Slashdot Mirror

← Back to Stories (view on slashdot.org)

North Korea Shows Off Space Center and Launches Missile

Posted by ryuzaki0 on from the pay-no-attention-to-the-missle-behind-the-curtain dept.

Hugh Pickens writes "BBC reports that nobody would describe North Korea's mission control as imposing. It is a small, unremarkable, two-story building, tiny compared to Nasa's Houston home in America or Russia's space command. But the North's secretive regime, now headed by the third of the Kim dynasty to rule here, Kim Jong-un, is opening up, for the first time in an attempt to allay fears it is about to test missile technology that could deliver a warhead as far as America. 'Sixteen technicians man the satellite command center. Dressed in white coats, like doctors, they sit behind computer screens,' writes Damian Grammaticas. 'On a big screen are live pictures from the launch pad, showing North Korea's rocket being fueled up. The satellite it will carry has already been loaded on board, we are told.' Pyongyang says the minibar refrigerator-sized satellite covered with solar panels and golden foil to protect its instruments will broadcast martial music praising North Korea's founder, Kim Il Sung and is designed to monitor weather, natural disasters and agriculture patterns. As the five-day window for North Korea's rocket launch opens today, the United States has warned a launch would be a breach of UN Security Council resolutions that ban the North from testing missile technology. If North Korea goes ahead it could lead to UN sanctions, it has warned. 'That's why we have invited you, to clearly show that this is a satellite launch not a ballistic missile,' says Paek Chang-ho, head of the satellite control center. 'I hope you become supporters in showing the transparency of our satellite launch.'" After all that North Korea decided to launch a missile anyway. From the article: "The three-stage rocket, called the Unha-3, blasted off from the Soehae launch site near North Korea’s western corner with China, at about 7:39 a.m., the South Korea Defense Ministry said."

65 of 294 comments (clear)

  1. Wow! Three times! by Psychotria · · Score: 5, Funny

    Missle in the title, the summary AND the "from the pay-no-attention-to-the-missle-behind-the-curtain dept". That's gotta be a record.

    1. Re:Wow! Three times! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Funny

      You see, the UN resolutions bar North Korea from launching missiles. They say nothing about missles.

  2. NK discovers life by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 4, Funny

    After the launch...

    South Korea Defense Ministry - "On this screen you can see we are detecting vast forms of life in outer space.."

    BBC - "That looks a lot like the Pacific Ocean..."

    1. Re:NK discovers life by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 3, Informative

      You must be american. Geography is not one of your strengths.

    2. Re:NK discovers life by Sneeka2 · · Score: 5, Funny

      Hint: North Korea and South Korea do not have the same kind of relationship as North Dakota and South Dakota.

      --
      Bitten Apples are still better than dirty Windows...
    3. Re:NK discovers life by pwnyxpress · · Score: 2

      I don't know, both southern entities have Badlands to the north

  3. Re:Missle? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Funny

    In North Korea, they often shorten Missile to just Miss, so they don't have much experience with the full spelling.

  4. Fail by Dan+East · · Score: 5, Informative

    Numerous news sites are reporting that the launch failed - it broke apart shortly after launch.

    --
    Better known as 318230.
    1. Re:Fail by Dahamma · · Score: 5, Funny

      First time in ages /. has actually reported an event within hours of it happening, and if they had just waited an extra 3 minutes they could have done it right. The irony...

  5. Kaputnik by daveschroeder · · Score: 4, Informative

    Yep, and the launch failed.

    Of course, even a failed launch is still valuable information for North Korea, as that is part of the whole point of such tests.

    1. Re:Kaputnik by sqrt(2) · · Score: 5, Insightful

      It shows you just how isolated they are. Any other country wanting to build a rocket to send a satellite into space could build on the 100+ years of research and development done by the rest of the world.

      I'm sure whatever mistake they made here was made by some rocket scientist in the past and has already been corrected, but they don't have access to that. They had to start from nothing and repeat all the mistakes of the past.

      I'm sure they get some help from the Russians and China, but they are all about trying to do things their own way, alone. Except feed themselves, apparently.

      --
      If you build it, nerds will come. Soylentnews.org
    2. Re:Kaputnik by daveschroeder · · Score: 4, Informative

      Already known, even to amateurs.

      And the White House has been warning the media about this.

    3. Re:Kaputnik by mug+funky · · Score: 4, Interesting

      their entire weapons program is based on freely available info.

      their plutonium is made by reverse engineered magnox reactors.

      their missiles are based on (old) russian tech. ...neither of which they seem to be able to do right. they get frighteningly close, but by frightening i mean they have a lot of toys that could explode and cause damage beyond their borders.

