Slashdot Mirror
North Korea Conducts Nuclear Test
viyh writes "North Korea conducted a nuclear test on Monday, South Korea's Yonhap news agency quoted a ruling party official as saying.
A magnitude 4.7 earthquake was recorded by the USGS in North Korea.
South Korean President Lee Myung-bak has called an emergency meeting of cabinet ministers over the test, Yonhap said."
Soooo ronery....
"I have never let my schooling interfere with my education." --Mark Twain
Yet you forgot one factor. Nutjobs.
Knowledge is power. Knowledge shared is power lost.
http://www.armscontrolwonk.com/2308/the-second-north-korean-nuclear-test provides a sober view of the latest test as well as other Korean and arms control related http://www.googlesyndicatedsearch.com/u/acw?q=korean&sa=Search topics.
The problem of world peace is one of leadership. It's not only a struggle for resources, but a struggle for supremacy, which guides our national policies. America believes it cannot continue to exist without controlling others. And NK believes that it must dominate its enemies in order to survive.
This can't be fixed so easily, I'm afraid. It's simply human nature. So it's up to each and every one of us to work towards that goal. I'm starting with the man in the mirror. I'm asking him to change his ways. And no message could have been any clearer: if you want to make the world a better place, take a look at yourself and make a change.
But communism DIDN'T work. And in a few years we'll realize that democracy doesn't work either.
Whole N Korea thing is something like a troll guy who begs for ''replies'' or getting banned until he gets the ultimate attention.
There were no news about N Korea for a while and bam, they explode a nuke.
Can a country troll? They seem to be able to do it.
But communism DIDN'T work. And in a few years we'll realize that democracy doesn't work either.
Democracy is the worst government system. Except for all the other ones we have tried in the past...
I hate to burst you bubble of ignorance, but, North Korea's first nuke test was on Oct. 9th, 2008. You know, when that other guy was still in office. And it was in development for a long time before that. Barry has been on the job three months. He's barely had time to get into the front door of the White House. You can't pin this on him at all. Kim Jong Il has always been one to do as he pleases.
"I have never let my schooling interfere with my education." --Mark Twain
While I'm not sure exactly where I stand on the overall issue of nuclear wepons - it's a lot more complex than the soundbites in the news like to make out, after all - I do think it's worth saying that characterising Kim Jong Il as insane is at least somewhat fair.
Were we talking about Iran, for example, I'd agree with you - although their leaders hold a vastly different ideology to many of our own, writing them off with simplistic statements is totally unfair. Their country works in its own way and while legitimate criticism could be levelled at them for failing to represent the wishes of their people, that would not negate the fact that the decisions they do make often work to achieve the desired outcome.
North Korea, on the other hand, is not running as a functional country in any sense of the word. The competence of the leadership is very much in question, and many of their past actions suggest a level of delusion that could potentially lead to very destructive behaviour.
I'm not referring specifically to nuke tests. I'm referring to the threats that North Korea has made to the West, mostly relating to medium-range missile tests. Also, I'm not American and I couldn't care less about partisan politics in that country. As far as I'm concerned, there are very few differences between the two major parties as they're both financed and mostly controlled by major corporations.
This space left intentionally blank.
Hint: they're extremely expensive to manufactuer and not really portable. The smallest ones are footlocker or reftigerator size and have a yield of ~1 kiloton, which is practically nothing at all. It could take out a building, yes, but so could a truck full of fertilizer, and horseshit is a lot easier to smuggle then nuclear munitions that give off radiation that's easy to detect.
Seems to be working fairly well so far. Maybe not to your expectations, but I don't see people falling over dead from starvation outside my house.
Also, keep in mind that we don't use straight-up democracy... It's a mixture of many different disciplines. Taxes, health care, and education are socialist ideals.
How about, when you have a job and get paid the same no matter what you do, you don't try very hard and industry stagnates. I lived in a former communist country for a while. I know how it is. Tire factories producing tires with bolts in them... horrible quality and service everywhere.
That's what I meant to say, we're not really living in a democracy and it's time we stopped pretending we do because I don't think that word means what our collective self thinks it does.
Hee Hee! Shamonuh. Chickah chickah.
