Beta
×

Welcome to the Slashdot Beta site -- learn more here. Use the link in the footer or click here to return to the Classic version of Slashdot.

Thank you!

Before you choose to head back to the Classic look of the site, we'd appreciate it if you share your thoughts on the Beta; your feedback is what drives our ongoing development.

Beta is different and we value you taking the time to try it out. Please take a look at the changes we've made in Beta and  learn more about it. Thanks for reading, and for making the site better!

North Korea Conducts Nuclear Test

CmdrTaco posted more than 5 years ago | from the happy-holidays dept.

The Military 573

viyh writes "North Korea conducted a nuclear test on Monday, South Korea's Yonhap news agency quoted a ruling party official as saying. A magnitude 4.7 earthquake was recorded by the USGS in North Korea. South Korean President Lee Myung-bak has called an emergency meeting of cabinet ministers over the test, Yonhap said."

cancel ×

573 comments

Sorry! There are no comments related to the filter you selected.

I for one.... (1, Funny)

Anonymous Coward | more than 5 years ago | (#28082113)

i for one welcome our north korean overlords

War is peace (-1, Offtopic)

Anonymous Coward | more than 5 years ago | (#28082117)

Freedom is slavery
Ignorance is strength
Google is not evil

Re:War is peace (4, Insightful)

BadAnalogyGuy (945258) | more than 5 years ago | (#28082313)

The problem of world peace is one of leadership. It's not only a struggle for resources, but a struggle for supremacy, which guides our national policies. America believes it cannot continue to exist without controlling others. And NK believes that it must dominate its enemies in order to survive.

This can't be fixed so easily, I'm afraid. It's simply human nature. So it's up to each and every one of us to work towards that goal. I'm starting with the man in the mirror. I'm asking him to change his ways. And no message could have been any clearer: if you want to make the world a better place, take a look at yourself and make a change.

Re:War is peace (0, Redundant)

Meneth (872868) | more than 5 years ago | (#28082467)

Like change is always for the better. Heh.

Re:War is peace (3, Funny)

Anonymous Coward | more than 5 years ago | (#28082645)

Hee Hee! Shamonuh. Chickah chickah.

Re:War is peace (3, Insightful)

Oricalchos (1339065) | more than 5 years ago | (#28082765)

And no message could have been any clearer: if you want to make the world a better place, take a look at yourself and make a change.

In my estimation, more misery has been created by reformers than by any other force in human history. Show me someone who says, "Something must be done!" and I will show you a head full of vicious intentions that have no other outlet. What we must strive for always! is to find the natural flow and go with it. - The Reverend Mother Taraza, Conversational Record, BG File GSXXMAT9

In Communist Korea... (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 5 years ago | (#28082119)

Nukes test you!

I'm ronery.... (5, Funny)

viyh (620825) | more than 5 years ago | (#28082135)

Soooo ronery....

Re:I'm ronery.... (5, Funny)

Psyborgue (699890) | more than 5 years ago | (#28082141)

Wacist!

Scary (1, Interesting)

mc1138 (718275) | more than 5 years ago | (#28082171)

Weapons that can destroy the planet are never a good thing so long as there's so much tension in the world.

Re:Scary (1, Insightful)

Psyborgue (699890) | more than 5 years ago | (#28082181)

But since they must exist, it's better if everybody have them. Deterrence.

Re:Scary (4, Insightful)

Daimanta (1140543) | more than 5 years ago | (#28082199)

Yet you forgot one factor. Nutjobs.

Re:Scary (1, Insightful)

Psyborgue (699890) | more than 5 years ago | (#28082239)

Yes the insane or otherwise unpredictable... It's easy to label the "enemy" as such, but the fact is that they have to be somewhat competent and predictable to run a country... if not a bit paranoid.

You want to avoid disaster? Don't push their backs to the wall and make sure their enemies all have nukes too so they don't have an unfair advantage. Balance is the key.

what? you got a better alternative? Harsh language and UN sanctions that hurt nobody but the people?

Re:Scary (1, Flamebait)

ShieldW0lf (601553) | more than 5 years ago | (#28082309)

I wish more people recognized this. It's like listening to people who were young during the cold war era talking about stupid commies, and how communism doesn't work... if they were so stupid and if their system doesn't work, how come your entire generation dedicated the entirety of their lives to destroying them and never succeeded?

