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.'"

151 of 2,001 comments (clear)

  1. Well....From the TFA- by thewldisntenuff · · Score: 5, Insightful

    "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

    1. Re: Well....From the TFA- by Black+Parrot · · Score: 5, Insightful
      "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!
      Just about any big explosion will create a mushroom cloud; I saw one from a tank car explosion one time.

      However, the reported 2+ mile diameter of the cloud is troubling. Surely radiation detectors will sort it out within a day or two.

      --
      Sheesh, evil *and* a jerk. -- Jade
    2. Re:Well....From the TFA- by kfg · · Score: 5, Interesting

      Reminds me of those WWII era Civil Defense movies I saw once in a history class...

      Yeah, I saw that one in school too. Then we all went into the cloak room, got our coats, then marched into the school basement to practice ducking and protecting ourselves by holding our coats over our heads.

      You weren't paying enough attention in class though, it wasn't a WWII era movie. It was. . .are you ready for it?

      A Korean Conflict era movie.

      KFG

    3. Re:Well....From the TFA- by Read+Icculus · · Score: 5, Insightful

      What's China going to do? Those nukes aren't for protection against China I can tell you that... although they work for that too.

      No the ball is in our court now, and as they have nukes... well I'm not too sure what the move is. It just goes to show other nations (Iran), that stepping things up is probably the way to go if you don't want to be the next Iraq.

      --
      Anti-social? My code is just platform-specific.
    4. Re:Well....From the TFA- by tmasssey · · Score: 4, Funny
      Nuclear blasts create a double pulse of light due to the physics of the blast itself. Read more here.

      See? I *knew* that reading all 1800 pages of Tom Clancy's The Sum of All Fears would come in handy...

      I know, it was only 800 pages. It just *felt* like 18000... That book would have been much better as a 400 page book.

    5. Re:Well....From the TFA- by gad_zuki! · · Score: 3, Interesting

      A couple thoughts:

      1. Lots of things can cause mushroom clouds. It may even be the case that NK is blowing up something (lots of TNT) to impress their own people and keep morale up while scaring everyone else. It may also be the case that they just detonated a nuke.

      2. Why are we hearing about this today? Any large explosion can be detected through vibrations. You can't set off a nuke without the world knowing.

      3. Clinton and the democrats safely contained these crazy dictators. I don't think the "war on terra" is going to scale up very well to nuclear war. That said I hope people would think twice before they vote for Bush again this year.

    6. Re: Well....From the TFA- by incom · · Score: 5, Interesting

      Maybe they staged it. A large ordinance detonation used to make the world fear their nuclear power.

      --
      True genius is grasping a situation like a peice of fruit, and peircing it just right so that it drains dry.
    7. Re: Well....From the TFA- by timeOday · · Score: 4, Informative
      Searching around, the NY Times recently reported conflicting expert opinion in recent days over signs that the N Koreans were preparing to detonate a nuclear weapon, and what the implications would be.
      One senior intelligence official noted that preparations the North knew could be detected by the United States might be a scare or a negotiating tactic by North Korea, while other officials speculated a test could be intended to influence the U.S. presidential election in November.
      This is going to be an issue in the election starting now. Do we have any choice but to play ball with the N Koreans?
    8. Re: Well....From the TFA- by stinky+wizzleteats · · Score: 5, Interesting

      A large ordinance detonation used to make the world fear their nuclear power.

      Not likely. If it was a real nuke, our sats would have picked up the gamma burst and we would have picked up the distinctive seismic signature. Those in power know as of right now whether or not it was a nuke, the question is - what will they tell us?

    9. Re:Well....From the TFA- by Phleg · · Score: 3, Informative

      Clinton and the democrats safely contained these crazy dictators.

      I'll concede this point if by "contained" you mean, "implemented cosmetic measures which allowed these crazy dictators to build up the weapons technology and arsenal's their unveiling now."

      Bush may not be helping much, but claiming that Clinton in some way "contained" the situation is laughable.

      --
      No comment.
    10. Re:Well....From the TFA- by bsharitt · · Score: 4, Informative

      China has a lot of troops at the North Korean border. They can be used to protect them, but are mostly there to overrun them if they get too stupid

    11. Re:Well....From the TFA- by gad_zuki! · · Score: 5, Informative

      >"implemented cosmetic measures which allowed these crazy dictators to build up the weapons technology and arsenal's their unveiling now."

      NK broke the reactor seals under Bush.

      NK lauched long range missiles under Bush.

      Rumors of NK's nuclear program growing in the past three years were under Bush of course.

      Saddam disarmed under Bush I and Clinton. Saddam's own son-in-law told Newsweek they had no WMD anymore and the UN agreed that the "threat" Bush played up was a seriously distorting the facts. After the invasion, guess who was right?

      Yeah, there is proliferation going on for two main reasons:

      The Bush admin is focused on the middle east region and only cares about WMD as pro-war propaganda.

      Other nations realized the lessons of the Iraq war weren't "with us or against us" it was "countries who really have WMD survive and don't get invaded." Works for Israel, it will work for everyone else.

    12. Re: Well....From the TFA- by Mycroft_VIII · · Score: 4, Interesting

      Mushroom clouds are an artifact of big explosions, not just atomic/hydrogen bombs.
      One interesting ordinance is the fule-air explosive devices. Take two gases that are explosive when combined and ignigted and put them in two big tanks at a great presure then release it all at once and a split second later when the expaning mix covers a football field, but is still at very high (80+ atmospheres iirc) detonate them.
      When first developed generals and such warned that thier use might be mistaken for an neuclear weapons.
      If you've seen the movie outbreak the bomb they were going to drop to stop that plauge was a FAE munition.
      The tell tale in this case of course would be the gamma radation signature as well as other factors, by itself a mushroom cloud just means a very big bang.

      Mycroft

      Mycroft

      --
      https://signup.leagueoflegends.com/?ref=4c3ed6600b6ea
    13. Re:Well....From the TFA- by killjoe · · Score: 4, Insightful

      "stepping things up is probably the way to go if you don't want to be the next Iraq."

      Yes. GW definately laid down the gauntlet. Unless you have enough power to cause serious damage the US reserves the right to invade you anytime it wants for any reason it wants.

      It would be very wise for all nations to develop nuclear, biological and chemical weapons. The UN is unable to stop strong countries from attacking and invading smaller countries.

      --
      evil is as evil does
    14. Re:Well....From the TFA- by Waffle+Iron · · Score: 3, Informative
      First, a thermonuclear bomb will create a double pulse. A regular old nuclear bomb only creates a single pulse of light. The double pulse is because the fission explosion that is required to set off the fusion blast.

      The way I remember it, all nuclear explosions create a double pulse. The interval between the pulses depends on the size of the explosion. Fission bombs are measured in milliseconds and may not be perceptible to observers; the largest thermonuclear bombs have a delay between pulses of about a second. In an H-bomb, the time between the fission trigger and the fusion reaction is measured in microseconds, so that's not an issue.

      The effect is due to the physics of the expanding fireball. The initial reaction directly emits light, which is seen as the first pulse. Right after this, the expanding ball of opaque plasma surrounds the bomb debris, obscuring further light. The plasma itself is hot and bright, however, and as its surface area grows the total emitted light increases again. This is seen as the second pulse.

    15. Re: Well....From the TFA- by quax · · Score: 4, Insightful

      Memo to you: This equates to mass murder. NK did as of now not attack your country.

    16. Re: Well....From the TFA- by saden1 · · Score: 4, Informative

      Germany and Japan have constitutional laws preventing them from having a military. They both have peace keeping forces but no sizable armies to wage war or even protect themselves. If anyone, however, has the capabilities to raise a well equipped military they are it. Toyota and BMW can undoubtedly produce military caliber vehicles in no time. People don't know this but Japan once flirted with building infrastructure to manufacture and mass produce aircraft for the aviation industry but was deterred from doing so by the United States.

      --

      -----
      One is born into aristocracy, but mediocrity can only be achieved through hard work.
    17. Re: Well....From the TFA- by flacco · · Score: 4, Funny
      Memo to you: This equates to mass murder. NK did as of now not attack your country.

      dude, apparently you didn't get the memo. it isn't mass murder, it's a "pre-emptive strike on an emerging threat."

      --
      pr0n - keeping monitor glass spotless since 1981.
    18. Re: Well....From the TFA- by badasscat · · Score: 4, Insightful

      Um, guys.. North Korea hasn't attacked anyone, um, ever...

      Jesus, how old are you? Maybe you'd better read up a little bit on a little thing called the Korean War.

      The NK's are not going to commit suicide by taking on the U.S.

      I'd hate to have listened to you on Dec. 6th, 1941. Or Sept. 10, 2001 for that matter.