    4. Re:Kaputnik by RightwingNutjob · · Score: 2

      Three launches and three failures. You get the sense these guys don't test their stuff before launch so much as they take the Dear Leader's word that it'll work just because. My understanding is that magical thinking is enforced from the top down in NK. Then again, I'd rather them be evil and stupid rather than evil and smart.

  6. A predictable outcome... by hyades1 · · Score: 5, Funny

    And in the belly of an oddly-configured 747 flying just beyond North Korea's radar horizon, a scientist skilled in laser technology was heard to mutter, "Pull!"

    --
    I've calculated my velocity with such exquisite precision that I have no idea where I am.
    1. Re:A predictable outcome... by Ihmhi · · Score: 4, Funny

      You know what's worrying? There's people on things like 4chan right now that will one day be inventing stuff like this.

      "Sir, how does this laser rifle work again?"

      "Okay, first, push the button that says 'CHARGIN'. Then, press the button that says 'FIRAN'".

      *BWUUUUUUUUUUUHH*

      "Kinda sounds like a dude projectile vomiting, Sarge."

      --
      Random Thoughts From A Diseased Mind (Not For Dummies)
  7. Predictable by Sponge+Bath · · Score: 2

    The previous /. story covering the new US agreement to provide aid was filled with posts of optimism, and contempt for anyone expressing skepticism as old relics too hardened in their ways to accept the new dictator's good faith.

    I'm still skeptical.

    1. Re:Predictable by Bomazi · · Score: 5, Insightful

      Of course they won't give up their nuclear weapon program in exchange for food aid, but that is irrelevant. Aid should be given, in exchange for nothing, even if it might be diverted or otherwise help the regime last. Using the threat of famine for political gains is unacceptable. North Korea does it to some extent, we shouldn't.

    2. Re:Predictable by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Insightful

      North Korea would have the economic power to buy food for its citizens itself if it wasn't blowing it all on shiny nukes and rocketry instead. The rest of the world shouldn't be expected to feed its people while it behaves like an irresponsible and rebellious teenager that spends all its money on hookers and fast cars. On the other hand, since the North Korean leadership has already demonstrated that it is perfectly willing to let its people starve so that it can play with shiny toys, outside demands aren't going to make much a difference. There is no easy answer to the situation.

    3. Re:Predictable by gman003 · · Score: 4, Interesting

      Sure there is.

      First, infiltrate the NK working classes. Give them outside information - anything they want. Secret Agent Man sneaks in, finds a farmer family, gives them each a Big Mac meal - Super-Sized - and a rundown of our side of the story. Don't ask them to do anything except listen. Just try to convince them that we're not the mass-murdering monsters the NK propaganda claims. Above all, though, be honest - admit to the things we have done wrong, don't hide it. It's not the glamorous James Bond spy gig, but it will actually work. Repeat on a massive scale - the number of agents involved should reach the thousands. Masquerade it as a food benefit program, if necessary.

      Second, start cutting off the rich kids' toys. We have sanctions on wheat and corn for the peasants, but the king still drinks $10,000-a-bottle champagne. Find a way to crack down on that sort of thing, and you'll either get them to seriously back down, or to go to even more extremes to maintain power.

      If the leaders did back down, a relatively bloodless revolution will come about naturally, over the course of decades. Just like the Soviet Union - the leaders liberalized, the oppressed used their new freedoms to get rid of *all* the tyranny. Didn't work out perfectly, but still better than the alternative. No more work involved on our end.

      If, however, Kim III clamps down tighter, get your "secret agents" to start a push for an armed revolution. Target especially the members of the army - when one in five North Korean combat-age men are in the army, you'll need to do something to shift those numbers. Promise the rebels full support - and GIVE it. They call for air strikes, give them. They ask for Stinger missiles, give them. The absolute worst thing you could do is fail to follow through at this point. This is arguably the only expensive part of the plan.

      If the revolution succeeds, try to angle them towards reunification. It'll be tough on South Korea's economy for a bit, but they're in good enough shape to handle it. If they insist on independence for whatever reason, make sure no new dictators pop up, through assassinations if necessary.

      Even if the revolution fails, the country will be in total ruins. Once the fighting stops, the generals will realize there's no food *at* *all*, and they'll either force the leadership out, or force them to accept any terms to get foreign food. You'll still have a dictator, but a pacified one, and one in a very, very tenuous situation.

      The only complicating factor is China. China views NK as a necessary buffer state between it, and the South Korean and American armies below. They've been propping the country up for half a century. They'll need to be neutralized somehow before any of this can have a reasonable chance of success.

      Best option? Trade. China is the world's #1 exporter, but also the world's #2 importer. Unlike North Korea, they *depend* on the rest of the world.

