North Korea kicks out nuclear inspectors

[Rixile]

On Sept 24th 2008, Weapons inspectors in North Korea were removed.

http://www.timesonline.co.uk/tol/news/world/asia/article4817972.ece

Very scary, north korea is asking for it in my opinion.

 

[willy88]

I would hate to see a war with DPRK, especially considering the state of the US economy.

 

[ryan]

If we ever have a World War 3 it will truly be the war to end all wars and the world for that matter.

 

[Deke]

If we ever have a World War 3 it will truly be the war to end all wars and the world for that matter.

If you're referring to nuclear warfare, I doubt it.

No country would want to be the first to launch a nuke. They don't want to be the "bad guy" that pressed the button to start it all.

Kim Jong Il is... Ill. He's not gonna be around much longer, and because of this his lackeys are getting nervous.

 

[ryan]

If you're referring to nuclear warfare, I doubt it.

No country would want to be the first to launch a nuke. They don't want to be the "bad guy" that pressed the button to start it all.

Kim Jong Il is... Ill. He's not gonna be around much longer, and because of this his lackeys are getting nervous.

There wont be anyone around to point the fingure, when lets say five bombs go off nuclear winter and :axehead:.

 

[Deke]

There wont be anyone around to point the fingure, when lets say five bombs go off nuclear winter and :axehead:.

Actually no, considering the government, such as Bush n' Pals would be in NORAD in an underground bunker, they'd strike back if they weren't the first. And I'm sure all other major countries have these preperations. So again, no one is going to be the first.

 

[Hielor]

Actually no, considering the government, such as Bush n' Pals would be in NORAD in an underground bunker, they'd strike back if they weren't the first. And I'm sure all other major countries have these preperations. So again, no one is going to be the first.

The MAD defense. Beautiful in its simplicity. Dreadful in its scope.

 

[Rixile]

If a nuclear war started i would have little time left to find shelter, and a nice survivalist retreat. The safest place would be in a abandoned nuclear launch facility, if you are rich and determined you could live in such a place, stripped of it's goods and left for the highest bidder.

Plenty of storage and designed to protect against fallout and radioactive waste. Half of them need to be cleaned.

Kim Jong Il wants global dictatorship, right? How the hell will he get that when the whole world is going to be decimated by the aftermath of nuclear arsenal? It is simple, if he launches the nukes off, in return his nation will be flattened.

Detente is only valid when nuclear powers are civilized, Kim Jong Il lacks such a degree in his self that he is dangerous. It is odd how the Sub-conscious of our mind naturally wants us to be alive, for him it's.. Twisted?

Russia from what i've read is at the top with Nuclear Stockpiles, America Second, China third, UK fourth, France Fifth, India Sixth, then North Korea.

There is controversy whether israel has nukes i believe.

 

[simonpro]

There is no controversy, Israel has nukes..they just don't tell people about them.
I'm also positive NK isn't seventh, Pakistan has more.

 

[James.Denholm]

The inspectors should be glad that they didn't get dropped into a fish tank full of giant catfish.

Nah, I agree with Deke, no-one wants to launch nukes, unless they are the second country to do so. However, if a bunch of terrorists gained control of a silo, then I'd be running for the hills.

 

[Notebook]

The inspectors should be glad that they didn't get dropped into a fish tank full of giant catfish.

Nah, I agree with Deke, no-one wants to launch nukes, unless they are the second country to do so. However, if a bunch of terrorists gained control of a silo, then I'd be running for the hills.

Not every country thought it was a good idea to launch second...

This is a government briefing document regarding the status of Blue Streak, the (then) UK nuclear detterent. Apologies for the poor copy, but if you read the last four paragraphs, someone is arguing that a Fire-First policy is required to be a valid detterent, scary!

http://i89.photobucket.com/albums/k207/Notebook_04/img008-1.jpg

All became academic, the RAF preferred bombers to silos, the Army had no need for a strategic weapon, so the Navy got Polaris and submarines. End of Blue Streak as a missile.

N.

 

[garyw]

However, if a bunch of terrorists gained control of a silo, then I'd be running for the hills.

Why? It takes more than just lighting the blue touchpaper and retreating to a safe distance to make nuclear weapon detonate.

I'm more concerned about the way trained personal supposedly ignored 20 seperate safety checks and allowed a B-52 to cross half of the USA with 6 live warheads and no tracking of them.

http://russianforces.org/blog/2007/09/us_loose_nukes.shtml

 

[Urwumpe]

One thing you can be sure: We will get a act of terrorism with a nuclear weapon.

It is not a question of the "if", but of the "when" and "where". If terrorists get hands on a nuclear weapon (for example in Pakistan, but also India is a good candidate, even more than Russia), they will sure also be able to obtain a way to use them.

North Korea is not a small problem for the western world. They rely on smuggling for getting luxury goods for their pharaoh. That means, they will use for trading what they have. And loosing one or two nuclear weapons to a group who wants to attack the USA, might be a valid option for them.

I would thus not underestimate their impact.

 

[cjp]

One thing you can be sure: We will get a act of terrorism with a nuclear weapon.

It is not a question of the "if", but of the "when" and "where". If terrorists get hands on a nuclear weapon (for example in Pakistan, but also India is a good candidate, even more than Russia), they will sure also be able to obtain a way to use them.

North Korea is not a small problem for the western world. They rely on smuggling for getting luxury goods for their pharaoh. That means, they will use for trading what they have. And loosing one or two nuclear weapons to a group who wants to attack the USA, might be a valid option for them.

I would thus not underestimate their impact.

So, the solution? Making sure they can get wealth in other ways than by smuggling and trading it for nukes?

 

[garyw]

North Korea is not a small problem for the western world. They rely on smuggling for getting luxury goods for their pharaoh. That means, they will use for trading what they have. And loosing one or two nuclear weapons to a group who wants to attack the USA, might be a valid option for them.

I disagree. I'd be very surprised if ANY country sold a warhead to a known terrorist organisation. What's to stop them detonating a warhead at an America facility that's close enough to the seller to cause significant damage to them?

 

[Urwumpe]

So, the solution? Making sure they can get wealth in other ways than by smuggling and trading it for nukes?

Would at least making arms smuggling less attractive, when less risky ways are around. After all, North Korea shows often that they deal according to the doctrine: The enemy of my enemy is my friend.

 

[Jarvitä]

Would at least making arms smuggling less attractive, when less risky ways are around. After all, North Korea shows often that they deal according to the doctrine: The enemy of my enemy is my friend.

Which would explain why Iran and Pakistan are flying North Korean ballistic missiles. :dry:

 

[Urwumpe]

Which would explain why Iran and Pakistan are flying North Korean ballistic missiles. :dry:

And why Iran and North Korea use Pakistani nuclear technology.

 

[ar81]

If you had an enemy that can't even pay his bills, and attacking you would cost him money, and scaring him would force him to spend more money, you might like to scare him out... The whole situation looks like a geopolitical cartoon.

 

[Urwumpe]

The whole situation looks like a geopolitical cartoon.