      I'm not agreeing with the guy who says we go in and nuke them first. But the alternative to that is not to deny that this is a real problem. This is a real problem. The North Koreans do act irrationally at times (especially with Kim Jong Il at the helm), they're very desperate, and there's at least a possibility they'll use their new nuke capability as a deterrent to our power, which will allow them to once again invade the south. They've been saying they want reunification ever since we pushed them back out in the 1950's. What they really want is the south's wealth. This is how wars start.

      Technically, the Korean War is not over. This is why we have 37,000 (I guess now 25,000?) troops sitting in between the two countries - because they're two countries at war and we are under a UN mandate to keep them apart. At least until such time that they agree to formally end the war, or peacefully reunite. The North could do these things at any time. They choose not to, while still saying they want reunification. What do you think that means? It means they want reunification on their terms, with their system of government, and their leaders... and the only way they'll ever get that is through another invasion.

      The South is in denial about this just like you are. But I don't know how many Pearl Harbors or World Trade Centers or Mauretanias or Archduke Ferdinands or whatever you want to come up with - I don't know how many of those you need before you realize that some countries in this world, and some people in power in very high places, are very dangerous and they will hit you and hit you hard when you least expect it. (Yes, I include George Bush in this statement - I'm not voting for him come November, and I didn't vote for him last time either. I'm no hypocrite, just being realistic here.)

      So what should we do? Who the hell knows. It's fine for me to say that, but the problem is our government seems to be saying the same thing. We need some sort of strategy and we clearly have none now. Somehow, someway, we have to get these nukes out of NK's hands. Maybe eventually that does mean military action of some kind. Not yet, but it really depends on them. But this is a country with a bad history, with a tyrranical leader and in a current state of war with their nearest neighbor, which happens to be a US ally. Their nukes can already reach Alaska and soon will be able to reach California. We need to deal with this and not pretend the problem does not exist.

    19. Re: Well....From the TFA- by k98sven · · Score: 4, Interesting

      the question is - what will they tell us?

      The truth. There is more than one government in the world, and they can't seem to agree on any single thing. How could they keep a secret among themselves?

      Besides that, there are plenty of civilian radiation detectors out there. A guy I know who worked at the Forsmark nuclear plant in Sweden told me that back in 1986, they found out about the Chernobyl accident way before anyone in the Swedish government. (And quite some time before the Soviet authorities admitted anything had happened)

      Although they did have a few worried hours trying to figure out where the radiation was coming from, before they realized that it actually had come from outside the plant. The isotope composition told them pretty quickly that it was a reactor failure, and not a bomb. Calculating backwards from the prevailing winds then gave them a pretty good guess of which reactor it was.

    20. Re: Well....From the TFA- by eSavior · · Score: 3, Funny

      what will they tell us?
      That throwing your cigarettes out the window in NK is NOT a good a idea...
      CNN NEWS ARTICLE

    21. Re: Well....From the TFA- by southpolesammy · · Score: 4, Funny

      Ok, you're possibly correct on many counts. But the things I'm seeing so far from the Washington spindoctors look suspicious to say the least. One report on CNN said that an American official believes it was a large forest fire. Could you imagine the diplomatic exchange here (apologies to Graham Chapman, John Cleese, and the rest of the loonies):

      North Korean official: We've tested a nuke near the China border.
      US official: No you haven't.
      NK: Yes we have, and we have the seismographs and radiation signatures to prove it.
      US: 'Tis but a scratch. It was probably an earthquake.
      NK: There's a big stinking radioactive hole in the ground!
      US: We've seen worse.
      NK: You liar!

      [NK tests a second time over the Sea of Japan -- blast seen from Pusan, South Korea and Fukuoka, Japan]

      NK: There -- everyone has seen it. Victory is ours.
      US: Hah!
      NK: Look you stupid bastard! We've tested twice now, and your own radiation-monitoring satellites confirmed it!
      US: No they haven't.
      NK: Look!
      US: It's just a flesh wound. Could just as easily have been a forest fire.
      NK: In the Sea of Japan?!?
      US: Chicken....

      --
      Rule #1 -- Politics always trumps technology.
    22. Re: Well....From the TFA- by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Insightful
      Those in power know as of right now whether or not it was a nuke, the question is - what will they tell us?

      Well according to CNN those in power have told us what it is, and I quote:
      The U.S. official said the cloud could be the result of a forest fire.
      Ya...right...forest fire...

      And they wonder why everyone thinks that the government is involved in so many conspiracies. A forest fire is going to create a mushroom cloud and a crater? A forest fire is going to create a seismic event? I so can't stand the lies anymore. I can't wait until November 2nd, and I can get rid of them!
    23. Re: Well....From the TFA- by Guppy06 · · Score: 4, Interesting

      "One senior intelligence official noted that preparations the North knew could be detected by the United States might be a scare or a negotiating tactic by North Korea"

      Which means that the "ho-hum" we're publicly seeing might simply be Washington's response. "Oh, that was supposed to be your bomb? It was kinda hard to tell. See, we thought you guys were working on nuclear weapons over there, and... well, shucks, we've seen bigger conventional explosions."

    24. Re:Well....From the TFA- by MrWa · · Score: 5, Insightful
      I couldn't agree more, killjoe.

      The logic behind the US's preemptive strike strategy boggles the mind. All we have done is solidify the opinion that the only way to deal with the US on anything close to a even standing is to develop nuclear weapons - real weapons and not "nuclear weapon related programs" - or you are fair game for some major bullying from the US government.

      Now that the world has seen how we handled Iraq and North Korea in parallel - one a real threat, one a fake threat - it is obvious that being as strong as North Korea is preferrable to being like Iraq (all bark, no bite.)

      Looks like more interesting times are headed our way...

    25. Re: Well....From the TFA- by Jah-Wren+Ryel · · Score: 5, Funny
      The U.S. official said the cloud could be the result of a forest fire.
      Ya...right...forest fire...

      Or... The cloud could be the result of everyone eating too much kimchee during the festivities.

      Hey, it's just as plausible as a forest fire!
      --
      When information is power, privacy is freedom.
    26. Re:Well....From the TFA- by Citizen+of+Earth · · Score: 4, Insightful

      It's also a massive failure of international diplomacy in respect to Pyongyang and all attempts to manage North Korea.

      Did anyone actually think that diplomacy would work? You cannot negotiate with psychopathic dictators. They don't keep their end of the bargain. Diplomacy will not work to make North Korea or Iran abandon their nuclear programs. Only a "regime change" will. It's almost comical to watch the 'International community' try to deal with Iran's nuclear program, though it will be a little less so when a western city gets vaporized by terrorists. The UN is still having meetings to decide if they should have meetings to ask then Iranians to stop. What a joke!

    27. Re: Well....From the TFA- by John+Newman · · Score: 3, Insightful
      Same in WWI, The US helped shorten the wars but Russia won them.
      Erm, Germany beat Russia in WWI, fair and square and damn near total. The war on the Eastern Front was over in Nov. 1917. By the Treaty of Brest-Litovsk, the Germans occupied all of the Ukraine, the Baltic states, Poland, the Crimea, and a further chunk of the Black Sea coast; they also grabbed a large slice of Belorussia just because they felt like it. Russia was done. They were saved from Germany's harsh terms only by Allied victory in the West. The contrast with WWII, which Russia might have been able to win on its own, was striking.
    28. Re:Well....From the TFA- by maxpublic · · Score: 4, Interesting

      The logic behind the US's preemptive strike strategy boggles the mind

      The logic is fairly obvious, actually. Governments create crises to remain in power, increase their power, and to quell protest against the amassing of that power. Crises are an excellent way to oppress your own citizenry while justifying your actions to the more gullible members of your nation.

      There is no profit in a solved problem. Unsolved problems are the method by which politicians remain in power, along with those who support them. The worse the problem, the more one can profit on the fear and uncertainty of the citizenry.

      If you want to create a problem, openly targeting three hostile nations as "the axis of evil" is a great way to do so. If they don't act quickly enough to fulfill their role as 'the enemy', invade and conquer one of them. That'll get the other two moving at double-time to present a credible threat, if only to prevent the invasion and conquest of their own countries. And by doing so, they become exactly what they've been labeled: dangerous enemies!

      The logic is beautifully Machiavellian.

      Max

      --
      My god carries a hammer. Your god died nailed to a tree. Any questions?
    29. Re: Well....From the TFA- by quax · · Score: 3, Interesting

      Why exactly? (Except for my stupid mistake of writing "2nd" instead of "cold").

      I would think that correcting a post that misstates that my country doesn't have an army is very much on topic.