To besmirch your enemy is to belittle yourself.

Re:Scary (3, Insightful)

Kokuyo (549451) | more than 5 years ago | (#28082371)

But communism DIDN'T work. And in a few years we'll realize that democracy doesn't work either.

Re:Scary (4, Insightful)

aetherworld (970863) | more than 5 years ago | (#28082401)

But communism DIDN'T work. And in a few years we'll realize that democracy doesn't work either.

Democracy is the worst government system. Except for all the other ones we have tried in the past...

Re:Scary (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 5 years ago | (#28082417)

Define a few years, I'd love to come back in a few years and reply to one of your posts saying you were wrong when, long behold, the world is still spinning. The End is Nigh? Doubtful.

Unlikely (-1)

Anonymous Coward | more than 5 years ago | (#28082697)

> I'd love to come back in a few years and reply to one of your posts

Considering that Slashdot closes discussions to posting after a period of only weeks, I rather doubt that you're going to be able to do this. Or that anyone will care, except you.

Re:Scary (1, Insightful)

Swizec (978239) | more than 5 years ago | (#28082481)

Wait, you mean to say there are people out there who think our flavour of democracy actually works? Nutjobs!

Everyone with a bit of knowledge knows that democracy only works in populations up to about 6500 people. After that it stops working and it was the inventors of democracy who figured that out ... the ancient greeks. Anyone who thinks democracy works with millions of people, or is in any sense of the term a real democracy if it even hints at working, is an idiot.

Re:Scary (3, Insightful)

DarrenBaker (322210) | more than 5 years ago | (#28082523)

Seems to be working fairly well so far. Maybe not to your expectations, but I don't see people falling over dead from starvation outside my house.

Also, keep in mind that we don't use straight-up democracy... It's a mixture of many different disciplines. Taxes, health care, and education are socialist ideals.

Re:Scary (4, Insightful)

Swizec (978239) | more than 5 years ago | (#28082597)

That's what I meant to say, we're not really living in a democracy and it's time we stopped pretending we do because I don't think that word means what our collective self thinks it does.

Re:Scary (2, Informative)

Macrat (638047) | more than 5 years ago | (#28082743)

Seems to be working fairly well so far.

That's because the US is a Republic, not a Democracy.

Re:Scary (1)

Opportunist (166417) | more than 5 years ago | (#28082801)

It may surprise you, but there are democracies with "socialist" parties in government positions that aren't some of the old red commie countries. Sweden had for the longest time a socialist government. So did other countries in Europe, with varying lengths, from France to Austria to Germany, Spain, Italy and IIRC Greece too.

You might want to know that we in Europe do see a very definite difference between "socialism" and "communism". Think of Democrats and Republicans, just towards the other end of the political spectrum.

Yes, the Dems would be a liberal right party in Europe.

Re:Scary (1)

Oricalchos (1339065) | more than 5 years ago | (#28082783)

Maybe Frank Herbert was onto something with his idea of Bene Gesserit ^_^

Re:Scary (1, Troll)

SharpFang (651121) | more than 5 years ago | (#28082529)

Communism didn't work for several reasons but two of about the biggest ones were:

- constant paranoia about getting sabotaged by outside enemies, which paralyzed progress by destroying mutual trust, on which communism must be built to succeed.

- constantly getting sabotaged by actual outside enemies - CIA funding religious extremists opposing the nation, never-ending propaganda about the paradise of the capitalist life, restrictions in trade of modern technologies, constant threat of war which stole lots of resources for army, which could otherwise be used on making lives better.

Of course there were other factors, but these two were nowhere near the least.

Re:Scary (5, Insightful)

Psyborgue (699890) | more than 5 years ago | (#28082553)

How about, when you have a job and get paid the same no matter what you do, you don't try very hard and industry stagnates. I lived in a former communist country for a while. I know how it is. Tire factories producing tires with bolts in them... horrible quality and service everywhere.

Re:Scary (4, Insightful)

Macrat (638047) | more than 5 years ago | (#28082777)

How about, when you have a job and get paid the same no matter what you do, you don't try very hard and industry stagnates.

Like union dominated US car industry?

Re:Scary (1)

jlarocco (851450) | more than 5 years ago | (#28082821)

Not even close.

