N Korea issues threat to Japan - U2 Feedback

Go Back   U2 Feedback > Lypton Village > Free Your Mind > Free Your Mind Archive
Click Here to Login
 
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread Display Modes
 
Old 04-09-2003, 04:33 AM   #1
Blue Crack Supplier
 
Popmartijn's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2001
Location: Netherlands
Posts: 32,543
Local Time: 07:13 AM
N Korea issues threat to Japan

Hello,

I just saw this article on the BBC News site.

Quote:
North Korea has issued a blunt warning to Japan, just hours before the United Nations Security Council prepared for its first meeting on the North's controversial nuclear programme.
The official KCNA news agency said Japan should be "clearly mindful that it is also within the striking range" of North Korea's weapons.


The statement appeared to have been prompted by Japan's launching of two spy satellites in March.

Although the North regularly issues threatening rhetoric, it did fire a ballistic missile over Japan in 1998, and its latest warning will add to tensions in the region over its nuclear ambitions.

Ahead of the UN meeting, diplomats said China would block any attempt by the Security Council to criticise North Korea's decision to resume its nuclear programme.

The United States has been pressing the Council to issue a statement condemning the government for withdrawing from the Nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty, and urging it to comply with its international obligations.

But China believes the crisis can best be solved outside the Security Council, and backs North Korea's demand that it should have direct talks with Washington.

The UN envoy to North Korea, Maurice Strong, said last week that Wednesday's meeting was likely to be "contentious".

Russia has also warned of the potentially destabilising effect of a Security Council discussion.

Alexander Losyukov, in charge of Asian affairs at the Russian foreign ministry, said relations between the US and North Korea needed to be fixed, before involving the UN.

"Otherwise, the UN Security Council discussion could, instead, become a launching pad for a further unravelling of relations," he said.

Quiet diplomacy

Behind the scenes, North Korea's neighbours are working for a solution to the impasse.

Russia has proposed talks involving the US, North Korea, Russia, China, South Korea and Japan.

The crisis was sparked by North Korea's alleged admission to the US of a secret nuclear weapons programme in violation of a 1994 pact.

It subsequently expelled UN inspectors and pulled out of the Non-Proliferation Treaty.


It will be officially free from the treaty on Thursday, one day after the Security Council meeting.

The crisis over the North's nuclear ambitions was referred to the Security Council by the UN's atomic agency in February, after it was deemed to be in "chronic non-compliance" with international agreements on non-proliferation.

The Security Council could consider a variety of options, ranging from a call for an intensification of diplomatic initiatives, to a tightening of economic sanctions.

Although Wednesday's meeting is unlikely to result in any specific results diplomats say the very act of holding the discussion may ratchet up tensions in North Korea, which has already condemned the meeting as a "prelude to war".

On Sunday, North Korean radio said that involving the UN was an "excessive act... that destroys all efforts for dialogue, and a grave act of provocation that... is, in and of itself, no different from being a prelude to war".
As the article says, North Korea is in full swing with its war rhetoric and IMO it is getting scarier every day. First issuing statements to the USA that any action is seen as an aggressive act, now this statement to Japan that North Korean missiles can easily reach Japan.



Marty
__________________

__________________
Popmartijn is offline  
Old 04-09-2003, 05:38 AM   #2
ONE
love, blood, life
 
yertle-the-turtle's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2002
Location: York, UK and Singapore
Posts: 11,750
Local Time: 02:13 PM
As a Japanese (but living overseas) this is worrying news.

__________________

__________________
yertle-the-turtle is offline  
Old 04-09-2003, 11:18 AM   #3
Blue Crack Addict
 
MissVelvetDress_75's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2001
Location: basking in my post-concert glow still mesmerized by the orbit of his hips..Also Holding Bono Close as he requested.
Posts: 25,776
Local Time: 01:13 AM
__________________
MissVelvetDress_75 is offline  
Old 04-09-2003, 11:22 AM   #4
Blue Crack Addict
 
nbcrusader's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2002
Location: Southern California
Posts: 22,071
Local Time: 10:13 PM

The US has a message for North Korea - learn from Iraq.

From Reuters
__________________
nbcrusader is offline  
Old 04-09-2003, 11:27 AM   #5
ONE
love, blood, life
 
Basstrap's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2000
Posts: 10,726
Local Time: 03:43 AM
the worse thing the US could ever do is attack N.Korea. That is asking for nuclear trouble.

My worse fear in the whole world is nuclear war...it scares the shit out me...for real. All it takes is one blow and then everyone starts lobbing them to and fro. It's a horrifying thought.

