Report: N Korea Conducts Nuke Test - Page 4 - 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 10-10-2006, 03:38 PM   #46
New Yorker
 
The Disciple's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2004
Location: Florida
Posts: 2,587
Local Time: 08:23 PM
Quote:
Originally posted by shart1780
If this is true I hope the UN actually does something for once.
Amen 2 that.
__________________

__________________
The Disciple is offline  
Old 10-10-2006, 07:34 PM   #47
Rock n' Roll Doggie
Band-aid
 
AEON's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2004
Location: California
Posts: 4,052
Local Time: 06:23 PM
Quote:
Originally posted by The Disciple


Amen 2 that.
I'll also give that a big AMEN. They are at risk of becoming as obsolete as the League of Nations.
__________________

__________________
AEON is offline  
Old 10-10-2006, 07:40 PM   #48
Rock n' Roll Doggie
ALL ACCESS
 
vaz02's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2006
Location: manchester
Posts: 7,447
Local Time: 01:23 AM
Quote:
Originally posted by AEON


I'll also give that a big AMEN. They are at risk of becoming as obsolete as the League of Nations.
Indeed.

There will be a new General secetary of the UN in december , maybe that freshen things up.
__________________
vaz02 is offline  
Old 10-10-2006, 08:21 PM   #49
Rock n' Roll Doggie
VIP PASS
 
Join Date: Jun 2004
Location: London/Sydney
Posts: 6,608
Local Time: 02:23 AM
Reports now that they may have just let off a second one. Japan saying they did, South Korea not sure.
__________________
Earnie Shavers is offline  
Old 10-10-2006, 08:26 PM   #50
Rock n' Roll Doggie
ALL ACCESS
 
vaz02's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2006
Location: manchester
Posts: 7,447
Local Time: 01:23 AM
In the news tonight it said NoKo do not have the right equipment or the right team to be able to create nuclear weapons.
__________________
vaz02 is offline  
Old 10-10-2006, 11:00 PM   #51
Rock n' Roll Doggie
FOB
 
Join Date: Oct 2001
Posts: 8,876
Local Time: 01:23 AM
Quote:
Originally posted by Numb1075
gotcha - because you wrote that the US size was 15 kilotons and that the French was 250 and that appears to be a large difference.
The size of the US bomb used in 1945 was 15 Kilotons, BUT THAT IS NOT the size of US strategic Warheads or French Warheads today or even as far back as the 1950s.

Bomb yields were greatly expanded in the 1950s. The Soviets exploded the largest one ever at 60 Megatons(60,000 Kilotons) back in the 1960s.

A warhead with a yield of only 15 Kilotons is considered to be very small by todays standards, and would normally be consider a battlefield or tactical nuclear device, rather than a strategic one. Most US, French and British warheads have yields of around 250 Kilotons while the Russians at least back in the early 1990s still had their warheads at the 1 Megaton level(1,000 Kilotons).
__________________
STING2 is offline  
Old 10-11-2006, 10:33 AM   #52
Refugee
 
dazzlingamy's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2005
Location: The city of blinding lights and amazing coffee - Melbourne.
Posts: 2,468
Local Time: 12:23 PM
ok this is a question i've asked many people but then they all agree with me (which is nice hehe) but...why is it so bad that North Korea has nuclear weapons? I mean of course i don't want them to have nuclear weapons but i don't want ANY country to have nuclear weapons.

Here is my question; Why are only SOME countries allowed to have the technology and a supply of nuclear weapons? I don't trust any country and i find it rather cynical for the us to be calling for sanctions on north korea cause to quote Bill O'reilly (that wonderful journalist *cough*) 'nth korea is a country with an insane man as a leader'
while im not calling GWB insane (childlike retardation more like it) i don't trust the usa as much as i dont trust nth korea. The USA have invaded countries, killed thousands of innocents and forced people to bend to their will. Russia fucks over the Chechens people, France is trigger happy, India and Pakistan are eyeballing each other, in fact NO country is responsible enough to have them, so if the usa, russia, india and so on can have them, who are they and we to deny North Korea, Iran and so on to have them?
__________________
dazzlingamy is offline  
Old 10-11-2006, 12:55 PM   #53
ONE
love, blood, life
 
Numb1075's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2004
Location: Tarrytown, NY
Posts: 11,382
Local Time: 08:23 PM
For one reason, because there is the distinct possibility that they can sell the weapons or the recipe to terrorists and/or other countries like Iran.
__________________
Numb1075 is offline  
Old 10-11-2006, 01:35 PM   #54
Blue Crack Addict
 
Join Date: May 2001
Location: gone
Posts: 17,891
Local Time: 08:23 PM
"If the U.S. keeps pestering us and increases pressure, we will regard it as a declaration of war and will take a series of physical corresponding measures"



http://apnews.myway.com/article/20061011/D8KMF0100.html
__________________
Chizip is offline  
Old 10-12-2006, 03:39 AM   #55
Rock n' Roll Doggie
Band-aid
 
trevster2k's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2001
Posts: 4,330
Local Time: 09:53 PM
From Gwynne Dyer:


Kim's crude tactics were always intensely irritating to the other
parties to the Six-Power Talks on North Korea's nuclear weapons (the US,
Russia, China, Japan and South Korea), and now they are furious with the
little dictator. Even China, North Korea's only ally, called Pyongyang's
test "stupid." But what are they actually going to do about it?