    30. Re: Well....From the TFA- by Igmuth · · Score: 5, Insightful

      Well, thats not exactly a minor mistake... It's like writing
      "The Ravenous Bugblatter Beast of Traal makes a good meal for visiting tourists"
      instead of
      "The Ravenous Bugblatter Beast of Traal makes a good meal of visiting tourists"

    31. Re: Well....From the TFA- by HeghmoH · · Score: 5, Insightful

      And, yes, it wouldn't be such a bad idea to apologize for Dresden, Hiroshima and Nagasaki.

      Dresden, I could see. Maybe even Nagasaki. But Hiroshima? What's the apology going to say? "We're sorry that your country went on a total rampage across half the surface of the planet for fifteen years. We're sorry that your ancestors were so totally fucking crazy that the only way to get them to admit they'd lost was to kill millions of people in a blockade, kill millions of people in an invasion, or kill hundreds of thousands of people in a shocking demonstration that could not be denied. We're sorry that, in the end, we chose the fastest option with the least loss of life."

      --
      Mod down posts with a "Free Mac Mini/iPod" sig, they're spam!
    32. Re: Well....From the TFA- by Ed_1024 · · Score: 3, Funny

      I blame extreme overclockers: Transcript from last few seconds "I think I can get 2 more Mhz out of the FSB, loo..."

    33. Re: Well....From the TFA- by flossie · · Score: 4, Insightful
      I think the phrase "don't bring a knife to a gun fight" could be applied here.

      According to the BBC:

      North Korean leader Kim Jong-il has said in the past Mr Bush would not have invaded Iraq if Saddam Hussein had had nuclear weapons capable of use.

      I think he is undoubtedly correct. As Robin Cook (a former British foreign secretary) said in his resignation speech immediately prior to the invasion of Iraq:

      it is only because Iraq's military forces are so weak that we can even contemplate its invasion.

      If you really believe that the US will be able to march into S.E. asia and win a war, I suggest you have another look at your history books. If you think nuking another country into oblivion will make you safe, you have clearly learned nothing from 9/11 about the vincibility of even the strongest nations.

    34. Re: Well....From the TFA- by RayBender · · Score: 4, Interesting
      A guy I know who worked at the Forsmark nuclear plant in Sweden told me that back in 1986, they found out about the Chernobyl accident way before anyone in the Swedish government.

      I've actually worked there, and I remember that day. Now I really wish I hadn't spent a good part of that day outside in the rain. For years afterward there was a bit of a "hotspot" just north of Stockholm where that rainstorm had washed a bunch of stuff out of the cloud and onto the ground.

      As for the possibility of civilians detecting a nuclear test - that depends on a lot of variables such as how the wind blows. Given the geography of the location, the cloud might go out over open ocean or over China, in which case you won't hear anything from civilians. Or it could blow over Japan, in which case some university scientists might notice something.

      Certainly the U.S. knows if it was a nuke thanks to our satellite systems; but the current regime may not wish to publicise such a failure of their anti-proliferation policy just before an election.

      In any case, I would have thought that the North Koreans would make an announcement if they had actually had a successful test. Why wouldn't they? I know they certainly trumpeted up their attempts at a space launch.

      --
      Human genome = 3 billion base pairs = 6 GBit. Windows + Office = 20 Gbit. Which is more impressive?
    35. Re: Well....From the TFA- by Frequanaut · · Score: 5, Funny

      " Germany has an army. During the 2nd world war it was the backbone of NATO"

      That's right. If I remember correctly Hitler was a big proponent of allowing israel into the EU as well.

    36. Re: Well....From the TFA- by flossie · · Score: 4, Insightful
      Nations at peace will be able to develop nuclear weapons. It is unrealistic to think that states in the 21st century will not be able to develop technology that the allies developed in the first half of the 20th century. The only way to reduce the number of countries possessing nuclear weapons is to reduce the need for them to possess nuclear weapons.

      That requires at least two things. Firstly, countries have to feel safe from external aggression. I don't have complete answers for this, but it will probably require a massive strengthening of the UN or some equivalent international body. Secondly, the most aggressive nations on Earth will have to get rid of (most) of their nuclear weapons. That includes the US.

      Whatever the solutions to avoiding nuclear proliferation, Bush's policies aren't part of them. Labelling a group of countries "evil" and then invading one of them is not the way to reassure N.Korea that they have no need to fear attack. It would also help if Americans could get over their hatred of all things communist. The US trades extensively with China, yet imposes sanctions on Cuba. If the White House could learn to respect the sovereignty of other nations, it might not need to waste such massive amounts of money on defence and security.

    37. Re:Well....From the TFA- by Bora+Horza+Gobuchol · · Score: 5, Insightful

      Geeks here like to think that by mirroring the american hatred of the rest of the world, they can be part of the intellectually superior and socially sophisticated crowd (and hopefully get laid at the same time).

      That's right. And all the "hippies" protesting the Vietnam War in the 70's were just at the rallies to get laid and smoke pot. Ignore the tear gas, the intimidation, the bullets, and the fire hoses.

      People died protesting the Vietnam War. It's likely that people will die protesting this one. Yes, some of the protest was fashionable - there was a culture war going on at the same time. But to say "oh, they're protesting because it's trendy" is to ignore the real arguments and issues at hand, and the very real determination they have to protest an illegal action.

      Installing a successful liberal democracy in the heart of the middle east...

      First: it's extremely difficult to "install" a democracy. It has been done, but only in countries in which millions died before being defeated.

      ...is the only way to bring lasting peace to the region and the world.

      Really? The only way? As opposed to, say, finding a solution to the Palestinian crisis, which has been the touchstone of religious fundamentalism and terrorism in the region for the last 60 years?

      They think the only reason the terrorists attack is because of grievances, not because they want to take over the world

      Please show me how 9/11 was an attempt to "take over the world."

      Bottom line: terrorism doesn't allow you to defeat nations. The goal of terror is to drive nations crazy with grief, fear, and anger, and nudge them in the direction you wish. It's not about defeating the enemy - it's about influencing policy. You need an army and modern weapons to take over a nation - not nineteen guys and boxcutters.

      Yes, there are dreamers on the fringe that talk of a "Muslim world" and a "new Muslim empire". That kind of rhetoric even works with some people. The reality is cells working in the dark.

      Those who doubt the Iraq mission are no different from those who doubted America's efforts to rebuilt post WW2 Europe and Japan. Back then they said it couldn't be done, was a waste of money and that the people would not be able to handle US-style democracy.

      It's very different. No-one in the Allied countries believed that Japan and Germany should be left to their own devices after being defeated. Both nations had functional demoracies before being taken over by extremists pre WWII. In addition, their culture was one of obidience to central authority - imposing a system of governance was not difficult. There was a slow, dawning realisation of shame amoung the citizenry - a realisation that they had been, at best, misled. Both nations had largely homogeneous cultures. Finally hundreds of thousands of civillians had to be killed.

      The situation in Iraq could not be more different. Iraq has never experienced democracy. It is riven by tribal, relgious, and cultural differences. Authority is at the behest of the tribal leader, the "strong man", or the iman - all of whom have different goals. Amoung the general populace (as opposed to English speaking, Internet connected bloggers) there is a tremendous feeling that Iraq did not deserve to be invaded and occupied - and the reasons for invasion have little to do with lofty ideals of "democracy". The war, to them, is about control of the region, politically and economically, by the US.

      No other country has sacrificed so much and given so much for complete strangers and yet you only see protestors in NYC protesting Bush's 15 billion dollar AIDs policy but you never see them protesting Europe's 0 dollar AIDs policy.

      Garbage. The EU has an annual budget of 800 million euros towards HIV/AIDS in the developing world. In addition, it pledged 120 million euros towards a Global Health Fund to combat AIDS this year. This

  2. They keep this up . . . by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 4, Funny
    . . . they'll be more mushroom clouds over North Korea, and soon.

    ~~~

  3. All Your Base Are Belong To Us by Alcohol+Fueled · · Score: 4, Funny

    Someone set us up the bomb!

    --
    Ah am not a crook! (\(-__-)/)
  4. It's a good thing... by wardomon · · Score: 4, Funny

    all of our troups are in Iraq.

    --

    - - - If the sun is a star, why can't I see it at night?
    1. Re: It's a good thing... by Black+Parrot · · Score: 4, Funny


      > all of our troups are in Iraq.

      Yeah, but can anyone account for where James Bond was on Thursday?

      --
      Sheesh, evil *and* a jerk. -- Jade
    2. Re:It's a good thing... by Phanatic1a · · Score: 5, Insightful

      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.

    3. Re:It's a good thing... by Wyatt+Earp · · Score: 5, Informative

      To respond to myself

      http://www.globalsecurity.org/military/ops/oplan -5 027-1.htm

      "The DPRK will seek force ratios of 3-5 to 1 in armor, 6-8 to 1 in artillery, and 4-6 to 1 in infantry forces to mount an attack. In attempting to breach a well-prepared defensive position, the DPRK may be expected to seek even larger ratios. This undoubtedly would be the case in attempting to break through DMZ defenses.