Things don't simply "work" or not. Human history is a continuum of change. Communism worked for some time in some places, Capitalism is working for some time in some places. There is no definitive solution, because there isn't a definitive problem.
The real nutjobs are the ones that claim to have found the "End of History". And both commies and cappies are guilty of such arrogance.
"They'll never actually do anything." Huh? Hitler and Stalin were just posing? What a curious reading of history.
I am saying this to people who thinks just because Russia and USA doesn't blow stuff up, nukes are over. Nukes just explode digitally these days which means they must be progressing way better than ''Lets blow this thing and see what it does'' ages.
There is a difference. The nuke testing done on computers by the USA and Russia is done for purposes of maintenance of current stockpiles and was key to implementing the 1992 moratorium on testing. The simulations aren't generally about simulating explosions, they are about simulating decay and related aging of the current stockpiles so that we can know what nukes will still go boom if we launch them.
In the US, the federal program that handles this stuff (and puts a lot of systems on the Top500 list) is ASCI - the Advanced Strategic Computing Initiative.
When information is power, privacy is freedom.
And no message could have been any clearer: if you want to make the world a better place, take a look at yourself and make a change.
In my estimation, more misery has been created by reformers than by any other force in human history. Show me someone who says, "Something must be done!" and I will show you a head full of vicious intentions that have no other outlet. What we must strive for always! is to find the natural flow and go with it. - The Reverend Mother Taraza, Conversational Record, BG File GSXXMAT9
How about, when you have a job and get paid the same no matter what you do, you don't try very hard and industry stagnates.
Like union dominated US car industry?
When China finally wakes up and realizes that having a somewhat unstable next door neighbor armed with nukes is a bad idea, this sort of thing will stop - North Korea survives only because China keeps giving them tons of aid.
Perhaps the North Koreans are interested in China's continued aid supplies over the long term? As in, after they get a credible, deliverable weapon, 'If you stop the gravy train, we take out Hong Kong, even if we're glass 8 minutes later. That whole "we don't like the west" thing was just so you would let us build nukes.'
I really don't get China's motivations. Once the nuclear genie is out, they won't be able to stuff it back in. It's like the U.S.A. helping Haiti to get nukes because they don't like Cuba. Does it not occur to the Chinese govt. that once North Korea has a real nuclear capability, they could aim it anywhere they so wished?
Were we talking about Iran, for example, I'd agree with you - although their leaders hold a vastly different ideology to many of our own, writing them off with simplistic statements is totally unfair. Their country works in its own way and while legitimate criticism could be levelled at them for failing to represent the wishes of their people, that would not negate the fact that the decisions they do make often work to achieve the desired outcome.
I'd say the ideology is a bit different. Here is a video of them chanting "Death to America" at a political rally before a speech by their president promising to continue developing nuclear technologies. You might consider rethinking giving these people nuclear weapons.
You don't make the poor richer by making the rich poorer. - Winston Churchill
1. North Korea has the second largest standing army in the world, behind only China.
2. They would instantly invade S. Korea.
3. They'd launch anything they could at Japan.
Both S. Korea and Japan are allies, and make nice shiny stuff. We're not interested in provoking a massive retaliation on either country.
Learning HOW to think is more important than learning WHAT to think.
It is not that Communism didn't or doesn't work, but rather it has never existed as Marx envisioned. The reform has never succeeded. Communism, like Democracy, exists only as a fantasy.
As an ideal, it is not half bad. Sadly, the worst kind of humans always manage to find a way to ruin things for everyone, regardless of the government.
Kim Jong Il is definitely not a nutjob. North Korea's internal politics are a pressure cooker like few on the planet. He's extremely smart, politically savvy and extremely ruthless. He learned at the feet of a master - his father - and successfully transitioned to power when it was widely expected he would fail. This is a man that thinks nothing of starving millions (as happened in the late '90's) of his own people if it suits his political needs. North Korea has survived for over half a century by using it's massive military to threaten the South and has played public opinion in South Korea like a violin.
Since China transitioned from a closed economy and withdrew much of it's overt support, North Korea has successfully used seemingly insane threats as negotiating leverage to obtain international aid many times. Because of China's residual support for the regime and their legitimate fear of massive numbers of refugees crossing the border, as well as resistance by (probably North supported) elements in South Korea it has been politically impossible to call North Korea's bluff. This is perhaps the one thing that could successfully break the back of the regime and initiate change in the North.