Sanctions, I hear you cry. But the US has had sanctions against
North Korea since 1953, and Japan has had them for more than a decade
already -- and if China stops sending aid, the entire economy will
collapse, millions will starve, and millions more will flee the country. I
was at the Foreign Ministry in Seoul in 1994 on the day that Kim Il-Sung
died, and I remember the panic that reigned as South Korea's diplomatic
elite contemplated the prospect of 25 million starving North Koreans
suddenly landing in their laps.

The regime in Beijing is equally appalled at the notion of millions
of North Korean refugees pouring across its border, so there may be
sanctions, but they will not be life-threatening for Pyongyang. Which
brings us back to the distasteful business of bargaining with blackmailers.

Kim would probably relinquish his nuclear weapons if he were
offered enough food and oil aid, an end to trade embargoes, and a firm US
promise not to try to overthrow him. None of that would cost very much, and
the US is not going to attack him anyway. Nor has Kim any intention of
attacking anybody, especially with nuclear weapons: he would have no hope
of surviving the instant and crushing retaliation by American nuclear
weapons. So it's just a question of persuading him to stop the nonsense.

But what about the principle of the thing? Won't other countries
be tempted to follow North Korea's example if we don't punish it for
developing nuclear weapons? You know, like we did when Israel, India and
Pakistan developed theirs.
__________________
trevster2k is offline  
Old 10-12-2006, 05:47 AM   #56
Refugee
 
AliEnvy's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2001
Location: Toronto, Canada
Posts: 2,320
Local Time: 01:23 AM
Quote:
Originally posted by Chizip
"If the U.S. keeps pestering us and increases pressure, we will regard it as a declaration of war and will take a series of physical corresponding measures"
If it wasn't so ridiculous I'd think this was the October Surprise.

Nice way to take the heat of Iraq though. Not to mention another "nucular" threat to raise the fear levels enough to say, win the mid-terms...and perhaps pre-emptive strikes on Iran after the election.
__________________
AliEnvy is offline  
Old 10-12-2006, 09:33 AM   #57
Forum Moderator
 
yolland's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2004
Posts: 7,471
Local Time: 02:23 AM
Quote:
By SHERYL GAY STOLBERG
New York Times, Oct. 12, 2006


WASHINGTON — President Bush said Wednesday that he would not use force against North Korea because “diplomacy hasn’t run its course,” but acknowledged that many Americans wonder why he invaded Iraq but has not taken military action to head off North Korea’s race for a bomb.

“I’m asked questions around the country, ‘Just go ahead and use the military,’ ” Mr. Bush said at a morning news conference in the Rose Garden, his first extended question-and-answer session with reporters in the days since North Korea announced it had detonated a nuclear device. “And my answer is that I believe the commander in chief must try all diplomatic measures before we commit our military.”

Then, without prompting, the president asked an obvious next question. “I’ll ask myself a follow-up,” Mr. Bush said. “ ‘If that’s the case, why did you use military action in Iraq?’ And the reason why is because we tried the diplomacy.”...That the president himself raised and rejected this critique appears to reflect concern among Mr. Bush’s advisers that North Korea could be a political liability for Republicans, one that the president needed to confront directly with voters.

Intelligence officials have not yet determined the exact size of the device that North Korea tested, or explained why it appeared to have been fairly small, less than a kiloton. Democrats and Republicans have been arguing over who was responsible for the buildup in the North. Madeleine K. Albright, a secretary of state for former President Bill Clinton, issued a statement on Wednesday defending his administration and striking back at Mr. Bush. “During the two terms of the Clinton administration, there were no nuclear weapons tests by North Korea, no new plutonium production, and no new nuclear weapons developed in Pyongyang,” Ms. Albright’s statement said. “Through our policy of constructive engagement, the world was safer. President Bush chose a different path, and the results are evident for all to see.”

Despite the North’s test, Mr. Bush insisted Wednesday that his diplomatic approach was the best course and that he would continue to seek support for sanctions from other nations. He resisted calls for direct negotiations with North Korea of the sort the Clinton administration had engaged in, saying “the strategy did not work.” “North Korea has been trying to acquire bombs and weapons for a long period of time,” Mr. Bush said, “long before I came into office.”
....................................
Mr. Bush was asked if he regretted his decision not to take action — military or otherwise — to destroy fuel supplies in 2003, when the North threw out international weapons inspectors, withdrew from the Nuclear Nonproliferation Treaty and said it would turn its spent nuclear fuel into weapons. At that time, the fuel was all briefly in one known location.

“I used that moment to continue my desire to convince others to become equity partners in the Korean issue,” Mr. Bush said, referring to the so-called six-party talks aimed at persuading the North to give up its nuclear capacity. He added, “I obviously look at all options all the time, and I felt like the best way to solve this problem would be through a diplomacy effort.”