Communism fails because its underlying assumption is that the people being ruled are too stupid to make decisions for themselves and that some government beaureacrat hundreds or thousands of miles away, with no first hand knowledge, knows better than individual people what those people should buy, what they should produce, and how they should live their lives.

Paranoia and sabotage are minor flaws when the whole underlying idea is broken.

Re:Scary (5, Insightful)

daem0n1x (748565) | more than 5 years ago | (#28082663)

Things don't simply "work" or not. Human history is a continuum of change. Communism worked for some time in some places, Capitalism is working for some time in some places. There is no definitive solution, because there isn't a definitive problem.

The real nutjobs are the ones that claim to have found the "End of History". And both commies and cappies are guilty of such arrogance.

Re:Scary (1)

GreenTech11 (1471589) | more than 5 years ago | (#28082637)

Just how is this flamebait?, the parent is giving one of the most reasoned arguments I have seen in this thread.

Re:Scary (4, Insightful)

MoonBuggy (611105) | more than 5 years ago | (#28082443)

While I'm not sure exactly where I stand on the overall issue of nuclear wepons - it's a lot more complex than the soundbites in the news like to make out, after all - I do think it's worth saying that characterising Kim Jong Il as insane is at least somewhat fair.

Were we talking about Iran, for example, I'd agree with you - although their leaders hold a vastly different ideology to many of our own, writing them off with simplistic statements is totally unfair. Their country works in its own way and while legitimate criticism could be levelled at them for failing to represent the wishes of their people, that would not negate the fact that the decisions they do make often work to achieve the desired outcome.

North Korea, on the other hand, is not running as a functional country in any sense of the word. The competence of the leadership is very much in question, and many of their past actions suggest a level of delusion that could potentially lead to very destructive behaviour.

Re:Scary (1, Insightful)

khallow (566160) | more than 5 years ago | (#28082615)

You want to avoid disaster? Don't push their backs to the wall and make sure their enemies all have nukes too so they don't have an unfair advantage. Balance is the key.

What makes the advantage "unfair"? Who should have nuclear weapons in order to maintain "balance"? Should you or I personally have them? My view is that no, we haven't demonstrated either the need, maturity, or the security to have nuclear weapons. Oddly enough, neither has North Korea.

what? you got a better alternative? Harsh language and UN sanctions that hurt nobody but the people?

We need to remember that penalties can go far beyond harsh language. My view is that the civilized world, not just the US, should back up nuclear nonproliferation efforts with the threat of both conventional and nuclear force. Ideally an international military force backed with nuclear weapons could implement this nonproliferation effort.

Re:Scary (0)

Ilgaz (86384) | more than 5 years ago | (#28082477)

Lets not forget the elected nutjobs too, shall we?

I mean between 2000 to this date which things seems slowly restoring, we all learned that elected people can do way more harm than a freak communist dictator even claiming they are doing it for democracy and human rights.

We at least know North Korea, what are they capable of and whether they are serious or not. What about some other countries which are claimed to run by democratically elected officials?

Re:Scary (1)

Skuld-Chan (302449) | more than 5 years ago | (#28082479)

Well another one yet - both countries are still technically at war still.

The insane need not apply (2, Informative)

Gazzonyx (982402) | more than 5 years ago | (#28082207)

Yeah, but it only takes one person with access, opportunity, and a death wish to take everyone with them.

Re:The insane need not apply (2, Informative)

Psyborgue (699890) | more than 5 years ago | (#28082373)

This isn't 24. Nukes aren't suitcase size. There needs to be a delivery method and that's pretty much impossible to pull off without it being traceable. *Worst* case scenario: it's not traceable, and there is no retaliation.

Re:The insane need not apply (1, Insightful)

frieko (855745) | more than 5 years ago | (#28082423)

Re:The insane need not apply (4, Informative)

Psyborgue (699890) | more than 5 years ago | (#28082495)

Hint: they're extremely expensive to manufactuer and not really portable. The smallest ones are footlocker or reftigerator size and have a yield of ~1 kiloton, which is practically nothing at all. It could take out a building, yes, but so could a truck full of fertilizer, and horseshit is a lot easier to smuggle then nuclear munitions that give off radiation that's easy to detect.

Re:The insane need not apply (2, Informative)

tcopeland (32225) | more than 5 years ago | (#28082709)

> Hint: they're extremely expensive to manufactuer and not really portable.

