Slashdot Mirror
Mushroom Cloud Reported Over North Korea
cbrocious writes "Yahoo! News is reporting a mushroom cloud over North Korea that occured on Thursday in Yanggang province near the border with China. 'The explosion in Kim Hyong Jik county blasted a crater big enough to be noticed by a satellite, the source said.'"
"there was no immediate indication that Thursday's reported explosion was linked to Pyongyang's efforts to develop nuclear weapons."
What was it then? Car crash? Natural gas explosion? Hmm..."no immediate indication." Bah!
I'm actually kind of surprised it took this long to hit the wires though....I mean, shouldn't we have picked it up and there been at least, a news report? Or some sort of acknowledgement of the situation by those in power........
I bet most of the Pacific Rim's probably up in arms over this-Especially the Chinese, TFA states it hit somewhere close to the China-North Korean border..... You'd think with something like that, either the Chinese would strike or raise hell along the diplomatic channels.....
Reminds me of those WWII era Civil Defense movies I saw once in a history class...You
know, the one with the turtle...
"Ok kids, what do we do when the bomb hits?"
"DUCK! AND COVER!"
-thewldisntenuff
My MythTV HowTo
Saddam's weapons of mass destruction.
How long can we ignore this crazy bastard, Kim Jong-il I mean? Are we gonna have to wait until he strikes oil?
-dameron
MOAB. Massive Ordanance Aerial Burst. Read all about it.
got sig?
If is it nuclear then yes, the U.S. military would likely know about it, but I highly doubt they would make this information available to the public so quickly.
It would be highly embarassing to the current administration to have to N. Korea's insane nuclear ambitions (which is a back burner issue for them) dominate the news during the 9/11 observance.
Behind one these curtains is an weird, probably psychotic dictator with weapons of mass destruction? Can you guess which one?
Wrong again George.
-dameron
Y! is really the only 'big' News Outlet that has more then just a small blurb about it. Untill I see a nice satellite image, or photo of the cloud or something concrete, I'm skeptical.
Your hair look like poop, Bob! - Wanker.
wondering why this isn't all over the news? Where are the pictures, reports, I mean if there is a chance this was nuclear in origin than it is A BIG DEAL. I certainly want to know what the hell is going on over there.
Something interesting to note. This took place on Thursday, 09 September. Two days ago. The news is only getting out now.
Anyone else think it quite remarkable that we live in an age where information travels at incredible speeds all over the world... but it took two days for the (at least mainstream) media to report this? Think about it. There are still places in the world where something equivalent to a small nuke can go off -- mushroom cloud and all -- and we don't NOTICE it right away.
It's kind of humbling.
"I am an Adept of Tantric VAX."
Here
Possession of the nukes all but guarantees immunity from invasion. This means they can now safely reduce their conventional forces by 30-40% and start working on things less critical to their survival.
Nowhere near "all of our troops" are in Iraq. We've got about 125,000 troops in Iraq. That includes Army, Marines, Air Force, Navy, and significant numbers of National Guard troops.
That's about two Canadian Armed Forces' worth of troops, but only a fraction of our total force strength.
And here's a big, big question for everyone who's going to bleat "Well why'd we send those troops to Iraq instead of North Korea?":
The city of Seoul is home to eleven million people. The city of Seoul is also within artillery range of North Korea. Artillery is cheap and ubiquitous, and as North Korea's army is arrayed along Soviet lines, they have scads of it. Until it fires, it's damned hard to spot camoflaged artillery from the air, and even if you could spot all of it, the sheer number of artillery pieces they have is quite staggering.
If you have a plan for military intervention in North Korea that doesn't lead to the virtual annihilation of Seoul within hours of the start of the war, please, we're all ears.
The real difference is the government controlling it. For NK, it is the whim of one man to launch a nuke. Is it rational for a self-preserving being to want to lauch a nuke? No, because of mutually assured destruction. But for someone irrational, this may be very possible. If Mexico and Canada had them, I'm certain that congress/parliment and whatever other democratic party that are they wouldn't want to launch a nuke, becuase the tens/hundreds of members in it understand that if they launch a nuke, they'd probably die. Even in China, which is ruled by an oligarcy, it is very likely that not all of those few very powerful people in the government would want to do something like that.
Yes, but here's the fundamental issue:
What do you DO about North Korea?
You can invade Iraq and dismantle their government with relatively few casualties.
But if you even START to THINK about invading North Korea, Seoul gets hit by 50,000 missiles before our troops can even step across the border. Sure, North Korea would fall in a matter of days, but not until after they'd done tons of damage.
