south Korea...how to invade north Korea without south Korean bases? Or the U.S. military forces themselves. (Fleets make a really good target.) The inaccuracy of Scuds and so forth ceases to matter when you've got nukes...Japan makes a much safer staging area.

In any case, the U.S. ruling class seems honestly convinced they have nukes: most speculation in the big-business media has focused on whether they can deliver 'em: are they small enough to be put on long-distance missiles, can the Taepodong II reach Hawaii, Alaska, and maybe even California, etc. (probably not)The Nodong-5 missile can hit California :[ IIRC, they've had those missles for at least 5 years now, NK stole the design schematics from the Chinese, who were not very happy.

U.S. policy seems to focus on pressuring north Korea by getting China and Russia to cut off or at least threaten to cut off aid and trade. Hence the focus on the 6-party talks.China brought NK to its knees a few years back by cutting oil supplies, so that same sort of tactic is the likely route. [/b]
Responses in bold...

[Severian]

Originally posted by [email protected] 17 2005, 09:00 PM
[QUOTE=Hodgeh,Feb 11 2005, 07:59 PM] ]Say SK get's their act in gear and desires an invasion/counter attack. There's 2 options: 1, wait for US armor to be shipped or 2, attack themselves. Let me clarify, SK would be the 'muscle' in any sort of aggression, with US support.
Why not just assume Martians will invade north Korea, while you're at it?

[Hodgeh]

:rolleyes:

[Severian]

I mean, I was interested to read yer opinion of the military situation in your first post, too few people on the left nowadays take that kind of thing seriously.

But you gotta base it on an accurate picture of the political situation first...since war is the continuation of politics by other means.

[Hodgeh]

Granted, but there was clear indication that I was moving into the hypothetical realm for the sake of argument in that last post.

[MeTaLhEaD]

GO GO GO


Viva North Korea

fuck bush and USA

[h&s]

Originally posted by [email protected] 25 2005, 03:51 AM
GO GO GO


Viva North Korea

fuck bush and USA
Grow up.