Colin Gray talks about the possibility of a terrorist using a nuke in Another Bloody Century [amazon.co.uk] . He thought it was more likely that a terrorist would buy or be given a nuke to use rather than fabricating it due to the difficulties that you mention. He also says that nukes have a certain cultural taboo that make even a small detonation A Big Deal.

That's a great book; he talks about how cyber warfare being overhyped and also where he thinks space warfare will go. Interesting stuff.

Re:The insane need not apply (2, Informative)

the linux geek (799780) | more than 5 years ago | (#28082735)

The United States produced the W48 nuclear artillery shell in quantity. They're six inches wide and less than three feet long - much smaller than a "footlocker or refrigerator."

Re:Scary (-1)

Warlord88 (1065794) | more than 5 years ago | (#28082209)

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mutually_assured_destruction [slashdot.org] >MAD?. By the way, is this nuclear test reason enough to invade North Korea and 'liberate' their people?

Re:Scary (2, Insightful)

DarrenBaker (322210) | more than 5 years ago | (#28082237)

Brother man, I did not support the invasion of Iraq one iota, but I'd support a multinational invasion force in North Korea, you better believe it.

Re:Scary (0, Insightful)

Anonymous Coward | more than 5 years ago | (#28082399)

I'd support a multinational invasion force in North Korea, you better believe it.

Bloody hell. You people never fucking learn, do you?

Re:Scary (1)

DarrenBaker (322210) | more than 5 years ago | (#28082623)

Note that I said 'multinational', as in the UN. It should be decided by many bureaucrats, not by a few war mongers.

Re:Scary (1)

samriel (1456543) | more than 5 years ago | (#28082405)

Brother man, I did not support the invasion of Iraq one iota, but I'd support a multinational invasion force in North Korea, you better believe it.

I agree. In Iraq, we had suspicions, ONLY suspicions, of WMDs. With North Korea, they have proven to us that not only do they have WMDs, but they also have rocket technology capable of delivering them to Japan, South Korea, Vietnam...

These are scary times.

Re:Scary (0)

Psyborgue (699890) | more than 5 years ago | (#28082451)

Why can't they have nukes? Why is it even our business?

Re:Scary (1)

UPi (137083) | more than 5 years ago | (#28082729)

Because the rest of the world doesn't want to be nuked.

Parent was moderated insightful, why?

Re:Scary (1)

DarrenBaker (322210) | more than 5 years ago | (#28082787)

Parent was moderated insightful, why?

Just a guess, but I'd say because it was insightful.

Re:Scary (1)

DarrenBaker (322210) | more than 5 years ago | (#28082761)

That's a complicated question, with a complicated answer, but I guess it can somewhat be boiled down to this: If you and your neighbours all have guns to keep the peace (inane, I know, but stay with me), things are cool. Up until one of those neighbours decides to start threatening everyone else, then starts firing the gun at 3 in the morning just to demonstrate that they have the cojones. Then the block association will probably have to bring it up at the next meeting, and probably decide that Crazy Larry doesn't get to keep his gun.

What you're asking is an ethical question, based in absolutes. When you pose those questions in a world based on compromised ideals and half-realised policies, it becomes a very different thing.

Re:Scary (2, Insightful)

confused one (671304) | more than 5 years ago | (#28082449)

Just remember that, no matter how fast an invasion force moves, the'll get off a couple of missles. North Korea has lots and lots of conventional missles. Japan and South Korea are well within range.

Re:Scary (1)

Macthorpe (960048) | more than 5 years ago | (#28082211)

*Must* they?

Re:Scary (1)

aereinha (1462049) | more than 5 years ago | (#28082219)

Except that some people that want them don't care if they die after they use them.

Re:Scary (2, Insightful)

Psyborgue (699890) | more than 5 years ago | (#28082315)

Dictators pose for the people. They use religion and the whole "we hate israel" crap (or we hate capitalism of whoever...) to get the support of their religious right... sort of like abortion is a carrot on the stick in the states. They'll never actually do anything. They would lose their leverage (and ensure self annihilation). Dictators look out for themselves first. They're after power, not idealism. Because of this, they're predictable. Insane? Irrelevant. So long as they're predictable they're controllable.

Re:Scary (3, Insightful)

lurker412 (706164) | more than 5 years ago | (#28082693)

"They'll never actually do anything." Huh? Hitler and Stalin were just posing? What a curious reading of history.