The ONLY way to deal with North Korea is diplomacy. Any other dealing will reduce Seoul to rubble in a matter of minutes. THAT is why nobody has done anything about that particular psychotic dictator, except met with him diplomatically.
Comment of the year
If it was an above-ground nuclear detonation, there will be plenty of fallout to analyze. North Korea is not a big enough country to contain all the radioactive particulate matter that would be generated by such a blast.
In addition, there may also be seismic confirmation. I'm not sure if it extends to above ground fission detonations, but I'm pretty sure most earthquake activity monitors in the US used to detect the underground tests done in the USSR.
Finaly, to those of you who are ok with them having nuclear weapons capability, keep in mind that at least from the perspective of the US, they have supplied many of this country's enemies with enhanced weapons capabilities. To passively allow those who would willingly use these things to acquire them is to invite your own destruction.
Just because we have them does not mean everyone should. It means that we(the world) should strive to conduct ourselves in such a way that no one needs/wants them. There are better things to do!
134,000: Number of US troops sent to Iraq, to topple Saddam Hussein's regime, which had nothing to do with September 11th.
17,900: Number of US troops sent to Afghanistan, to hunt down Osama Bin Laden and Al Qaeda, the people responsible for September 11th and other terrorist attacks against the US.
That give you an indication of what the Bush adminstrations priorities have been?
"Accept that some days you are the pigeon, and some days you are the statue." - David Brent, Wernham Hogg
Don't jump to conclusions. Reporters are notorious for being inaccurate, and modern news services are notorious for rapidly spreading news stories whether or not the sources are credible.
Our government and NORAD monitor everything and know what's going on. You can't expect to know the real story until you have your own satellite in orbit and your own offshore seismic monitoring stations.
So if you're stressed out right now I suggest you read a good book, hit up a good house party, get drunk, get laid, smoke dope, whatever -- and don't worry so much on a Saturday night.
Funny thing is, if politicians and military people could do the same (chill out a bit) instead of going ape shit and provoking escalations, we would live in a safer, happier world. So if there is something to worry about, let's hope that the People in Power don't do anything too stupid. When in doubt, be nice.
...raise your hands. Now, tell us HOW you think this should be handled:
1. Go over there and nuke them now before they really start causing trouble.
2. Let's reserve judgement until we know for sure it was a nuke. Then if it was, let's go over there and nuke them before they really start causing trouble.
3. Let's reserve judgement until we know for sure it was a nuke. Then if it was, let's hope the current administration will set up talks with North Korea to try and reach some compromises to their demands.
4. OK. So they have nukes. So what? Leave them alone. It's none of our business.
I am certain that we will know your political affiliations based on which answer you relate to the most.
Un-news
and i'm sure he'll become more sane, have less weapons, and become less desperate as time goes on.
pr0n - keeping monitor glass spotless since 1981.
What this shows is quite simple. If you are an evil dictator who doesn't want to be invaded what you should do is *get* nuclear weapons and be able to threaten your neighbours with destruction.
Iraq: no nuclear weapons, very weak conventional army, not really a military threat to any of its neighbours, including US allies - result: invasion.
N Korea: nukes, strong conventional army that can wipe out Seoul in hours: no invasion.
The lesson therefore for evil dictators is NOT to disarm - in fact get those nukes as quickly as possible! Then no-one will dare invade you. Oh and build up your conventional army and station it right at the border of your nearest neighbour that is most important to the US. Basically if you look weak the US will invade. If you look strong (nukes, big army, chemical weapons etc.) then the US will not invade. Fairly simple.
Oh, for crying out loud! Everyone and his mom are speculating about "teh bomb". Consider the options in a rational manner, for once, please. Even if this is the /dot:
Possibility number 1: A nuclear explosion. If it was a nuclear explosion, remember that it happened close North Koreas's north eastern border with China. If that is the case, remember that the prevailing winds will blow the fallout either north or west, in which case the fallout will cross over into China, and you can bet your sweet apple pie that China will not take lightly to radioactive fallout from a neighbouring country, or the winds blow the fallout east in which case both Japan and Russia (Yes, George, Russia is just across the way over there) will raise living hell, or the winds blow the fallout south in which case South Korea gets to crap their collective pants. Either way, the international media will find out really fast about it.
2. It was an accident such as the one a few months ago, when a train laden with chemicals went up into the air. Given that NK is poor as hell and workplace safety not a major concern, this is the most likely cause. If this is the case, it is possible that it will take a long while until the media discover it.
3. It was a military accident at a missile site, where one exploding missile set off the rest, a la Chinese firecrackers. If this is the case, the NK's will probably try to keep it as secret as possible as it would be hugely embarrassing to the fuckers who routinely make huge boasts about their military and have this obsession with saving face.