I think the US should propose to disarm ALL of its nukes if N. Korea does. Maybe a little bit of a naive suggestion I know!
__________________
Basstrap is offline  
Old 04-09-2003, 01:04 PM   #6
Refugee
 
Klaus's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2002
Location: on a one of these small green spots at that blue planet at the end of the milky way
Posts: 2,432
Local Time: 07:13 AM
nbcrusader:

What N.Korea might have learned from Iraq: don't give away your WMD's if the US threats you, they invade you later anyway
__________________
Klaus is offline  
Old 04-09-2003, 04:50 PM   #7
Refugee
 
Join Date: Jun 2001
Posts: 1,760
Local Time: 07:13 AM
Quote:
Originally posted by Klaus
nbcrusader:

What N.Korea might have learned from Iraq: don't give away your WMD's if the US threats you, they invade you later anyway
1.) saddam never gave away his WMd's....prompting all this. Also we never promised we wouldn't invade iraq.




2.) to the best of my knowledge all N korea wants is a promise that they wont' be invaded. I think just sign a non agression past with them like they want and shut them up.


Also I'd be curious to know if N korea has any terrorist ties.
__________________
V Nura is offline  
Old 04-09-2003, 06:49 PM   #8
Refugee
 
Klaus's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2002
Location: on a one of these small green spots at that blue planet at the end of the milky way
Posts: 2,432
Local Time: 07:13 AM
Arun V:

a)i was thinking to the long-range rockets, i'm sorry

2)the only reason why these weapons were destroyed and the only reason blix did his job was because the UN is and was convinced that they decide if Iraq would be attacked. Sadly history became different,
let's hope there are more positive than negative longterm sideeffects of this.

3) depends on what you call terrorist. German, US and Israelian definition might be verry different.
Would be another interesting thread: How would you define terrorist ties

Klaus
__________________
Klaus is offline  
Old 04-09-2003, 07:11 PM   #9
War Child
 
MiniFly's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2002
Location: At Johnny Depp's house.
Posts: 696
Local Time: 10:13 PM
Here's my thoughts on this:

Well, as the world can learn from the US's treatment of both Iraq and North Korea, it is far better for a country to have at least one nuclear weapon if it wants the United States not to bother it. Nevermind that North Korea's dictator is a nutcase. This is showing us as the world that no matter how large the opposing armies are, one nuke on either side levels the playing field.

Japan doesn't have an army or missle defense with which to defend itself! Brilliant! Excellent move.

Well, when Clinton was president, North Korea was starting to open up and re-join the global community. Unfortunately, being placed on the List of Evil by Crusader Bunnypants undid this progress. Also, all that spy plane stuff probably didn't help much either.

Why the hell do we need nuclear weapons in the first place? Sure, they're great for mass obliteration of one's enemies, but they pollute the last for decades and can affect your own population if you're not careful.

Fuck fuck fuck. I had a feeling this would happen. Right when we're up to our eyeballs in Iraq (just because Baghdad fell doesn't mean it's over, we're just getting to the hard part), North Korea decides it's a good time to act up. Well, I sure hope the US decides not to go it alone on this one too. Military action WILL NOT subdue a nuclear threat. There are very little options for action now, but calling in the cavalry is the stupidest thing anyone could do now.
__________________
MiniFly is offline  
Old 04-09-2003, 07:21 PM   #10
War Child
 
MiniFly's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2002
Location: At Johnny Depp's house.
Posts: 696
Local Time: 10:13 PM
Quote:
Originally posted by nbcrusader
The US has a message for North Korea - learn from Iraq.

From Reuters
Whoa, I didn't even see this post.

Learn from Iraq? Wha? Okay, North Korea has nuclear weapons. I don't think we would have gone into Iraq as casually as we did (soldiers not wearing chemical protection suits for instance) if the Iraqis did indeed have mass proliferation of chemical and biological weapons. What the hell does Korea have to learn from Iraq? I'll tell you what, don't give up your mega-weapons and show the world you'll use your weapons if you want to. The only reason Iraq would have chem. or bio. weapons is because we gave them to them in the 80's anyway.

Gotta love this:

Quote:
Iran has said its nuclear programs are for peaceful purposes, while Syria has denied U.S. charges of shipping military supplies to Baghdad and lawmakers have accused the United States of double standards in its support for Israel.
Because of the sanctions, Iraq has not been able to get things like pesticides because they could be used as a weapon. Many things are being blocked from Iraq that could really help the Iraqi people. Same thing here, if Iran wants to have nuclear power available for it's people, then what buisness does America have trying to stop that?