      Combined-arms operations constitute the foundation of tactical battle in DPRK doctrine. Utilization of the forward conventional corps, reinforced by the mechanized and armor corps, to fight from the DMZ to Pusan is called the Strike Force concept. This concept embodies how the DPRK is expected to fight, especially south of Seoul or in defense of the DPRK."

      "Without moving any of its more than 12,000 artillery pieces, "Pyongyang could sustain up to 500,000 rounds per hour against Combined Forces Command defenses and Seoul for several hours" Gen. Thomas A. Schwartz said in testimony in March 2001 before the Senate Armed Services Committee. Schwartz heads the United Nations and ROK-US Combined Forces Commands and US Forces Korea.

      Towards the end of the Korean War fighting in 1953, the Chinese were able to fire approximately 100,000 rounds per day against US forces, and the number of rounds per day was increasing. A 100,000 round day would be a light day in a new war.

      In 1993 and 1994, when the North Korean nuclear question emerged as an international issue, the North deployed large numbers of improved 170mm self-propelled guns and 240mm multiple rocket launchers to forward positions close to the DMZ. This was apparently meant to threaten South Korea's security while calling for nuclear negotiations with the US."

      "A major air campaign against northern forces would be required before the counteroffensive could begin. A US Marine Expeditionary Force (in division strength) and the 82nd Air Assault Division, along with ROK divisions, would launch an overland offensive north toward Wonsan from the east coast. Soon thereafter, a combined US-ROK force would likely stage an amphibious landing near Wonsan, and advance to Pyongyang. Subsequently, a combined US-ROK force would execute a major counteroffensive from north of Seoul aimed at seizing Pyongyang. This would be achieved either by linking up with the force at Wonsan, or meeting it at Pyongyang."

    4. Re:It's a good thing... by tehanu · · Score: 3, Insightful

      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.

    5. Re:It's a good thing... by rampant+mac · · Score: 4, Interesting
      "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."

      I know this is probably too late to get modded up, but I spent a year in Osan, Make no mistake, we weren't there to to protect South Korean. In fact, after arriving at Osan, we were briefed that we were, literally, nothing more than speed bumps, preventing the North's troops from advancing too quickly through the South. We were there to hold off the North's attack until reinforcements could arrive from Japan.

      To get an idea how large their army was, they gave us a rough estimate that we would be outnumbered 100 to 1. Needless to say, during exercises, we would be laden down with about 15 pounds of ammo; Not because we didn't need it, but because it made us aware of what we were up against.

      --
      I like big butts and I cannot lie.
    6. Re:It's a good thing... by darkmeridian · · Score: 3, Funny
      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.


      A day before the invasion, everyone in Seoul takes ten steps that way.

      --
      A NYC lawyer blogs. http://www.chuangblog.com/
  5. Misleading by b0lt · · Score: 5, Informative

    This probably isn't a nuclear detonation, since they would be instantly detected, due to the huge flash created. Back in the 80s, we had satellite technology to detect nuclear explosions. Don't you think we have it now?

    --
    got sig?
    1. Re:Misleading by dameron · · Score: 4, Insightful

      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

    2. Re:Misleading by Blakey+Rat · · Score: 4, Insightful

      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.

    3. Re:Misleading by Phanatic1a · · Score: 3, Informative

      The signal spectra. In other words, the same thing that makes the signature of an explosion different than the signature of an earthquake. Hell, the Fast Fourier Transform was originally used for the very purpose of distinguishing between earthquakes and nuclear tests.

    4. Re:Misleading by flacco · · Score: 5, Insightful
      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.

      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.
    5. Re:Misleading by HyperCash · · Score: 5, Interesting

      What is wrong with this world. Do the people reading this post and moderating it up understand what they are reading?

      The PRK is covered with military installations. This JInterest states that we should use "strategic nuclear weapons against the PRK to destroy every military installation." Yes, because nuking a country of 22 million people is the right thing to do.

      You think WWII was bad? I agree, it was. But if you start a nuclear war in this day and age things will be much, much worse.

      "Never underestimate the instinct of most tyrants for self-preservation." Which is why North Korea would never use a nuclear weapon unless attacked to begin with. They would be utterly and completely wiped out. There wouldn't be half a dozen North Koreans left alive.

      I still can't believe a post basicly promoting the genocide of a population of 22 million people has been modded up!

      What is wrong with you people. I watched the movie the gray zone the other night and I was amazed at what people would go along with in those circumstances. I thought how did that happen.

      But all JInterest had to do was say OMG there is a big scary guy over there and he's bad and might hurt us and people are willing to go nuke a country. WHAT THE FUCK!

      Burn my Karma, I don't care. This needed to be said. Fucking Sheeple.

      --
      So I'm jump'n up and down screaming show me the money.
    6. Re:Misleading by quax · · Score: 4, Insightful

      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?

    7. Re:Misleading by quax · · Score: 5, Insightful

      Thank you. Happy for every American slashdot reader who has not gone bloodthirsty crazy. Helps me to maintain my believe in humanity.

    8. Re:Misleading by killjoe · · Score: 3, Interesting

      You know I just don't buy the whole "he is insane" bullshit. Why is it that every leader who does something we don't like is lables "insane"?

      I suspect he is very wily but certainly not insane.

      --
      evil is as evil does
    9. Re:Misleading by strider44 · · Score: 5, Funny

      Diplomacy is the art of saying "nice doggy" until you can find a rock.

    10. Re:Misleading by xsbellx · · Score: 3, Insightful

      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
  6. This was reported by CBS... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 4, Funny

    But the cloud was produced by MS word...

    1. Re:This was reported by CBS... by brxndxn · · Score: 3, Funny

      typical Microsoft bug..

      --
      --- We need more Ron Paul!
  7. Looks like Bush finally found... by dameron · · Score: 5, Insightful

    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

    1. Re: Looks like Bush finally found... by Black+Parrot · · Score: 4, Funny


      > Are we gonna have to wait until he strikes oil?

      I hear that South Korea has been sneaking barrels of oil across the border, hoping to provoke Bush into attacking the North.

      --
      Sheesh, evil *and* a jerk. -- Jade
    2. Re:Looks like Bush finally found... by WIAKywbfatw · · Score: 4, Funny

      No, military action is only to be used against countries that have huge oil reserves.

      --

      "Accept that some days you are the pigeon, and some days you are the statue." - David Brent, Wernham Hogg
    3. Re:Looks like Bush finally found... by Blakey+Rat · · Score: 3, Insightful

      Because, uh, you can't DO anything about him without North Korea devastating Seoul first. The only way to deal with North Korea without the massacre of MILLIONS of people is diplomatically, and we're already making as many diplomatic moves as is possible... you don't hear about them as much because they're not as exciting as tanks rumbling through the desert, but they're there working to reunite Korea every day.

    4. Re:Looks like Bush finally found... by Wind_Walker · · Score: 4, Funny
      How long can we ignore this crazy bastard, Kim Jong-il I mean?

      I'm glad you cleared that up. I thought you were talking about Bush.

  8. those wacky north koreans by voisine · · Score: 4, Funny

    Those wacky North Koreans... at it again.

  9. Re:Its a nuke. by b0lt · · Score: 3, Insightful

    MOAB. Massive Ordanance Aerial Burst. Read all about it.

    --
    got sig?
  10. i r korea kekekeke by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Funny

    Nuclear Launch... Detected

  11. Am I the only one.... by rel4x · · Score: 4, Funny

    ....who looked at the title of this article, and wondered whether it was North Korea or the U.S. who dropped it?

    --

    Before you mod me funny, think, perhaps I was insightfully funny?
    1. Re:Am I the only one.... by Bluetrust25 · · Score: 3, Informative

      There's nothing that makes a two mile wide mushroom cloud other than a nuclear explosion.

      Actually, any large fire could create a mushroom cloud that big.

      Last summer, we had a brushfire here in Los Angeles and the mushroom cloud it created was five miles wide. I'd love to post a link to the pictures I took, especially the ones where the cloud reached overhead and turned the ambient light orange, but sadly, it wasn't digital film.

      Here's some photos from the news coverage.

  12. Re:Its a nuke. by rokzy · · Score: 4, Interesting

    since there are no photos, how about the possibility that some ignorant reporter only knows the adjective "mushroom-shaped" when talking about clouds from explosives?

    like the way all bad experiences are always "harrowing".

  13. OK some quick facts here by OverlordQ · · Score: 3, Insightful

    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.
    1. Re:OK some quick facts here by TopShelf · · Score: 3, Funny

      CNN has a similar story up now, speculating that it might be the result of a forest fire...

