Slashdot Mirror


North Korea Admits to Having Nuclear Weapons

steelvadi writes "North Korea has now admitted to possessing nuclear weapons. Government officials there claimed that they are needed as defense from an increasingly hostile attitude from Washington. It was also stated that N. Korea will not be reentering negotiations on disarmament for the foreseeable future. "

19 of 2,056 comments (clear)

  1. Re:Thank Goodness... by SamBeckett · · Score: -1, Troll

    You don't realize that we had to invade Iraq just so that it would not become another North Korea? Anyway, laugh it up, all the dead soldiers appreciate it.

  2. Re:Thank Goodness... by SamBeckett · · Score: -1, Troll

    I don't pretend to know all of the administrators motives for invading Iraq, but I assure you, my original post was one of them.

  3. Not Funny, Just True by Anonymous Coward · · Score: -1, Troll

    One of the reasons the US invaded Iraq was precisely so Saddam wouldn't be in the position that Kim Jong Il is in now. A bloodthirsty homocidal dictator with WMD.

    Taking out Iraq showed how important it is to take out the enemy before they developed the capability of nuclear blackmail.

  4. Re:Thank Goodness... by MartinG · · Score: 0, Troll

    A country that has the ability to obliterate one of it's neighbors and uses that fact for negotiations.

    Sounds more like the US to me. Except that for the US the neighborhood it "negotiates" with extends across the world.

    --
    -- MartinG To mail me: echo kewyjlcxyzvjfxbqwh | tr bcefhjklqvwxyz .@adgimnoprstu
  5. Re:Thank Goodness... by torpor · · Score: -1, Troll

    Another America: (Let's ignore the human rights issues at the moment) A country that has the ability to obliterate one of it's neighbors and uses that fact for negotiations.

    Good for the goose, good for the gander. Bad for everyone.

    (And if you don't think the U.S. has its own problems with human rights abuses, you haven't been paying attention to your prisons ...)

    --
    ; -- the corruption of government starts with its secrets. a truly free people keep no secrets. --
  6. Re:I think "admits" is probably the wrong word. by ezavada · · Score: 0, Troll

    t'd be real easy to resolve. Let the fuckers nuke each other. The U.S. can take out Asia, the Krazy Koreans can take out the western seaboard. If they can hit Texas, an awful lot of problems would be resolved.

    I'm afraid the real problem is in Washington, and I live a bit too close to there to feel comfortable with that "solution".

  7. Paid by Iran to divert attention by mi · · Score: 0, Troll
    Both regimes need to be crushed -- through sanctions or military actions or both.

    The sooner the better.

    --
    In Soviet Washington the swamp drains you.
  8. Re:Korean War ('scuse, "police action") by RailGunner · · Score: -1, Troll

    How did N. Korea get nuclear technology? From us.
    So, when they nuke LA, remember to thank Bill Clinton and Madeleine Albright. They're the ones that signed that stupid treaty.

  9. Re:Korean War ('scuse, "police action") by Anonymous Coward · · Score: -1, Troll

    Yeah, you're right, every nation is the enemy of the US, the US needs to bomb every nation out of existance, outlaw all open source, kill all gays and lesbians, and anyoneone that isn't a Bush style Christian to get rid of that evil socialism and communism. We all need to be like Rush Limbaugh and say fuck the poor, fuck anyone that's not white because they're all heathen.

    God bless America
    </sarcasm>

  10. Re:I think "admits" is probably the wrong word. by deanj · · Score: 0, Troll

    "outside of America, everyone knew Saddam DIDN't have WMDs".

    Sorry, but that's complete FUD.

    From this article:

    Jacques Chirac: "we have to find and destroy them [Iraq's weapons of mass destruction]."

    Hans Blix: Iraq possesses 650 kilograms of "bacterial growth media," enough "to produce . . . 5,000 litres of concentrated anthrax."

    and that's leaving out the Clinton quotes.

    Not to mention the fact that France, the UN and many other people were in Saddam's back pocket because of the money they received in the "Oil for Food" program. No wonder they were against war in Iraq. They already sold out.

    So get off your damn high horse and quit acting all holier than tho. Getting bribed to keep a dictator in power isn't a virtue.

  11. Re:"Coalition"? by deanj · · Score: 0, Troll

    Nice of you to belittle other countries efforts in Iraq.