If it were possible to "pull the plug" on international aid and enlist China to stare down the North's military threats the regime would probably collapse, but it's unlikely China could be induced to do so given the flood of refugees they would inevitably have to handle.
Hence the "insanity" continues with no end in sight.
I have mod points. The reign of terror begins now.
Perhaps statements like this are part of the reason why some South Koreans 'hate' the US?
I agree with your post about the U.S. needing to get out of the world-running business. But - your casual statement regarding the extermination of 70+ million people only in terms of positive impact to U.S. car companies is not helpful to your argument, since people may assume you are a ghoul, which means they won't take your otherwise good idea as seriously as they should.
A few things:
1) The S. Korean army can defend itself from the North. The reason we (I'm American) were there originally was that it was assumed (probably rightly) that any confrontation would actually be with China, through North Korea, which would be a pretty big, horrible war.
2) The reason we're still there is basically the same: As a deterrent against China. If China misbehaves, we're right there. Also, we have a joint security treaty with Japan, and basically share militaries with them (they don't have one, officially, but... they have one). There are many Asian history scholars who basically see the current Korean situation (North/South) as a buffer to keep China away from Japan (remember that the US and Japan are old buddies, having only had that little spat in the 40s). Full disclosure: I live in Japan and my wife is Japanese; I'd like us to continue this deal (there's no reason to stop it--Japan is and always has been the only country in Asia whose values mesh well with the West--chivalry and Calvinism, basically, although they go by different names).
3) Who would benefit from a war in South Korea? Nobody in the short term, China in the long term. In the short term, Korea (both of them) would suffer, Japan might take some hits (they would be really not cool with that), and then China would take the area over, getting all that American infrastructure and brain investment, in addition to some of the shittiest land in East Asia. It wouldn't really be a desirable thing.
4) Koreans are crazily patriotic. They denounce everybody. They insist on serving kimchi with French food (I love kimchi, but, um... Do we serve ketchup with pulgogi in the US???), just to assert their Korean-ness. It's insane. They bitch and moan about Japan and burn the Japanese flag every time a politician has the audacity to honor Japan's war dead, despite the fact that a large percentage of their business comes from Japan and they have just basically copied the Japanese economic model--even where it makes no sense to their situation. Korea is nuts. Both Koreas. Crazy. A history of playing second-fiddle to whomever else was in power has bred a keen inferiority complex, which they overcompensate for. So saying they hate America is not really the whole picture. They hate everybody.
Finally, I don't really care if North Korea gets the bomb either, and I live in their closest target. 10 years ago when I was a student in Osaka, they fired a rocket over our heads and it landed in Osaka harbor. I think I was supposed to be scared, but my response was, "Oh fuck you." That's all I feel today, too. I'm not afraid of these morons. They're not going to do shit, and if they did, they'd be wiped off the map by mid-afternoon.
It isn't necessarily a nuke that could be fitted into a missile
The test is being reported as an 'Hiroshima' size yield: around 20 kilotons.
This doesn't mean they have a fully-funtional nuke in the moden sense of the word. The Hiroshima bomb was basically a large gun that fired a chunk of 90% U-235 into another chunk of Uranium, and was a proof-of-concept that was simple and guaranteed to work. And big: not possible to mount on a Taepodong-2. They have hundreds of kilos of Uranium from their pre-2007 nuclear power industry that can be enriched for this type of bomb.
Until they can show they're testing nukes using shaped Plutonium and timed explosives, this could be just bravado to stir up support for the military as Kim Jong-Il hands power over to one of his sons. Not necessaily technical achievement.
BTW, sod gender-neutral language. the masculine forms are meant as unspecified gender, as is common practice throughout Europe and elsewhere. If you can't understand me, go and lobotomise yourself.
Now, here's an scenario for you:
Citizen A introduces a bill. Citizen B votes yes. Citizen C votes no. Citizen D and E vote for C.
Now it gets ugly. Citizen F, G, H, I and J are employed by A. Citizen A is very rich and the owner of a big corporation.
Citizen A tells F, G, H, I and J: "If you don't vote for me, you'll lose your jobs and you won't be able to work anywhere in this town".