      --
      Stop by my site where I write about ERP systems & more
  14. Am I the only one.... by IoN_PuLse · · Score: 4, Insightful

    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.

  15. The Time Frame by Caraig · · Score: 5, Insightful

    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."
  16. Oh fuck by Paladin144 · · Score: 4, Interesting

    Not really the news I wanted to hear. The last thing we need is that nutcase Kim Jong Il with nuclear-fucking-weapons! I was (and am) against the war in Iraq - Saddam never kept me up at night. Kim Jong Il, on the other hand, is a different story. This guy could be extremely dangerous. I can't really think of a good way to contain/eliminate him, but I'm thinking it would be a smart idea to do so before he starts LAUNCHING NUCLEAR FUCKING WEAPONS!

    -=Memo to Bush=-
    ___________________
    Wrong country, dude.

  17. Let's not jump to conclusions... by iamdrscience · · Score: 4, Funny

    Hey now, maybe it's a good mushroom cloud. You know, like umm... err... a cotton candy factory exploding. That wouldn't be too bad, right?

  18. BBC Link by MacDork · · Score: 4, Insightful
  19. Not likely by annenk38 · · Score: 3, Insightful

    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.

    1. Re:Not likely by A1kmm · · Score: 4, Insightful

      The doomsday threat doesn't work if the attacking party thinks they can take down the entire nuclear capacity of the state before the victim can respond. However, given that North Korea alreay claims to have nukes, demonstrating that they do does not make them any more likely to come under attack.

      However, if this is a first weapons test, then they probably don't have very well developed nuclear weapons yet, and some governments might take a "its now or never" approach.

      --
      X-Has-Sig: yes
    2. Re:Not likely by einhverfr · · Score: 3, Informative

      Possession of the nukes all but guarantees immunity from invasion.

      The large number of missiles and artillery aimed at Seoul is their current deterrant for invasion. Nukes would add to that substantially.

      For example, if they could hit Seoul or Tokyo with their nukes, and still maintain teh firepower they have trained on Seoul, then they are safe, for the moment. However, if they think we are attacking them and hit Tokyo, then we have a doomsday scenarop.

      --

      LedgerSMB: Open source Accounting/ERP
    3. Re:Not likely by EvanED · · Score: 4, Insightful

      It would suck, but it would only destroy two countries, not the entire world.

      Yeah, it'd only be 150 million people dead if those two countries are leveled; just your average day. Not a doomsday scenario at all...

    4. Re:Not likely by fyngyrz · · Score: 5, Insightful
      It would suck, but it would only destroy two countries, not the entire world.

      I think you underestimate the situation. Remember 9/11? Remember the US economy taking a royal crap over the loss of one building and a few thousand worker bees?

      What do you think would happen if Japan, one of the world's most powerful economic engines, were destroyed or knocked out of play for a while?

      "Suck" doesn't even begin to cover it. This isn't 1945. There are more ways to destroy a country than to blow stuff up. If Japan goes, I think you'll see lots of awfully bad stuff happen in the US and elsewhere.

      --
      I've fallen off your lawn, and I can't get up.
  20. Yeah, right... by erick99 · · Score: 5, Interesting
    From an CNN story post a few minutes ago:

    The U.S. official said the cloud could be the result of a forest fire.

    Damn, we must look stupid to gov't officials.

    Cheers,

    Erick

    --
    http://www.busyweather.com/
  21. NYT: Atomic Activity in North Korea Raises Concern by scupper · · Score: 4, Informative

    New York Times
    Atomic Activity in North Korea Raises Concerns
    By DAVID E. SANGER and WILLIAM J. BROAD
    September 12, 2004
    http://tinyurl.com/5kb3d

    WASHINGTON, Sept. 11 - President Bush and his top advisers have received intelligence reports in recent days describing a confusing series of actions by North Korea that some experts believe could indicate the country is preparing to conduct its first test explosion of a nuclear weapon, according to senior officials with access to the intelligence.

    While the indications were viewed as serious enough to warrant a warning to the White House, American intelligence agencies appear divided about the significance of the new North Korean actions, much as they were about the evidence concerning Iraq's alleged weapons stockpiles.

    Some analysts in agencies that were the most cautious about the Iraq findings have cautioned that they do not believe the activity detected in North Korea in the past three weeks is necessarily the harbinger of a test. A senior scientist who assesses nuclear intelligence says the new evidence "is not conclusive," but is potentially worrisome.

    If successful, a test would end a debate that stretches back more than a decade over whether North Korea has a rudimentary arsenal, as it has boasted in recent years. Some analysts also fear that a test could change the balance of power in Asia, perhaps leading to a new nuclear arms race there.

    In interviews on Friday and Saturday, senior officials were reluctant to provide many details of the new activities they have detected, but some of the information appears to have come from satellite intelligence.

    One official with access to the intelligence called it "a series of indicators of increased activity that we believe would be associated with a test," saying that the "likelihood" of a North Korean test had risen significantly in just the past four weeks. It was that changed assessment that led to the decision to give an update to President Bush, the officials said.

    The activities included the movement of materials around several suspected test sites, including one near a location where intelligence agencies reported last year that conventional explosives were being tested that could compress a plutonium core and set off a nuclear blast. But officials have not seen the classic indicators of preparations at a test site, in which cables are laid to measure an explosion in a deep test pit.

    "I'm not sure you would see that in a country that has tunnels everywhere," said one senior official who has reviewed the data. Officials said if North Korea proceeded with a test, it would probably be with a plutonium bomb, perhaps one fabricated from the 8,000 spent nuclear fuel rods that the North has boasted in the past few months have been reprocessed into bomb fuel.

    A senior intelligence official noted Saturday that even if "they are doing something, it doesn't mean they will" conduct a test, noting that preparations that the North knew could be detected by the United States might be a scare tactic or negotiating tactic by the North Korean government.

    Several officials speculated that the test, if it occurred, could be intended to influence the presidential election, though a senior military official said while "an election surprise" could be the motive, "I'm not sure what that would buy them."

    While the intelligence community's experience in Iraq colors how it assesses threats in places like North Korea, the comparisons are inexact. Inspectors have seen and measured the raw material that the North could turn into bomb fuel; the only question is whether they have done so in the 20 months since arms inspectors were ousted. While Iraq denied it has weapons, the North boasts about them - perhaps too loudly, suggesting they may have less than they say.

    On the other hand, the divisions within the administration over how to deal with North Korea mirrors some of the old debate about Iraq. Hard-l

  22. Behind the curtain by s-orbital · · Score: 5, Funny

    Behind one these curtains is a weird, probably psychotic dictator with weapons of mass destruction? Can you guess which one?

    A: Behind our curtain!

    --
    Patent: from Latin patere, to be open
  23. Little Known Fact by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Informative

    All GPS satellites have detectors for a nuclear flash.

    http://ares.redsword.com/GPS/old/sum_sat.htm

  24. Re:allowed nukes by GaussianInteger · · Score: 3, Insightful

    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.

  25. Re:Its a nuke. by Phanatic1a · · Score: 4, Informative

    Besides, "mushroom-shaped" clouds form from all large explosions, not just nuclear ones. Set off a big bomb, and you suddenly generate a large amount of superheated gas in a pocket near the ground. This rises so rapidly that it generates vortices around its perimeter, and the rolling of these vortices draws up a column of smoke and explosion debris, forming the stem. Then when the rising gas reaches a higher altitude where it's just about as dense as the surrounding air, it spreads out, forming the cap.

    A mushroom cloud could be from a nuke. It could also be from the explosion of a liquefied natural gas storage facility, or a MOAB, or cargo train filled with ANFO. It's not a tell-tale of anything other than a big explosion.

  26. Keep you heads on... by Boyceterous · · Score: 3, Insightful

    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!

  27. Forest fire? Don't think so. by Omega+Hacker · · Score: 4, Interesting

    This CNN story claims that a 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: a mushroom cloud is caused by a large amount of superheated gasses, concentrated and hot enough to rise miles into the atmosphere before dissipating enough to break the cap. Unless they have had a multi-year drought and a forest dense enough to flash to many thousand degrees C in a very short period of time, there's no possible way the mushroom cloud was created that way.

    Now, it's entirely possible that it is not a mushroom cloud, as it sounds like all the indications of its presence so far are satellite shots. AFAIK very few, if any, satellites can shoot pictures at a sufficiently low angle to actually get enough outline to confirm a mushroom cloud. Basic physics again: too low and angle, you get a massively distored image because there's a) more air in the way, and b) angle of incidence causes wild refraction.

    If anyone can elaborate on (or correct) these two issues, please comment. I'd be glad to be proven wrong in some way, as a verified nuclear N.Korea is not a good thing. However, what we know so far is not promising.