From the BBC article: "A crater caused by the blast could be seen from a satellite, an unnamed official in Beijing was quoted by Yonhap as saying."
;)
Forest fires cause lots of damage, but generally they don't make huge craters visible from space.
That you have NO idea what the fuck happened over there. You are sitting in front of your computer, relying on third or fourth hand stories of the event. So trying to declare that you know which is true and false, at this point, is pretty stupid. I would also note that CNN is a considerable more credible news source than Yahoo news.
So, what really happened? Well, I dunno, but neither do you. If you assume that it was a nuclear blast, you are taking that on faith. There is little in the way of second hand confirmation and you sure as hell have NO first hand information.
So while I'm not saying that CNN isn't wrong, please let's lay off the bashing until there is more information.
Actually at the end Saddam gave them full access (scroll down 2/3 of the page).
Unfortunatelly this was apparently not as widely reported in the US as in Europe. I remeber hearing this news on the radio in my car back in Germany.
The UN inspectors concluded that Iraq in all likelyhood did not have any more WMDs. So they did a very good job indeed since we now know that this was a correct assesment.
The fact that the US nevertheless invaded Iraq is what irked France and my country (Germany) and as good friends and allies the governments of both countries tried really hard to convince the Bush adminstration that another Iraq war given these facts was a very bad idea. Alas to no avail.
If you have to deal with them diplomatically it would have really helped if the president did not includ them into the axis of evil when giving a puplic speech. Not very diplomatic now, is it?
As a counter-weight to the continual cries of "diplomacy is useless!", consider the Cold War. The USA and the USSR didn't fight each other; all of their contact was (essentially) diplomacy. Yet the situation remained (relatively) peaceful, and eventually the danger went away.
During the so-called "Cold War" millions died in places like Korea, Vietnam, Afghanistan, Angola, Guatemala, Nicauragua, Cuba, etc. over the course of decades as the "Superpowers" engaged in bloody and terrible warfare by proxy. You clearly need to re-read your history of the period.
Thank you. Happy for every American slashdot reader who has not gone bloodthirsty crazy. Helps me to maintain my believe in humanity.
Ya, let's provoke a nation that is under the leadership of a crazy guy who probably wouldn't bat an eye at killing all this citizens by launching a nuke at a bunch of US carriers or at Seoul. When the crazy guy has a gun you don't point your gun at him and start yelling at him. You talk very nicely and don't make any sudden moves until you are sure you can get the gun away from him before he shots you, himself, or any of the innocent people who happen to be nearby. We can't use the same tactics against NK that we did with USSR; at least they weren't crazy. Power hungry and a little mean, but not crazy like the leader of NK.
Space for rent, inquire within
There are not many AC comments that make me want to reply but this is one of them.
Well for starters, moving 4 million people around in the United States is an impressive exercise but not overly complex. There is an excellent infrastructure in place to handle large movements of people when required. You also have vast geographic areas to move the displaced people to. Florida has a population density of roughly 114 people per square kilometer compared to South Korea's 494 people per square kilometer. Simpling finding space to move the evacuees to will be much more difficult in South Korea.
The other thing to consider, South Korea is, for the purpose of this discussion, essentially an island. There is no place to move people to outside of the country unless by sea or air. This greatly complicates the evacuation scenario. Assuming you could cram 10,000 people on to a large cruise ship, you would need 1,100 of them or 22,000 747's each carrying 500 people.
The third item to take into account is stealth. Given the paranoia gripping the government of North Korea, I believe it would be quite impossible to displace 11 million people in the South without the North knowing about it rather short order. What possible conclusion could be drawn by the North when 20 per cent of the population decides to move somewhere virtually at the same time, other than military action is imminent. At that time, the North's only possible response would be to attack so as to inflict the most possible damage in a pre-emptive strike. When this happens, the evacutaion will not be complete and civilians will suffer huge casualities. Compounding this, the invasion force (most likely U.S. lead) will not yet be in a strategic or tactical position of advantage.
In other words any evacuation plan for South Korea will have only a very minimal chance for success.
If VISTA is the answer, you didn't understand the question
They don't have the technology to hit a ship, much less a battleship in the open sea. All they can do is blackmail us by threatening Japan and South Korea.
We can keep waiting for them to build longer range missiles capable of hitting North America too (while we and others supply them with food and fuel) or tell South Korea and Japan to deploy a lot of Patriot missiles, pray to various deities and kick the crap out of North Korea.
Very good analogy -- while you "talk very nicely", you better have the snipers deployed around... The nuclear armed submarines suggested by the grandparent article are the "snipers"...