Re:Scary (1)

daem0n1x (748565) | more than 5 years ago | (#28082769)

What you say applies to any politicians. We just "elect" ours.

Re:Scary (1)

ZombieWomble (893157) | more than 5 years ago | (#28082471)

I had this discussion with some friends after the long-range rocket test NK did a while back, and I don't buy that the US having nukes would substantially affect NK's outlook on using a nuclear weapon against the US if it could and saw a clear benefit from it.

Consider it from the USA's point of view - a North Korean nuke sails out of the sky and flattens, say, Seattle. Should the US respond with nuclear weapons? Where should they go?

Targeting North Korean cities just kills a lot of civilians who the NK authorities don't seem to care that much for anyway, and which would certainly guarantee a degree of hatred from the remaining North Korean populace and severely damage what would otherwise be a perfect moral high ground for removing the current leadership.

The other option is using them to speed along the war by using them on military targets - a slightly more plausible use - but raises similar problems to the above. The US would lose a portion of its moral high ground, and the rest of the international community is going to be a bit leery of committing troops to an invasion force if they suspect there's going to be lots of nukes flying around.

If a government seemed to really be concerned for the welfare of all their citizens, then yes, the concept of deterrence would be a good policy. But if they're out to promote an ideology and strike back at their enemies, then its effects are dangerously diminished. At the moment this means that North Korean nukes would be a strong deterrent to the USA, but perhaps not the other way around.

Re:Scary (1)

daem0n1x (748565) | more than 5 years ago | (#28082593)

Why must people play with fucking weapons? Why don't they play with their balls, instead? Nobody's harmed that way.

insert fallout 3 jokes here (1)

hort_wort (1401963) | more than 5 years ago | (#28082223)

It's time to send in Liberty Prime! Just need to reprogram him to yell about North Koreans and their "Juche" government, whatever that means.

It might be a good time to invest in all those radiation toys you've been thinking about.
http://ki4u.com/ [ki4u.com]

Re:insert fallout 3 jokes here (1)

cheesybagel (670288) | more than 5 years ago | (#28082287)

As powerful as Liberty Prime is, I think it can't cross oceans. Unless it has an optional flight pack I am unaware of.

Re:insert fallout 3 jokes here (1)

ubersoldat2k7 (1557119) | more than 5 years ago | (#28082667)

Anyone knows of a wig's company? I would like to get some stocks.

Kim Jong Il on his country (2, Funny)

AHuxley (892839) | more than 5 years ago | (#28082235)

Its a fun clip that should give slashdot readers some smiles, but
the last line is haunting, "keep on throwing I dare you.. "
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=NpF5-mBmI0c [youtube.com]

ArmsControlWonks view of the test. (4, Informative)

auric_dude (610172) | more than 5 years ago | (#28082249)

http://www.armscontrolwonk.com/2308/the-second-north-korean-nuclear-test [armscontrolwonk.com] provides a sober view of the latest test as well as other Korean and arms control related http://www.googlesyndicatedsearch.com/u/acw?q=korean&sa=Search [googlesynd...search.com] topics.

Japan Goes Nuclear At Last? (2, Interesting)

resistant (221968) | more than 5 years ago | (#28082341)

It'll be interesting to see if this latest provocation makes Japan [nuclearweaponarchive.org] finally go nuclear [scitizen.com] .

Re:Japan Goes Nuclear At Last? (2, Informative)

Ilgaz (86384) | more than 5 years ago | (#28082421)

If they go Nuclear, you won't be able to figure it.

Exploding nukes underground is so backwards technology or done to get attention. See the top500.org , you will see they are the documented ones. Japan has hit number 1 very easily just 2 years ago. They have companies like NEC, Hitachi and many more. They can build a super computer or use existing super computer instead of actually blowing stuff up.

I am saying this to people who thinks just because Russia and USA doesn't blow stuff up, nukes are over. Nukes just explode digitally these days which means they must be progressing way better than ''Lets blow this thing and see what it does'' ages.

Re:Japan Goes Nuclear At Last? (5, Informative)

Jah-Wren Ryel (80510) | more than 5 years ago | (#28082705)

I am saying this to people who thinks just because Russia and USA doesn't blow stuff up, nukes are over. Nukes just explode digitally these days which means they must be progressing way better than ''Lets blow this thing and see what it does'' ages.