    --
    GStreamer - The only way to stream!
  28. Re:Its a nuke. by jaxdahl · · Score: 3, Interesting

    Could it have been a small meteorite strike?

  29. Online seismometers by uberdave · · Score: 5, Informative

    Are there any online seismometers that show this blast. A nuclear explosion would show one big spike, but large ordnance would show a series of smaller spikes.

    1. Re:Online seismometers by isolation · · Score: 5, Informative

      Yes.....
      Look at the data marked 3 days ago and compare it to the others. There is a spike.

      http://www.physics.hmc.edu/research/geo/seismo.h tm l#days

      --
      Free Unix? Free Windows. http://www.reactos.com
    2. Re:Online seismometers by onco_p53 · · Score: 4, Informative
      Yes.....
      Look at the data marked 3 days ago and compare it to the others. There is a spike.


      A direct link to the image
    3. Re:Online seismometers by servognome · · Score: 4, Interesting

      I wonder how much "noise" there is with all the natural seismic activity in Japan (3 large earthquakes in last week).
      If anybody is interested there is a way to determine if the seismic activity is from an explosion or from an earthquake, or nuclear blast.

      --
      D6 63 0D 70 89 81 BB 8E 7B 7C 5F 5D 54 EA AB 73
  30. Re:China is the differnce here by ElGuapoGolf · · Score: 5, Interesting

    So, if the US goes into NK, we are pretty much going to go mano-a-mano with the PRC for domination of the globe. Neither the US or the PRC really want that. ... yet.

    And don't, for a second, think that the US or the PRC really want to do that... ever.

    This ain't the cold war. Our economies are so intertwined that a war between us would result in huge economic depressions, job losses, people going hungry, cats and dogs living together, etc.

    Put it this way, if you lived during the cold war, you'd never pick up a piece of merchandise you bought from the store and see "Made in USSR" on the bottom. "Made in China" is farily common, last I checked....

  31. Troop numbers... by WIAKywbfatw · · Score: 5, Insightful

    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
    1. Re:Troop numbers... by Gumber · · Score: 4, Insightful

      But is a manhunt what is really called for in Afghanistan?

      The country is sliding back into the condition it was in before we invaded. Warlords control huge peices of territory, the Taliban are resurgent. It'll be another breeding ground for extremists and summer camp for terrorists they way things are going now.

      Besides, you math is off. 17,900 is appearantly to few people for a manhunt in Afghanistan, given that Bin Ladin has evaded capture.

      134,000 troops isn't enough to overthrow invade an established country, overtrow its government and occupy a resisting population. It wasn't enough to round up loyalists on our way to overthrowing the government, and it wasn't enough to properly secure arms depots, which is part of the reason it isn't enough to occupy a resisting population -- The average # of American soldiers killed per day is climbing, and has been since the transfer of power at the end of june; at the same time the US is rushing to turn security responsibility for more and more territory over to Iraqi forces. In other words, people are dying faster defending less territory.

  32. CNN: "North Korea cloud 'not nuke blast'" by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Informative
  33. Please! Everyone! Chill out by bigberk · · Score: 3, Insightful

    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.

  34. All Of You Who Are Frightened By This... by Trolling4Dollars · · Score: 3, Insightful

    ...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.

  35. Other possibilities by r_j_prahad · · Score: 4, Informative

    Paektu-san (Mount Paektu or White Head Mountain), is an extinct volcano and Korea's highest mountain (2,744 meters). It's located on North Korea's northern land border. It may have sprung violently back to life like North America's own Mount St. Helens.

    Also, forest fires occur there with some regularity (more than 130 at once this summer), and can produce large white mushroom shaped clouds under the right atmospheric conditions.

    Let's not jump to conclusions. Oh wait, this is Slashdot....

  36. Possibly volcanic? by NeuroManson · · Score: 5, Interesting

    While I don't have a degree in geophysics, I wonder if the mushroom cloud was volcanic in nature? N. Korea *is* close enough to the ring of fire that it could, perhaps in a fluke, have experienced a volcanic eruption, resulting in both a crater, and a miles wide mushroom cloud.

    If I remember correctly, Mt. St. Helens wasn't expected to erupt either, except by geophysicists, and in comparison was a relatively unprecedented event (being that the only volconoes to erupt in a US territory within recent history were in Hawaii).

    --
    Just because you can mod me down, doesn't mean you're right. Shoes for industry!
    1. Re:Possibly volcanic? by NeuroManson · · Score: 4, Interesting

      That's the problem. Seismometers haven't recorded it. Nuclear explosions, however, have a very distinct *thud* on the seismographs. Only one seismometer shows anything in the Pacific NW within the last two days.

      Look up seismology during the demolition of the Seattle Dome, for example, there's a massive amount of data collected from dozens of miles away. Same goes for the WTC attacks. The WTC amounted to approximately a 1 kiloton blast when the towers fell.

      Now on the other hand, there's S. Korea, China, and Japan, all have extensive seismic networks in operation. They should have shown *something* by now.

      --
      Just because you can mod me down, doesn't mean you're right. Shoes for industry!
  37. Re:Ooops - No Seismic Activity Last Hour, Day, Wee by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Funny

    Well, that's just great, but North Korea isn't in Southeast Asia.

    Wars are Gods way of teaching Americans geography.

  38. No, the time is wrong by El+Puerco+Loco · · Score: 5, Informative

    The spike is at 16:10 UTC which would be 2:10 AM in Korea. The article says the explosion happened at 11:00 AM.

    1. Re:No, the time is wrong by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Informative

      Fine Check out this Sizeooetwhatever in Japan http://www.fnet.bosai.go.jp/freesia/waveform/prev. html Set for "Selected Window" IZH 1day plot Date: 2004/09/10 (UT) Something bighappened at 2 AM, Same as the HMC plot, but this one is a hell of alot bigger. AKA so it was closer to this one than the HMC one. North Korea? Perhaps.

    2. Re:No, the time is wrong by Frogbert · · Score: 4, Informative

      I have a friend over there in Japan, it was an earthquake.

    3. Re:No, the time is wrong by NegativeOneUserID · · Score: 3, Funny
      I have a friend over there in Japan, it was an earthquake.
      Shouldn't that be
      It was an earthquake. I have a friend over there ... in Japan!
  39. Comment removed by account_deleted · · Score: 5, Informative

    Comment removed based on user account deletion

  40. don't be so innocent by IshanCaspian · · Score: 4, Interesting

    Don't you realize how advantageous it is to release this information on the anneversary of the twin towers attack?

    --

    But there is another kind of evil that we must fear most... and that is the indifference of good men.
  41. Do we have any choice but to play ball? by Cryptnotic · · Score: 5, Funny

    Of course we have a choice:

    Would you like to play a game?
    >list games
    Ball
    Global Thermonuclear War
    >play Global Thermonuclear War
    How about a nice game of Ball?
    >No, I would like to play Global Thermonuclear War.
    Very well...

    Seriously though, of course we have a choice. We didn't cave in to the USSR, I don't expect us to give a cowtow to N. Korea. Seriously, expect a carrier battle group in the Sea of Japan ASAP if there isn't one there already. Expect half of the U.S. Navy including a dozen submarines loaded with 60 ICBM's each sitting off the coast of North Korea very soon. Oh, we'll be playing "ball" all right.

    --
    My other first post is car post.
    1. Re:Do we have any choice but to play ball? by Aadain2001 · · Score: 4, Insightful

      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
    2. Re:Do we have any choice but to play ball? by mi · · Score: 4, Insightful
      by launching a nuke at a bunch of US carriers or at Seoul.

      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.

      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.

      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.
    3. Re:Do we have any choice but to play ball? by surprise_audit · · Score: 3, Insightful
      When the crazy guy has a gun you don't point your gun at him and start yelling at him.

      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"??

    4. Re:Do we have any choice but to play ball? by pjt33 · · Score: 3, Funny

      Actually it sounds to me like the way we Europeans would describe a stereotypical US citizen.

    5. Re: Do we have any choice but to play ball? by gidds · · Score: 4, Insightful
      Not really, no.

      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.

  42. Oh Christ, grow up, people!!! by theolein · · Score: 4, Insightful

    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.

  43. Craters and forest fires by theolein · · Score: 4, Insightful

    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. ;)

  44. Well I would note by Sycraft-fu · · Score: 4, Insightful

    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.

    1. Re:Well I would note by necro2607 · · Score: 3, Insightful

      What makes CNN more credible? That they have their own TV channel? That they have more money than Yahoo?

      I'd actually consider Yahoo far more credible because they aren't as swayed by the influence of corporate sponsorships and similar bullshit very very likely used to influence how stories are reported among news networks like CNN, MSNBC and so on.

  45. Checking of facts? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Funny
    > Germany has an army. During the 2nd world war it was the backbone of NATO
    ...
    > I suggest you better check you facts before you post.