Citizens F, G, H, I and J vote for A and A can do anything he wants.
Lesson: The secrecy of the vote is not there because it's fun.
GPG 0x1B479C78
Thanks for the interesting post - you sound like you have a keen appreciation of the politics there. So, let me ask you the question I've asked elsewhere:
How does a nuclear armed North Korea benefit China?
All the explanations I can come up with only make short-term sense. I don't think the Koreas' will remain seperate forever (or even for more than 50 years). A unified, nuclear armed Korea is probably not a good thing to have on your doorstep - why encourage it?
I DO think the North Korean government is pretty crazy, and once they get deliverable nuclear weapons, that gives them a big stick to use against anyone, including China! Allowing North Korea to develop nuclear weapons ultimately reduces China's control over them. Why would they do this?
North Korea and China are allies for strategic, historical reasons which are becoming less important. The basic relationship seems to be, "We give you arms, and food when you botch up your agriculture or have a drought -- you cause trouble/distractions for us when we ask". I wouldn't bet a lot on such a relationship enduring many decades.
The fact that North Korea would be a smoking hole within a half-hour doesn't seem to deter them much, but I think China might object to having Guangzhou or Hong Kong removed as well. That's the problem with nukes - their destinations are not hard-coded into them based on the political winds of the day they are done.
And, risking veering off into serious off-topic land: Why do you think Japan's culture is more compatible with the West than any other Asian country? I know it might be a long response...
The odd thing about North Korea is that even without nukes it is offlimits for US military action for three reasons
First most people think the North Korean army would fight if attacked, unlike the Iraqi one. Their equipment is outdated, but they have numbers and determination would most likely kill enough Americans to trigger a Vietnam style withdrawal. I'd guess China would keep them supplied too.
Secondly North Korea has vast amounts of artillery aimed at Seoul, the capital of South Korea. It is theorized that if attacked they would shell Seoul. By the time the artillery had been destroyed by US airpower millions of South Koreans would be dead, and probably thousands of US pilots. The US government would most likely not be able to accept that loss.
Finally it's widely believed that China has told the US that NK is under its protection and that attacking it would move the US and China into an open state of hostility.
Now they do have nukes they could use them on US forces, Japan or South Korea. Actually I think that Japan or the US would probably be able to shoot down NK missiles or destroy them on the ground as they are liquid fueled and thus take time to set up. Also there are questions of whether they would be able to build a warhead that would fit on a missile. So compared to their conventional military and powerful allies, their nukes are not particularly useful.
Of course even a few dummy missile launches at Japan may trigger an extreme overreaction on Japan's part. Their current pacifism could be revoked quite quickly and while pointedly non nuclear it is widely believed that they could build a large nuclear arsenal very quickly if threatened. China would no doubt react by building up its own military. So an attack on NK would most likely leave South East Asia looking like a much more threatening place.
echo -e 'global _start\n _start:\n mov eax, 2\n int 80h\n jmp _start' > a.asm; nasm a.asm -f elf; ld a.o -o a;
Kim Jong Il is definitely not a nutjob ... [he] thinks nothing of starving millions
What were you saying?
successfully used seemingly insane threats as negotiating leverage to obtain international aid many times
Name one that has succeeded.
The aid has been given despite the insane threats as we know the situation of the people there.
Sure the insanity continues as the other possibility is death. Or can you imagine a peaceful change in the country (like in USSR)?
I'm not sure I get your point - I said that Iran's ideology is vastly different to our own, but that they run a functional government nonetheless.
An Iranian guy once told me a joke.
Mossad, the CIA and the Iranian Intelligence service decide to hold a contest. Each team must go out, wrestle bears and bring them back alive. The first team to come back is Mossad. They have one bear each, beaten unconscious and carried on their backs. All of the bears but one die over their injuries soon after they return. A bit later the CIA team come back. They have one bear tied up and hooded in a high tech cage they have presumably assembled from the contents of their packs.
There is a long wait. Mossad and the CIA decide the Iranians aren't coming back and start to pack up. Suddenly the Iranians return. They have a dear on a leash, looking very scared and clearly badly beaten. The dear says "I'm a bear! I'm a bear!"