There is a difference. The nuke testing done on computers by the USA and Russia is done for purposes of maintenance of current stockpiles and was key to implementing the 1992 moratorium on testing. The simulations aren't generally about simulating explosions, they are about simulating decay and related aging of the current stockpiles so that we can know what nukes will still go boom if we launch them.

In the US, the federal program that handles this stuff (and puts a lot of systems on the Top500 list) is ASCI - the Advanced Strategic Computing Initiative. [wikipedia.org]

Re:Japan Goes Nuclear At Last? (1)

Bender0x7D1 (536254) | more than 5 years ago | (#28082795)

Your post reminds me of the old adage: The difference between theory and practice is that, in theory, they are the same thing but, in practice, they aren't.

The U.S. has a LOT of empirical data from all of their tests that they can use to feed into their models, but a lot of nuclear scientists are concerned about the state of our nuclear stockpile - even if the simulations are showing they will still work. If you want to be sure something works, you have to build one and test it.

Re:Japan Goes Nuclear At Last? (1)

justleavealonemmmkay (1207142) | more than 5 years ago | (#28082809)

Simulating on a computer is fine, only if you have already a stockpile of real life tested warheads. Would you base your deterrence on devices that "theoretically work" ? Would you even trust the nuke scientist who would sell you computer simulated snake oil ?

Re:Japan Goes Nuclear At Last? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 5 years ago | (#28082823)

I hope the e-radiation doesn't affect my second life!

Broken Record (2, Insightful)

javacowboy (222023) | more than 5 years ago | (#28082345)

This whole North Korea situation sounds like a broken record.

Every U.S. administration since Clinton has been dealing with these sorts of North Korean threats. The Republicans criticized Clinton for his handling of the situation, and they found themselves in the exact same position.

Re:Broken Record (1)

confused one (671304) | more than 5 years ago | (#28082543)

Excuse me... Every President since Harry Truman has had to deal with North Korea; and, every administration has criticized the previous administrations handling of issues in asia, in general.

Re:Broken Record (-1, Troll)

Anonymous Coward | more than 5 years ago | (#28082807)

This whole North Korea situation sounds like a broken record.

Every U.S. administration since Clinton has been dealing with these sorts of North Korean threats. The Republicans criticized Clinton for his handling of the situation, and they found themselves in the exact same position.

Except this happens within months of Obama becoming President.

North Korea was pretty quiet for the eight years Bush II was President.

But pretty much as soon as Obama's in, they really start rattling their cage, launching missile after missile and finally going openly nuclear.

That's no coincidence.

China may rue the day they started letting their little lap dog get away with snarling and growling and snapping. This will probably push Japan much closer to getting their own nukes, and may even be enough to push Taiwan.

Not sure how many people know this, but Taiwan was bent on going nuclear back in the 1970s and 1980s, and the US pretty much prevented them.

Now that North Korea has nukes, it'd be pretty hard for the US to prevent South Korea, Japan, and even Taiwan from going nuclear if they so desire.

Which really puts a damper on China's ability to Finlandize those countries.

Barry's Fault (-1, Flamebait)

Anonymous Coward | more than 5 years ago | (#28082361)

So much for the Post Bush Diplomacy initiative.

"If we just be nice to them and stop calling them names, they'll be nice to us.".

Re:Barry's Fault (5, Insightful)

viyh (620825) | more than 5 years ago | (#28082415)

I hate to burst you bubble of ignorance, but, North Korea's first nuke test was on Oct. 9th, 2008. You know, when that other guy was still in office. And it was in development for a long time before that. Barry has been on the job three months. He's barely had time to get into the front door of the White House. You can't pin this on him at all. Kim Jong Il has always been one to do as he pleases.

Re:Barry's Fault (1, Troll)

Rob Kaper (5960) | more than 5 years ago | (#28082483)

People claimed Bush was able to stage/provoke 9/11 in just nine months. It's perfectly fair to blame this on Obama, it's all part of the job.

Re:Barry's Fault (3, Informative)

javacowboy (222023) | more than 5 years ago | (#28082485)

I hate to burst you bubble of ignorance...