Quote:
"It is a wonderful opportunity for Syria to foreswear the pursuit of weapons of mass destruction and, as with other governments in the region, to see if there are not new possibilities in the Middle East peace process," he (Bolton) said.
Syria: What a big demilitarization treaty you have grandmother.
Bolton: All the easier to conquer you *cough* I mean, ensure world peace, my dear...
__________________
MiniFly is offline  
Old 04-09-2003, 07:23 PM   #11
War Child
 
MiniFly's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2002
Location: At Johnny Depp's house.
Posts: 696
Local Time: 10:13 PM
Quote:
Bush, after meeting with British Prime Minister Tony Blair (news - web sites) on Tuesday, promised to turn his focus to settling the Israeli-Palestinian conflict once Saddam was removed from power.
A-ha! So he IS going to ignore N. Korea. This could be very good or very bad.
__________________
MiniFly is offline  
Old 04-09-2003, 11:25 PM   #12
Refugee
 
Join Date: Jun 2001
Posts: 1,760
Local Time: 07:13 AM
Quote:
Originally posted by Klaus
Arun V:

a)i was thinking to the long-range rockets, i'm sorry

2)the only reason why these weapons were destroyed and the only reason blix did his job was because the UN is and was convinced that they decide if Iraq would be attacked. Sadly history became different,
let's hope there are more positive than negative longterm sideeffects of this.

3) depends on what you call terrorist. German, US and Israelian definition might be verry different.
Would be another interesting thread: How would you define terrorist ties

Klaus
Klaus,



Thing is ...I would think that in this day and age we'd be less afraid of a rogue regime by itself than we would be of a rogue regime with terrorist ties.


The US is Ultra hypocritical though when it comes to the term "terrorist state"
Pakistan sponsors terror and yet they are a US ally

BUT all n korea seems to want is a non aggression pact....why dont' we just give it to them and move on to fighting terror.

I dont understand why the bush administration is stalling on this issue. The us paid it's dues with iraq now...we screwed up int eh 80's and I hope we make it right for the iraqi ppl now.


But I dont' want to fight war after war I'm starting to worry that the term "diplomatic solution" will become an antiquity especially when the bush admin is telling N korea to learn from iraq...


Why do you tell a country sitting on nukes that's already nervous as hell to learn from a country we just invaded. It's really not goign to help things. I just dont' feel this administration has the tact necessary to deal with these situations. Afgahnistan I can see why we went to war..Iraq more of a stretch..but I can see it still..but if this trend continues...It's going to make me very nervous.
__________________
V Nura is offline  
Old 04-10-2003, 02:28 PM   #13
Refugee
 
Klaus's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2002
Location: on a one of these small green spots at that blue planet at the end of the milky way
Posts: 2,432
Local Time: 07:13 AM
US government supported terrorists too - thats why i was curious about your terrorist ties definition

I'm affraid of the same, when Bush gets reelected i expect another 4 wars - i'm unsure if they don't want diplomatic sollutions or ...

Well at least they have Powell who could to the job if they would give him the time it needs just "diplomacy until we sent enough troops" simpy isn't enough.

Klaus
__________________
Klaus is offline  
Old 04-11-2003, 09:15 AM   #14
Refugee
 
Join Date: Jun 2001
Posts: 1,760
Local Time: 07:13 AM
Quote:
Originally posted by Klaus
US government supported terrorists too - thats why i was curious about your terrorist ties definition

I'm affraid of the same, when Bush gets reelected i expect another 4 wars - i'm unsure if they don't want diplomatic sollutions or ...

Well at least they have Powell who could to the job if they would give him the time it needs just "diplomacy until we sent enough troops" simpy isn't enough.

Klaus
well Us citizens supported the IRa with funds for years and no one said anything. I guess the only thing we can hope for is that somehow the white house decides to hold all countries equally accountable for terrorism.

but still my argument holds valid that I think bush would be more frightened if korea had serious terror ties.

then again the regime of pakistan has terror ties..and has WMD"s....but they are our ally...go figure.



This being said i don't think terrorism will ever be stopped. I think the best we can do is keep terrorists contained and keep them from obtaining WMD's.

I don't thin we'll have another 4 wars under bush BUT...I dont want to see any more wars like this sloppily justified and politically damaging to the US. Also kalus I'm very worried about the rift with out allies..they may come in handy when dealing with N korea.
__________________

__________________
V Nura is offline  
 

Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are Off
Pingbacks are Off
Refbacks are Off



All times are GMT -5. The time now is 01:13 AM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.8 Beta 1
Copyright ©2000 - 2017, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.
Design, images and all things inclusive copyright © Interference.com