Experts believe the nuclear buildup in the North dates back to the early 1990’s, when the first President Bush was in office. Under an agreement Mr. Clinton struck in 1994, North Korea agreed to freeze its production of plutonium in return for energy aid. North Korea abided by the freeze, but starting around 1997, it took steps on a second, secret nuclear program. In 2002, after South Korean and American intelligence agencies found conclusive evidence of that program, the Bush administration confronted the North with the evidence that it had cheated while Mr. Clinton was still in office. That led to the six-nation talks, involving the United States, North Korea, South Korea, Japan, China and Russia.

“The Clinton administration was prepared to accept an imperfect agreement in the interest of achieving limits,” said Gary S. Samore, a North Korea expert who helped negotiate the original 1994 agreement. “The Bush administration is not prepared to accept an imperfect agreement, and the result is that we have no limits.” But Mr. Bush on Wednesday reiterated his stance that it was “unacceptable” for North Korea to have nuclear weapons. Asked if he was “ready to live with a nuclear North Korea,” Mr. Bush gave a one-word answer: “No.”
__________________
yolland [at] interference.com


μελετώ αποτυγχάνειν. -- Διογένης της Σινώπης
yolland is offline  
Old 10-12-2006, 04:01 PM   #58
Blue Crack Addict
 
MrsSpringsteen's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2002
Posts: 24,984
Local Time: 08:23 PM
Did anyone see Oprah yesterday? Lisa Ling went into North Korea under false pretenses, it's going to be on National Geographic Explorer. Scary and strange stuff


http://www2.oprah.com/tows/slide/200..._284_103.jhtml
__________________
MrsSpringsteen is offline  
Old 10-13-2006, 08:07 AM   #59
Forum Moderator
 
yolland's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2004
Posts: 7,471
Local Time: 02:23 AM
http://www.nytimes.com/2006/10/13/wo...pagewanted=all
Quote:
US Softens Sanctions Proposal After Russia, China Object

New York Times
October 13, 2006


UNITED NATIONS — The American push to win Security Council backing for tough, swift sanctions against North Korea appeared to be set back by China and Russia on Thursday, in an echo of the obstacles the United States faces in a similar push to punish Iran. The US circulated a softened draft resolution to the Security Council in response to North Korea’s assertion that it conducted a nuclear test on Monday. The US pressed for a vote by Friday, but China and Russia immediately signaled their opposition to critical parts of the measure and said they needed more time. On Thursday night, a new draft resolution was circulated, and Reuters quoted the Chinese and Russian ambassadors calling the revisions improvements.

That draft dropped earlier Japanese amendments prohibiting North Korean ships from entering any port and North Korean aircraft from taking off or landing in any country. Japan is imposing its own new sanctions, including a ban on North Korean ships in Japanese waters.

The draft still cited Chapter VII of the United Nations Charter, which makes sanctions mandatory and suggests the possibility of military enforcement. China and Russia have consistently opposed Chapter VII enforcement for North Korea in the past. The version circulated Thursday night retains stringent economic and weapons sanctions, but makes clear that the measures do not include military force, Reuters and The Associated Press reported. China and Russia had said they believed the steps recommended in the draft proposed by Washington earlier in the day could end up doing more harm than good. Sounding a note of exasperation, Mr. Bolton protested as “simply incorrect” the interpretation that Chapter VII sets a pretext for military force, as many countries at the United Nations believe it did in Iraq. “It would require a separate resolution, if one were needed, to authorize force,” he said.

The latest draft drops the idea of a weapons embargo and keeps a provision to allow nations to inspect cargo to and from North Korea. The provision has aroused particular objections from China, which is wary of such interdiction moves being conducted off its coasts. American officials, while acknowledging how difficult it will be to win Security Council backing for the tough sanctions they prefer, insist that even a weaker resolution would send a strong signal of international condemnation. The draft still would require all countries to prevent the sale or transfer of arms, luxury goods and material related to North Korea’s nuclear, ballistic missile and unconventional weapons programs. Mr. Bolton said that the US already had the power to inspect cargo under the American-led Proliferation Security Initiative, a group of more than 70 countries that have pledged to seize illicit weapons as they move across oceans or are transported by air. But he said the US wanted language in the resolution that would make it binding on all 192 member states of the United Nations.

The measure also calls on North Korea to return to the six-nation talks involving South Korea, China, Japan, Russia and the US that it walked out of 13 months ago.
__________________
yolland [at] interference.com


μελετώ αποτυγχάνειν. -- Διογένης της Σινώπης
yolland is offline  
Old 10-14-2006, 05:00 AM   #60
ONE
love, blood, life
 
A_Wanderer's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2004
Location: The Wild West
Posts: 12,518
Local Time: 11:23 AM
Quote:
Originally posted by MrsSpringsteen
Did anyone see Oprah yesterday? Lisa Ling went into North Korea under false pretenses, it's going to be on National Geographic Explorer. Scary and strange stuff


http://www2.oprah.com/tows/slide/200..._284_103.jhtml
Welcome to the slave state, but then at least slaves got fed by their owners.
__________________

__________________
A_Wanderer 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 08:23 PM.


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