I'm not referring specifically to nuke tests. I'm referring to the threats that North Korea has made to the West, mostly relating to medium-range missile tests. Also, I'm not American and I couldn't care less about partisan politics in that country. As far as I'm concerned, there are very few differences between the two major parties as they're both financed and mostly controlled by major corporations.

Re:Barry's Fault (1)

viyh (620825) | more than 5 years ago | (#28082511)

That wasn't in response to you, javacowboy. It was in response to the "Barry's Fault" comment from an Anon. that's been modded down already. :P

Re:Barry's Fault (1)

javacowboy (222023) | more than 5 years ago | (#28082533)

That wasn't in response to you, javacowboy. It was in response to the "Barry's Fault" comment from an Anon. that's been modded down already. :P

Strange....I didn't see that comment. I doesn't even appear as "1 hidden comment". It's totally invisible.

Still, sorry for the misunderstanding.

Sting - Russians (0)

JustKidding (591117) | more than 5 years ago | (#28082375)

I hope the North Koreans love their children, too.

Re:Sting - Russians (2, Funny)

Sponge Bath (413667) | more than 5 years ago | (#28082825)

Sure, and now they can hug them with their nuclear arms.

media coverage (1)

martas (1439879) | more than 5 years ago | (#28082381)

you know, if the media and politicians stopped making such a big deal of everything north korea ever does, i kind of think they'd stop... it's like angelina jolie adopting babies, or britney spears showing her sexual organs - it's all about attention.

They are trolling the planet (5, Informative)

Ilgaz (86384) | more than 5 years ago | (#28082385)

Whole N Korea thing is something like a troll guy who begs for ''replies'' or getting banned until he gets the ultimate attention.

There were no news about N Korea for a while and bam, they explode a nuke.

Can a country troll? They seem to be able to do it.

Alrighty... (0)

whisper_jeff (680366) | more than 5 years ago | (#28082391)

This cannot possibly end well...

And the one behind this.... (-1)

Anonymous Coward | more than 5 years ago | (#28082431)

...is china. N Korea is just a pawn in China hand. Back then N Korea had a working economy, until Chine feared that N Korea will get out of their control and things started to get messy. So China can get their hands clean and let N Korea do all the dirty jobs.

n. korea ignores sanctions - where's the news? (1)

jsepeta (412566) | more than 5 years ago | (#28082487)

since north korea ignores sanctions and doesn't care about their citizens who are suffering from famine and the obsessive control of their despotic leader, we should give them of something that kim jong il will understand -- launch a missile strike on one of his palaces, and tell him if he doesn't halt work on nuclear weapons immediately -- including divulging information on these weapons to Iran and Pakistan -- we'll have no other choice than to take him out of the game permanently.

The Guy thats next in line is worse (1)

RobertLTux (260313) | more than 5 years ago | (#28082753)

we would have to run the line of succession until we found a person we could live with and then somehow take out a whole mess of stuff.

99.999999% of the battle plans include Seoul Korea as casualties in the first couple hours.

The sad part is that its needed for North Korea. (1, Troll)

miffo.swe (547642) | more than 5 years ago | (#28082555)

The he only way countries like Iran, Iraq, Afghanistan etc can be sure they wont be invaded is to get nuclear weapons.

It would have been much easier arguing against these countries getting nuclear arms of the west had not invaded countries right and left for no reasons. Stupid decisions brings terrible effects.

I very highly doubt these weapons will ever be used. The only country that has ever used an atombomb so far is the US so i would watch them more closely than North Korea.

Re:The sad part is that its needed for North Korea (1)

paziek (1329929) | more than 5 years ago | (#28082683)

They don't need to be used in order to cause harm. Now, no one will stop Kim from doing whatever he wants. Not like they would "help" them anyway, since theres no oil there, but its a general idea.

Who knows if USA wouldn't have been invaded long time ago if not for their nukes. A lot of people hate them for good reasons, but can't "fix" them, cause they simply have nukes.

Re:The sad part is that its needed for North Korea (1)

paziek (1329929) | more than 5 years ago | (#28082717)

Now that I think about it, my comment looks like redundant. Ah, give me "unsubmit" button :(

Radioactive S. Korea? (2, Interesting)

should_be_linear (779431) | more than 5 years ago | (#28082641)

Does this effect levels of radioactivity in air of S. Korea (or Japan, China) ?