In Soviet Washington the swamp drains you.
Looking at the reactions so far on /. I get the sense that people are soiling their pants over this. Try to step back a bit and have a more realistic look at things.
1. N Korea is a small country and however much one may dislike them, they are not in a position to attack and take over the world - or even the region, nuke or not.
2. Its not realistic to imagine terrorists smuggling an atomic bomb anywhere. These things are big and 'noisy' in terms of radiation. While one might imagine that a very rich organisation - say, al Qaeda - could actually smuggle one into USA, why would they? It's too much effort for too little effect, when it is so much easier to slam an aircraft into a building or something like that.
No, even if N Korea make a nuclear bomb, it only makes sense for them to keep it as a threat. The very fact that they still exist against all odds demonstrates that they may have a very bad government, but they are probably not on a suicide mission.
The real danger (I have to say this, otherwise I'll get modded up) lies elsewhere: with people whose heads have grown too big and seem to tink they have a right to tell the world what to do.
Didn't crazy guy with a gun used to be more or less the definition of a terrorist, before it started to be redefined as "anyone the US think is acting suspiciously"??
Someone else already pointed out that NK has not signed the non proliferation treaty, but that I think is the least of your problems.
Simply put: pre-emption is a euphamism for aggression.
First of all you're right about them selling nuclear material, but blowing them up isn't the right answer. What is? I don't know for sure, I'm not an expert, but economic incentives and disincentives would be a good start. When GWB came into office all he offered was the stick. Remember that? No carrot. He doesn't deal with evil. (Well, until reality intruded and he had to). In addition to that inspections would seem to be viable.
They seemed to be working in Iraq, unless of course you've got some other agenda.
As for Reagan, I don't by the Fox Wisdom stating that Reagon spending this country to death brought down the soviet union. It's not that simple. It seems to me that it was a combination of corruption and social pressure and inept government that brought down the soviet union. There's probably a lesson there for us as well.
But lets translate the behavior you propose into everyday life:Let's say your walking down a street and see some thug looking at you in a menacing way. Let's even say you notice he's packing. Do you pull out a gun and shoot him before he does anything? You probably don't because it's illegal, antisocial and brings you to the same level of the person you're afraid of.
A better quesstion for you and all the warmongers in this country is do you wish you could? Is it your greatest fantasy to just blow everything up, to kill it all and stand above the mess?
My direct message to GWB: Fear and hatred are not viable foreign policies. The number of people who wish to kill americans will only increase if we continue to behave like scared bullies.
But the rest of the worlds opinion is not the most important reason to change our foreign policy. The most important reason is because it is wrong, immoral and counterproductive. But then again I don't expect the foreign policy of GWB to be much different than his domestic policy or anything else in his life.
Most fundamentally the problem with pre-emptive action is that you simply don't know what can happen. And killing thousands of other people, both your own citizenry and those of another countries, is too expensive of a price to pay.
As you say, it seems to have been forgotten, especially by the US, but the real meaning of 'terrorist' is someone who uses violence to achieve a political end; who favours intimidating methods of coercing a government or community.
By that definition, a man walking into a restaurant with an Uzi and shooting everyone inside for no good reason is not a terrorist. A man walking into a restaurant with an Uzi and threatening to shoot everyone inside unless he's given a million pounds is not a terrorist. A man walking into a restaurant with an Uzi and threatening to shoot everyone inside unless the US pulls all its troops out of Iraq is a terrorist.
Of course, 'political' need not be concerned with international military policy; it could be anything from demanding better wages for employees of BigEvilCorp, to protesting about planning regulations in LittleTown. But it usually takes some basic level of lucidity and intent, so the 'lone madman' probably doesn't count.
Ceterum censeo subscriptionem esse delendam.
> US official suggests that the mushroom cloud might be
> caused by a forest fire. A little bit of physics knowledge
> [layman/common-sense] makes this suggestion laughable
You're missing the point. If the government can get people to argue back and forth about whether a forest fire would create a 2-mile cloud and a crater, the people won't spend time thinking Bush's missteps regarding North Korea (and foreign policy in general). Just like if you can get people arguing about the typeface of a typewriter, they'll ignore the fact that witnesses and records say that Bush did not fulfill his National Guard duties and we deserve to know why.
If you can get people to argue about a particular branch on a tree, they'll forget to consider the forest.
Insert simplistic political, ideological, or personal proselytization here.
There seems to be agreement on /. that:
1) there was a big crater
2) it didn't show up on anyone's seismometer
I don't know what happened in NK, but the above two statements, taken together, do NOT make sense!
Upstairs Dog, Downstairs People.