    And there's NO evidence that Bush "bought their cooperation". You made that up, or you're listening to people that made that up and believe it. You know how I know that? Because if it had happened, every freakin' paper the the country would have been blasting it all across the front pages. It's just a conspiracy theory.

    There is however, a LOT of evidence that Saddam bought off the French, the UN (Kofi's son, for one) and many other countries with the "Oil for Food" scandal that's still being investigated.

  12. hardline approach by Anonymous Coward · · Score: -1, Troll

    god forbid we hold someone accountable to their treaty. ohh no! The US is the "evil" one just for using harsh words against a crazy dictator. what has this world come to?

  13. Re:Korea by dokterneo · · Score: -1, Troll

    I have read most of the posts below where Korea is being compared with Iraq. I amazed by the magnitude of sheep on this topic. I see a lot of pokes at the Bush administration, and how it was using WMD as an excuse to get "OIL". Seriously folks, if that was the case, wouldn't you expect the OIL prices to go DOWN? We are looking at 2 bucks a gallon in the midwest. Have you forgotten the mass genocide Saddam has commit, even to his own people? If you look at history, I think this would be topped only by Hitler. Most of you also forget that there was a majority support for the US to invade Iraq. Dems and Reps. They were all using the same intel. There is a difference between a threat to the country and a threat to human life. North Korea doesn't pose a direct threat to the US, but more than likely, South Korea, and most of Asia. I don't recall the N. Korean ministry commiting mass genocide recently. Now, their dictator is completely nutz, but very predictable. US intel knows that. They have also know for quite some time numb-nutzs' intentions. The "element of surprise" of the US about N. Korea is just good show to sway the general public which ever way they choose.

  14. Re:It's Truman's fault by Anonymous Coward · · Score: -1, Troll

    you are an ignorant fuck for believing that shit. Our war in korea was pure genocide on the north. read some history, you sound like a fucking english lord during the empire.

  15. Re:I think "admits" is probably the wrong word. by Citizen+of+Earth · · Score: 0, Troll

    well, outside of America, everyone knew Saddam DIDN'T have WMDs. the inspectors didn't find a single thing.

    I think the intelligence experts of most countries knew that Saddam DID have WMSs.

    Actually, I'm a little surprised that the pacifists don't congratulate Dubya on his honesty. I assume most such people assumed that the US would simply plant or fabricate some WMD evidence after invading. If any had been found, this would have been the first thing out of such people's mouths.

    We'll just see if the Europeans have any luck negotiating with Iran. My fear is that they will, and they will be celebrating peace in our time while Iran builds The Bomb at their secret sites unhindered.

  16. Re:The Second Amendment says I can have nukes by Anonymous Coward · · Score: -1, Troll

    No, it doesn't. Read it again.

  17. Comment removed by account_deleted · · Score: 0, Troll

    Comment removed based on user account deletion

  18. Re:I think "admits" is probably the wrong word. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0, Troll

    They're fucking dying anyway you idiot.

    Much less would die in the long run and it would be a much quicker and much less painfull death.

    But hey, it's easy to talk shit when you're living the high life. Fuck 'em. Let 'em all die of starvation right? It was their choice to be born in that hell hole.

  19. Re:United States Admits to Having Nuclear Weapons by Anonymous Coward · · Score: -1, Troll

    Hell, I *wish* we'd act like the Roman Empire. Do you think for a minute that if the Romans had nuclear weapons that they'd have hesitated to destroy every other civilization that threatened them?

    What puzzles me is why in the world (pardon the expression) would a nation voluntarily pull its punches like the US does? We have nuclear weapons and an overwhelming military, we should use them.

    Those of us who think it would be appropriate to annhilate Tehran, Pyongyang, and Mecca (for good measure) understand that it is acceptable to kill someone who wants to kill you. Allowing a murderous regime/religion to persist when you have the power to destroy it is tantamount to national suicide.

    If we're trying to not "go the way of the Romans" then we should quit f*cking around and just destroy our enemies. While we destroyed the Soviet system with diplomacy (and a few proxy wars), these less formidable entities could be easily removed if we'd take the gloves off and send a few ICBMs. Yes, life would be hard on the North Koreans if we just annihilate their government, but life is hard on them now. And yes, the Iranians will starve in the desert if their government falls...but hey, Allah will provide, right?

    Liberals who read this and are bothered by it should just consider that I'm simply advocating a pro-choice view of world politics. We didn't want these unexpected regimes, they're unhealthy and they threaten our own health, so we're simply having a procedure to remove them.