Re:Radioactive S. Korea? (1)

isorox (205688) | more than 5 years ago | (#28082749)

Does this effect levels of radioactivity in air of S. Korea (or Japan, China) ?

Does a test 6 miles underground affect radioactivity in the air?

Happy Memorial Day (0, Troll)

viyh (620825) | more than 5 years ago | (#28082659)

What a wonderful way to remember those that died by kicking it off with the most destructive force man has come up with.

we have nothign to worry about (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 5 years ago | (#28082701)

every country has the right to cheap nuclear electricity especially a country such as north korea whos people are starving.

they would never build a bomb... oh wait ....

on another note.. good thing restrictions from the well update (1968) nuclear arms proliferation treaty place restrictions all signing states... opppss north korea forgot to sign...

USA Nuclerar Tests (0, Insightful)

Anonymous Coward | more than 5 years ago | (#28082719)

64 years ago the USA conducted two nuclear tests over Japan on two cities killing thousands of innocent civilians.

Given that precedence, it doesn't sound slike much of a big deal that a communist bankrupt country is conducting some nuclear tests.

Sounds like they fixed their yield problem (1)

HangingChad (677530) | more than 5 years ago | (#28082721)

A magnitude 4.7 earthquake was recorded by the USGS in North Korea.

If memory serves their last couple tests didn't generate much of a yield. But that big of tremor likely indicates they have overcome that problem. They got it working now.

Lovely.

Why should USA care about S Korea (0, Flamebait)

tjstork (137384) | more than 5 years ago | (#28082775)

In the Bush era, I suppose I would have really worried about this and even posted on slashdot that this proves how dumb liberals are at reading the intentions of dictators....

but, electoral disasters have a way of clarifying political ideas and I have to ask, why is the USA even bothering to defend North Korea? Since half of South Korea hates the USA and the other half riots at the prospect of having more open trade on their side, one has to ask, why is the USA in Korea at all? Right away, if North Korea and South Korea destroyed each other, it would be better for American car companies. We wouldn't have as many Hyundais and Kias running around the USA.

At some point, the USA needs to let go of trying to run the world. There's no gain in it for America, and the world doesn't want to be run anyway.

So North Korea gets the bomb. I don't care. Neither should you. The USA can build a missile defense system based on Aegis that can stop some ballistic missiles, and anyway has a pretty good retaliatory capability.

Nothing to see here, move along... (0)

Nesa2 (1142511) | more than 5 years ago | (#28082813)

So far US, UK, Russia, France, China, and maybe Israel all have nuclear weapons capability.

There is no reason to invade North Korea just because they are trying to develop nuclear weapons.

There was no reason to invade Iraq either even if there was suspicion that they "might" have nukes.

What gives the right to countries that have nuclear arsenal to enforce their dominance over other countries that don't and prevent them from development?

North Korea has not committed any act of war, and neither did Iraq at the time, let them be - who are we to assume supremacy over other nations and act on suspicions (like we did with Iraq)?

If US invades NC on it's own without FULL support from international community, then we are not better than Nazi and I will from one be ashamed to be American.

China. (3, Insightful)

Starker_Kull (896770) | more than 5 years ago | (#28082817)

When China finally wakes up and realizes that having a somewhat unstable next door neighbor armed with nukes is a bad idea, this sort of thing will stop - North Korea survives only because China keeps giving them tons of aid.

Perhaps the North Koreans are interested in China's continued aid supplies over the long term? As in, after they get a credible, deliverable weapon, 'If you stop the gravy train, we take out Hong Kong, even if we're glass 8 minutes later. That whole "we don't like the west" thing was just so you would let us build nukes.'

I really don't get China's motivations. Once the nuclear genie is out, they won't be able to stuff it back in. It's like the U.S.A. helping Haiti to get nukes because they don't like Cuba. Does it not occur to the Chinese govt. that once North Korea has a real nuclear capability, they could aim it anywhere they so wished?
Load More Comments
Slashdot Login

Need an Account?

Forgot your password?

Submission Text Formatting Tips

We support a small subset of HTML, namely these tags:

  • b
  • i
  • p
  • br
  • a
  • ol
  • ul
  • li
  • dl
  • dt
  • dd
  • em
  • strong
  • tt
  • blockquote
  • div
  • quote
  • ecode

"ecode" can be used for code snippets, for example:

<ecode>    while(1) { do_something(); } </ecode>