    Yes, quite.

    1. Re:Checking of facts? by JDevers · · Score: 3, Funny

      Well, they had a pretty good army during the second world war too...

  46. Re:History eh? by quax · · Score: 3, Insightful

    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.

  47. Re:Are you sure? by JInterest · · Score: 4, Insightful

    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.

  48. I guess you don't live in South Korea? by Mal+Reynolds · · Score: 4, Interesting

    If you and yours lived only 50 miles from the DMZ, I don't think you'd be spouting such nonsense.
    As the poster above suggested, any move by the US would be met with decimation of the South Korean capital.
    The North Koreans have enough artillery and incendiary weapons to make Seoul look like post WWII Dresden. Neither the US nor the South Koreans have enough weapons to destroy all those artillery positions before they've done their work. Yes, the US would eventually win. But it would take at least 1 to 3 months to fight North Korea to a standstill. Perhaps longer, as most of our forces are committed elsewhere.
    You may be able to accept a few hundred thousand South Korean civilian casualties and the reduction of their capital to rubble. But it shouldn't come as a surprise that the South Koreans are not so anxious to risk that possibility. And that's just the conventional weapon threat. If the North managed to lob a single nuclear device towards the south, the casualties could run to millions.
    I suggest you do your tough talking when it's the lives of your family on the line. In this case, the South Korean's have every right to drive the direction of these negotiations. It's their families only 50 miles away from the DMZ, not yours or mine.

  49. Re:The seismometer is in California by ColaMan · · Score: 4, Informative

    No.

    Vibrations through the earth travel at many kilometers per second, depending on density.

    There'd be a delay (thats how you can triangulate earthquakes and such) but not in the order of 9 hours.

    --

    You are in a twisty maze of processor lines, all alike.
    There is a lot of hype here.
  50. The time is right. by scum-e-bag · · Score: 3, Informative
    The spike is at 16:10 UTC which would be 2:10 AM in Korea. The article says the explosion happened at 11:00 AM.
    Seismic waves take time to travel through the earths crust, just like a tidal wave on the ocean. It is possible that the wave took 3 hours to travel to the measrurement center at physics.hmc.edu

    Those files have been slashdotted... anyone get originals?
    --
    Does it go on forever?
  51. NK != Iraq by rlp · · Score: 4, Informative

    A little history - In 1994 Clinton sent Carter to negotiate a treaty with North Korea. The North Koreans agreed not to develop nuclear weapons in exchange for hundreds of millions of dollars of aid in the form of food and oil, and assistance in developing a "peaceful" nuclear program. The North Koreans then used their "peaceful" nuclear program with assistance from Abdul Qadeer Khan from Pakistan to develop their own nukes thus secretly breaking their agreement. North Korea also has an active missile programs and has conducted "test firings" of multi-stage missiles - shooting them over Japan. Japan is not very happy about this.

    The U.S. with U.N. backing (the Soviet Union's UN ambassador had walked out - thus avoiding a veto) fought a war with the North Koreans in the 1950's. The war ended with an armistice in 1953 - not a peace treaty. North Korea has a 1.1 million man army out of a population of 22 million. They spend about 23% of their GDP on the military. The South Korean capital - Seoul is within easy artillery range of the North Korean border, and the North Koreans are believed to have a lot of hidden artillery in bunkers on the border. In the event of war, a lot of civilians in South Korea would die quickly. Finally, North Korea's leader Kim Jong-il is a wacko. While his people starve, he imports large quantities of large items for himself (he favors Hennessy cognac). He's had Japanese citizens kidnapped to teach the Japanese language to North Koreans spies . He's a movie nut (owns 20,000 films) and kidnapped a South Korean movie director to make films about himself.

    China is North Korea's largest trade partner and patron. However, with China's economic boom - China now trades far more with South Korea, Japan, and the U.S. Nevertheless, China is still wary of Japan - remembering the horrors inflicted on China by the Japaneses during WWII. Since the war, Japan has become an economic rather than military power, and it's pacifistic constitution (written by the US) ensures that it will not again become a threat to it's neighbors.

    A nuclear North Korea threatens the balance in the region. It is not in the interest of China for South Korea to develop it's own nukes. It is not in the interest of anyone for the Japanese to develop nukes to counter the threat of nuclear armed missiles from North Korea. China's real nightmare - is if the region starts a nuclear arms race and Taiwan goes nuclear.

    So, the choices are as follows:

    1) Cut a deal similar to the 1994 Carter deal that the North Koreans violated (fool me once ...)
    2) Attack North Korea and risk immediate massive civilian casualties in South Korea.
    3) Drag China into the negotiations with North Korea and convince them to "curb your dog".
    4) Close our eyes, put our fingers in our ears and shout "La La La La La ...".

    Personally, I think the only viable answer is number three - and that's what we're doing.

    --
    [Insert pithy quote here]
  52. Re:Forest fire? Don't think so. - WRONG by lombre · · Score: 5, Informative
    This CNN story claims that a 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

    pictures speak a 1000 words

    ex 1

    ex 2

    you can find 100's of recountings of forest fires that have mushroom clouds

  53. Badger, Badger, Badger,... by uss_valiant · · Score: 3, Funny

    Badger, Badger, Badger, ....., Mushroom cloud, Mushroom cloud, Badger, Badger, .... Mushroom cloud, Mushroom cloud, Badger, Badger, ..., Mushroom cloud, Mushroom cloud, Badger, Badger, ...., a Snake, a snaake, snaaaake, a snaaake, ooou it's a snaaake, Badger, Badger, ...

  54. FALSE ALARM - japanese seismograph at 2 AM by Shmibbon · · Score: 4, Informative

    The 2 AM seismic event is strongest at KIS. That's located in the middle of the south shore of Japan (Chugoku-Shikoku area). It also shows up strong on the north/south motion graph (first graph is up/down).

    Check the previous days, there's plenty of spikes. It's just a damn earthquake in Japan.

  55. Radiation Increase on September 10th by dorpus · · Score: 3, Interesting

    This radiation monitoring station in Ishikawa Prefecture of Japan, due east of the Korean peninsula, shows elevated radiation levels on September 10th. http://atom.pref.ishikawa.jp/RS25000.htm

  56. L.A.Times article = He's insane by spineboy · · Score: 4, Informative
    The L.A. Times had an interestng article about a Japanese chef who worked for him for a while and then escaped. It included such info as Kim Jong Il II (sp?) has EVERY GRAIN of rice hand selected by a staff of women - imperfect ones are discarded. Food is cooked over fires made from a certain type of tree on a remote mountain that reportedly has special powers. Water too is from a "special" location. Made everyone in his hunting party take the same drugs as he was taking, after a spill from a horse. Always "wins" every competition that he is in.

    He's either whacked or really, really different - I vote for the former.

    --
    ..........FULL STOP.
  57. Re:Ooops - No Seismic Activity Last Hour, Day, Wee by infolib · · Score: 3, Informative
    Well, that's just great, but North Korea isn't in Southeast Asia.

    Really? Where'd they move to?

    East Asia. Let's see what Wikipedia says:

    Southeast Asia is a subregion of Asia. It includes all of the following territories:
    Brunei
    Cambodia
    East Timor
    Indonesia
    Laos
    Malaysia
    Myanmar (Burma)
    The Philippines
    Singapore
    Thailand
    Vietnam

    When you look at a map it is obvious that Korea is really pretty far to the north, which makes it reasonable that it's included with Japan, Taiwan and some Chinese provinces in East Asia.

    --
    Any sufficiently advanced libertarian utopia is indistinguishable from government.
  58. Re: MORONS, your bus is leaving by shutdown+-p+now · · Score: 3, Insightful
    Haven't you people heard of the Non-proliferation Treaty?
    Yes, we did. Surprisingly, it is only binding to those countries which signed it. North Korea is, as of now, not a signatory.
  59. S. Korean government says it wasn't a nuke by sofakingon · · Score: 4, Informative
    From the Chosun Ilbo, the largest newspaper in Seoul.

    I live here, so I pray to God it wasn't a nuke.

    Gov't Confirms 'Non-Nuclear' N. Korean Explosion

    It was reported that there was a massive explosion Thursday around the town of Yongjo-ri, Kim Hyong-jik County, Ryanggang Province. U.S. Department of State, sources familiar with North Korea and the Korean government all confirmed the explosion. A high-ranking government official said Sunday, It is true that a large mushroom cloud about 3.5 to 4 km in diameter was observed by a satellite at around 11:00 a.m. Thursday. It was not a nuclear test, but the explosion seemed to be three times bigger than the one that took place during the Ryongchon Station accident,± and added, Both U.S. and Korean intelligence authorities are investigating what caused the explosion.±

    Chong Wa Dae Spokesman Kim Jong-min said, We noticed the explosion right after it took place and reported it to the president in writing during a National Security Council meeting. But we cannot decide the nature of the accident yet.±

    The accident took place in a mountainous region 1,500 meter above sea level around Yongjo-ri, where it is known that there were many munitions factories nearby. In particular, the exact spot of explosion is only 10km away southwest from the Yongjo-ri base for Rodong 1 and 2 missiles and some 30km away from the Sino-Korean border.

