North Korea Nuclear Standoff

[cycloneye]

They better not do something foolish because dire consequenses may go to them.

North Korea

[Janice]

Well, our government and other countries knew this would probably happen. They did nothing to stop it..

And we are worried about hurricanes ?

[cycloneye]

http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/13361343/

Above is more information about this important development.It looks like they haved fueled the missile that can reach Alaska.

[Janice]

Good post, Cycloneye... keep us updated

[cycloneye]

North Korea Warns



North Korea warns about wiping the U.S forces.Well it's easy to talk but to do it in reallity is another thing.

[cycloneye]

North Korea



Above is a brief summary about all of this North Korean crisis.

[Janice]

Well, we could take out Korea very easily. But, will the administration want to do this?

Maybe they are waiting to see if they strike first. If they do, it will be their last one.

[Brent]

North Korea Warns



North Korea warns about wiping the U.S forces.Well it's easy to talk but to do it in reallity is another thing.

I seem to remember the Iraqi Ministry of Mis-Information saying the same thing.



This will be a SERIOUS provocation if they do it.

[nholley]

Why should they not test it? For the life of me I can't see why they should not be allowed to.

[Brent]

Why should they not test it? For the life of me I can't see why they should not be allowed to.

Maybe because they are producing Nuclear Weapons? It's not like the U.S. is alone in urging them not to do it.

[nholley]

Maybe because they are producing Nuclear Weapons? It's not like the U.S. is alone in urging them not to do it.

Why should they not have Nuclear Weapons? Because they will use them? Maybe...maybe not. Surely the one nation that has used Nuclear Weapons is not the one to be crying foul?

[cycloneye]

http://www.breitbart.com/news/2006/06/1 ... 3ejuy.html

Will the U.S intercept this long range missile? If it is carriying a nuclear device what happens next? Those are two of many questions that arise as this news takes a serious path.

[x-y-no]

http://www.breitbart.com/news/2006/06/19/060619174146.pod3ejuy.html

Will the U.S intercept this long range missile? If it is carriying a nuclear device what happens next? Those are two of many questions that arise as this news takes a serious path.

Let's not get carried away, now ...

This is a serious development, but it's only a missile test. We've known of their progress in developing long-range missiles for some time, so there's little new here.

Now it's true that they've probably built somewhere around a dozen plutonium bombs by now (and in deference to board policy I'll abstain from commentary on how that came to be) but I'm not aware of any inidication that these weapons have been fitted to any missile, let alone this new long-range missile. Making a weapon compact enough to be fitted to an ICBM is a substantial additional challenge to simply building a weapon. Very little information is publicly available to allow us to guess how far along the NKs may be in that effort.

[cycloneye]

http://www.cnn.com/2006/US/06/19/nkorea ... index.html

Condi Rice says this is a provocation from North Korea.

[gtalum]

Kinda makes you wish our military wasn't otherwise engaged, doesn't it?

[Cookiely]

Why should they not test it? For the life of me I can't see why they should not be allowed to.

The last test was fired over Japan if I'm not mistaken. How would you like if they lobbed one over Hawaii. I'd call that provacative, even if it is a test. What if there was a problem with the missile and it landed in downtown Tokyo? Any men with war experience tell me what the damage would be?

[x-y-no]

Why should they not test it? For the life of me I can't see why they should not be allowed to.

The last test was fired over Japan if I'm not mistaken. How would you like if they lobbed one over Hawaii. I'd call that provacative, even if it is a test. What if there was a problem with the missile and it landed in downtown Tokyo? Any men with war experience tell me what the damage would be?

Well, it's unlikely they'd fire in a trajectory as far south as Tokyo, more likely over northern Japan. But if it were to fall short into some populated area, then a pretty likely level of damage would be on the order of that caused by maybe two to four of the Iraqi Scuds which hit Israel during the first Gulf War. I'm basing this estimate on the fact that actually the majority of the Scud damage was due to unburned fuel (the warheads were notoriously unreliable) and this missile will have several times the quantity of fuel that a Scud has.

No doubt the Japanese are seriously annoyed about this test, but I've seen little sign that they're willing to act on their annoyance.

[Janice]

Don't they realize that if they would ever target anyplace with population, they would be wiped off the face of the earth immediately? They can't be that dumb. If they strike anyone, it will be the last time.

[cycloneye]

Don't they realize that if they would ever target anyplace with population, they would be wiped off the face of the earth immediately? They can't be that dumb. If they strike anyone, it will be the last time.

They would be erased from the map if they fire this missile especially if they go ahead and load it with nuclear stuff.

[Janice]

Well, why are they even talking about it. They must know that. Are they that DUMB or do they think they will never get hit.

Can anyone stop a missle if they release one?