I think that joke tells you a lot.
echo -e 'global _start\n _start:\n mov eax, 2\n int 80h\n jmp _start' > a.asm; nasm a.asm -f elf; ld a.o -o a;
You're full of shit, capitalism is the idea that a LARGE group of individuals ought to be able to make unilateral and INDIVIDUAL decisions with wide reaching consequences according to their own arbitrary whims.
them chanting "Death to America" at a political rally
In Iran the phrase "Death to...." is a commonly used slang term. It is used much in the same manner as you would hear Americans say "Fuck that" or "Dammit" or "Damn it to Hell".
So when you hear people chanting Death to America, its meaning is more along the lines of "Fuck those assholes" than "We want to kill all Americans". You can also commonly hear people say Death to traffic, Death to children, Death to politics, and Death to whatever happens to be pissing someone off at the time.
Think about what you yourself say if it's taken literally. Have you ever said "I'm going to kill somebody"? Did you really mean you were going to murder them? Didn't think so. Ever said "Damn it" or "Damn them"? That phrase literally means to send someone/something into the Hellish afterlife, but is that what you were actually advocating?
Getting worked up over slang words that you saw on TV is a stupid method of making an opinion about an entire culture.
Where and when did communism work? Apart from the obvious issue of human rights which are undermined by the very nature of communism, not any particular implementation of it, the fundamental difference is the economic freedom (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Economic_freedom) which historically is VERY strongly correlated with living standards. There is almost no exception to the rule that, assuming the basic rule of law exists in a country, the more free its economy is (i.e. more capitalist) the more prosperous it is.
Negative moral value of force outweighs the positive value of good intentions.
The thing to keep in mind with Iran is that it's a Persian state, surrounded by Arab states. Shouting 'death to Israel' is their way of saying to their neighbours 'look, there's someone we both hate! Don't invade us again please!'
I am TheRaven on Soylent News
That's why the social democratic system is so popular in Europe... You get most of the benefits of capitalism, with the safety net of communism.
The golden path lies in the middle.
- These characters were randomly selected.
Number 1 is not technically true, they have a very large reserve army which can give that appearance..but South Korea has a similarly sized armed force which is much more heavily armed. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_countries_by_size_of_armed_forces
The Wood Engineer
You're making a HUGE assumption when you say that F, G, H, I, and J are all going to break with A on this issue. They have a prisoner's dilemma type choice where individually, it's a safer choice to stick with A, because if the bill loses then they don't get punished, and if the bill wins then no harm was done. Therefore, perfectly rational self-interest will lead to continued oppression, even though a collective decision to break with A leads to the optimal outcome.
And if you were to argue that F won't vote A because when G, H, I, and J win the vote then they'll also kick F to the curb (thus breaking the dilemma by providing the same negative consequences either way but divergent positive consequences), then you've really traded one tyranny for another.
I think the most likely scenario would be something like this:
USA: Bad NK! We are gonna invade! Booya!
China: If you do, we will demand you pay your debt to us.
USA: That would totally fsck our economy man!
China: So don't do it then.
USA: Lets get Iran! Booya!
Japan occupied Korea for the first half of the 20th century and ran the entire country like a concentration camp. Koreans weren't allowed to speak their own language or acknowledge their own heritage. They didn't even keep their own names.
The occupation didn't end until the end of World War 2 and underscored the more well-known rape of Eastern China, commonly known as "the Rape of Nanjing."
There is a lot to be said about this, so here: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Korea_under_Japanese_rule
Japan was once a violent empire. This ended roughly around the same time it had two nuclear bombs dropped on it. Strangely enough, this made Japan one of the most peaceful countries in the world.
Japan hides it's brutal history from it's children, unfortunately.
Sadly, Korea has very little left from the time before the occupation. Most historic places in Korea were built ten-to-twenty years ago.
I think your figures are wrong. When I made my military service in the artillery our guns could shoot about 21 km and they where of an older model. The newer model could shot further and this was standard 15 cm artillery.
As far as I know, battleships of WWII could fire to the horizon and could possible fire beyond it today with better aiming - according to Wikipedia an Iowa class battleship could fire it's 40cm guns at targets 39km away.
I wouldn't be suprised if NK has artillery that can reach at least 40 km which is close enough to hit Seoul if you add chemical or biological weapons.