    There is much talk about the cause of the explosion. The government official said, If a nuclear test causes an explosion, we can detect it by reading satellite data. Thus, the recent explosion in North Korea was not caused by a nuclear test.± The intelligence authorities assume that an ammunition depot with over 1,000 tons of dynamite or an ammunition car may have exploded, or there may have been a chain explosion of chemical material or a big fire. Some Chinese sources argue that a massive explosion took pace in a munitions factory. Hong Sun-jik, director at the Hyundai Economic Institute said, Other than the assumption that it may be a simple accident that took place due to old facilities, we cannot exclude the possibility that the explosion may have taken place due to the lack of control of the Kim Jong-il regime, or it may have been connected to a secret feud over the successor of Kim Jong-il following the rumor of death of Kims wife, Ko Young-hee.±

    Also, some strongly argue that it is not a simple accident because it took place on Sept.9, the Norths foundation day, which is considered a very important national holiday. Others argue that with Koreas nuclear experiments in the past at issue in the international community, it could be a false explosion by North Korea to intensify the Koreas nuclear issue. In other words, the North intentionally caused the explosion to deliver a message to the international community.

    The government official said, We will be able to know the exact cause only after North Korea makes an official statement or intelligence authorities announces the results of their analysis.±

    (Choi Byung-mook, bmchoi@chosun.com )

  60. Calm down by jandersen · · Score: 3, Insightful

    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.

  61. Or you need to do some more reading. by tgd · · Score: 5, Informative

    The US tested many sub-kiloton devices.

    I suggest as a minimum reading a bool called the Curve of Binding Energy... I'm pretty sure its got a chapter talking about Ted Taylor's efforts to build micro-yield devices.

    Either way, your comment is completely wrong. Its far more complicated to created small yield devices, but not even remotely impossible. Its extremely unlikely that North Korea did that, though. While creating a nuclear detonation is simple given enough raw fissionable material (US and Russia both had no failed tests with primitive technology until we started pushing the envelope for smaller and smaller explosions), creating micro-yield explosions is, and the details is one of the closest kept nuclear secrets in the US.

    1. Re:Or you need to do some more reading. by Jesus_666 · · Score: 3, Funny

      I suggest as a minimum reading a bool called the Curve of Binding Energy...

      So, is it true or false?

      --
      USE HOT GRITS WITH STATUE OF NATALIE PORTMAN (NAKED AND PETRIFIED)
  62. Black Ops, anyone? by niktemadur · · Score: 3, Interesting

    Supposedly the explosion took place very close to a weapons factory.

    I'm just speculating, Tom Clancy style, about a joint American-Japanese-South Korean sortie, you know, James Bond-ish sort of thing. And on Kim Jong Il's grand celebration, to boot. Now THAT would be quite an embarassment to the Illuminated Leader.

    Then, the well trained western media calls it something ludicrous, like a forest fire, a classic techno-thriller wrapup.

    Now that I've read the end of the book, I'd like to go back and read a bit of character development, the romantic interest, etc. :-)

    --
    Lil' Thindime, lilting a lacrimose lament, krashes the kwaint konfines of Kokonino Kounty
  63. since the 1950's by evenprime · · Score: 5, Informative
    In practical terms it's impossible to build a nuclear bomb that yields less than about 5 kilotons.

    We've had smaller nukes than that since the late 1950's. Our AIM-26A and AIR-2A air to air missiles typically had 1.5 nuclear warheads. Some of these had the even smaller 0.25 KT warheads.

    More Info:

    http://www.milnet.com/aamtab.htm

    http://www.wpafb.af.mil/museum/arm/arm16.htm

    http://www.hill.af.mil/museum/photos/coldwar/genie .htm

    --

    "Weapons should be hardy rather than decorative" - Miyamoto Musashi
    I think that goes for OS's too
  64. U.S. strike? by RayBender · · Score: 3, Interesting
    #begin tinfoilmode

    Could this cloud have been the result of a U.S. strike against a North Korean nuclear facility? Maybe we located the place where they keep all of their bombs and just took it out?

    #end tinfoilmode

    I know, I can think of a million reasons why we shouldn't do something like that, but maybe we did anyway. It's not like this administration is beyond acting like cowboys...

    --
    Human genome = 3 billion base pairs = 6 GBit. Windows + Office = 20 Gbit. Which is more impressive?
  65. Move along.. by t_allardyce · · Score: 3, Interesting

    Reading 'Mushroom Cloud Over North Korea' woke me up ;) but its abit of a dud. Move along everyone, nothing to see here. Firstly, if it was a nuke theres no way it would be hidden for 4 days - the US would certainly want the news out, hell even i would support a pre-emptive attack on that evidence, and even if the didnt, lots of people would want to know so a cover up would be hard. The radiation would be picked up, its not. Even that padded-cell case wouldnt do an above ground test in the small country, it would be below ground or over the sea (he himself would be at risk from the radiation!). Its not a US bombing raid on a nuke facility, nuclear weapons dont go off when you drop bombs on them, they do give off lots of radiation tho. Its unlikely to be a US mini-nuke (although that would explain a cover-up) again because of the radiation: if it leaves a crater, you're gonna get fall-out and even if not from that, you'd get if from the nukes they destroy! From the location its probably a missile test gone wrong or some explosives all stored in one place or fuel?

    --
    This comment does not represent the views or opinions of the user.
  66. Re:Impossible by TGK · · Score: 4, Interesting

    Not impossible, just hard. To be fair, I'd call it impossible for N. Korea to construct a 5Kt weapon given their lack of experiance in the subject matter.

    With sophisticated facilities, extensive work done in neutron reflectors and fission enhancing substances (Tritium for example), it would be possible to construct such a weapon.

    Think of it this way, the Manhattan project wasn't interested in a target yeild, they just wanted to make the concept work. All three of their first generation nukes tipped the scales around 15-20 kt. For all intents and purposes, it's fair to assume that 15-20 kt is the default size of your average nuke unless you engineer it differently. If N. Korea is trying to build the "lets see if this works" nuke, it's likely going to fall into that range.

    --
    Killfile(TGK)
    No trees were killed in the creation of this post. However, many electrons were inconvenienced.
  67. Re: MORONS, your bus is leaving by Frequanaut · · Score: 4, Insightful

    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.

  68. Re:Impossible by Travis+Fisher · · Score: 4, Informative

    You're wrong. Do a bit of web browsing about the threat of nuclear terrorism sometime. Try this paper for a start. What you're missing is that there is another critical factor determining the efficiency -- for what time period the assembly is critical. A group with limited resources trying to build a nuclear bomb for the first time is likely to aim for a device with a minimum of technical sophistication. This means one of two designs, corresponding to the bombs dropped on Hiroshima and Nagasaki. One was the "gun design," so named because a slug of uranium is shot into another subcritical mass of uranium. The other is the "implosion design," where a hollow sphere of plutonium is surrounded by shaped charges of convential explosive, which when detonated compress the plutonium into a super-critical density. The problem with these designs is that if you do a shoddy job building the thing, the nuclear chain reaction will take off when the fissionable material is only partway to the final "assembled" state. Then most likely the nuclear explosion blasts the parts back apart before they ever reach the final assembled state, and this flying apart of the material makes things subcritical again before much of the nuclear energy is released. This can lead to arbitrarily small yields. This is particularly likely (or maybe almost inevitable) if a bomb is built with the less-refined "reactor grade" materials as opposed to the more-refined "weapons grade" materials. The less-refined material has a far greater proportion of undesirable isotopes which randomly decay releasing extra neutrons which will start the chain reaction before the optimal stage of assembly.

  69. Kimchee Explosion by Ranger · · Score: 4, Funny

    They probably buried to much kimchee together and it reached critical mass. Rotting cabbage in an enclosed container produces highly explosive gasses. And when you bury them in a collective farm they usually pack them too close together. Then blammo. An enourmous cabbage cloud, not mushroom cloud, shoots skyward. I do understand that any kimchee that survives the inferno is pretty tasty.

    Thank God they didn't do that on the Moon or it we would have lost it.

    --
    "You'll get nothing, and you'll like it!"
  70. Re:Forest fire? Don't think so. by sg3000 · · Score: 3, Insightful

    > 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.
  71. Reading over the comments . . . by ReciprocityProject · · Score: 3, Insightful

    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!