      The best place to squeeze them is on manufacturing technology. They import almost all their manufacturing machinery from either the US or Japan, both of whom have a vested interest in neutralizing North Korea. Getting Russia to join in by cutting off the flow of oil and power from the North would also help, but might be optional.

      Obviously, selling the American public on accepting a huge spike in consumer good prices "for liberating North Korea" will never work. However, doing so "for FREEDOM" might. There's been a huge amount of anti-Chinese rhetoric in American politics lately - between latent Sinophobia (racism against Chinese is probably one of the more tolerated bigotries in the US), and the whole "China buying up America" debt scare, you could probably sell America on accepting a spike in prices at least long enough to execute the NK plan.

      OK, fine, so it's not *easy*, but it is *possible*. And if there's ever a revolution in China that leads to them abandoning NK, it *does* become easy.

      But, as better men than I have said, "doing what is right is not always easy, and doing what is easy is not always right".

    4. Re:Predictable by circletimessquare · · Score: 4, Insightful

      this is akin to holding the cops accountable for what the kidnappers do

      nobody in the world is using the threat of famine for political gains on the issue of north korea, except north korea

      if the world is interested in feeding the people of north korea, it would remove the impediment that is preventing the people of north korea from feeding themselves. that would be the government of north korea

      or, the world could continue to ship grain to north korea while its government builds nukes and ICBMs instead of feeding its people. so with every passing decade, we have more and more weapons of mass destruction, and people still starving unless the world continues to feed them

      we can wait for the government to collapse itself. except that we've been doing that for over 50 years, and it never collapses. it just invests in more advanced military technology. we reward them for those efforts, because we prove to them we will still feed them no matter how crazy they act or how many threats they make or how vile the weapons they build

      the people of north korea continue to starve, the weapons technology proliferates to other vile regimes in the world, more weapons get stockpiled, and therefore the stakes involved with the government of north korea collapsing get more dire: who gets the weapons in the anarchy that follows? what does the long life of the north korea regime and the timidity of the world governments say to other countries who wish to engage in warmongering and neglect of its own people?

      this doesn't end well. and the longer the regime lasts, the less well it ends. and the whole time, the people there starve and suffer

      the interest in peace sometimes requires difficult choices. hundreds of thousands would die in south korea if north korea is attacked. but kicking the can down the road just means the choice gets more difficult later, and more die later

      i have two thoughts:

      1. the longer the regime lasts, the more people die when the regime goes away. so the bravest choice is to confront them as soon as possible. we have not done this, and now they have nuclear weapons while their people eat leaves
      2. china stops covering for its rabid historical ally, and begrudingly accepts a united korean penninsula under a seoul friendly to the west. chinese nationalism does not accept the numbers of chinese who died for the existence of north korea o allow this outcome

      am i a warmongerer for having these thoughts? because i am critical of a regime that endlessly prepares for war and does not feed its own people? how is that possible in your mind to not see the malice where the malice actually lies: pyongyang

      i am saying this does not end well. you can dispute me

      1. some kidnap scenarios end with the kidnapper and the hostage and a lot of police dead.
      2. some end with the kidnapper in custody and the hostage safe

      i'll try to be optimistic and think pyongyang will go away in scenario 2. but my gut and my mind tell me scenario 1 is more likely. i am sorry, i do not think i am being pessimistic here, i think i am being realistic about the obvious and long demonstrated malice of this rabid kooky mafia cult

      --
      intellectual property law is philosophically incoherent. it is your moral duty to ignore it or sabotage it
    5. Re:Predictable by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Insightful

      Interfering with their internal affairs is not right. If the people want a revolution, they will have one. If they do not want, who are you to tell them what is better for them? North Korea is not unique, many countries have dictatorships and monarchies, and they will all go down in due time. It is not your country, no matter how good you try to pretend your intentions are "freeing" them is not your responsibility but theirs.
      The only thing your plan would achieve is replace a dictator with another (that and spill a lot of blood). If that was your intention all along, congratulations you're an asshole.

    6. Re:Predictable by the+gnat · · Score: 4, Insightful

      You mean kind of like the way the USA is spending beyond its means on all sorts of things while many are homeless?

      I don't approve of my country's budget priorities either, but there's a couple of crucial differences:

      1. It's not illegal for the homeless to seek gainful employment in the private sector.

      2. It's not illegal for the homeless to leave the country and find another with less craptastic public policy.

      In North Korea, everyone is completely at the mercy of the government for every need, all the time. Complaining means getting thrown into prison camp. Trying to escape the country means getting thrown into prison camp. Trying to make money to support your family because your government job stopped paying you two years ago could also mean getting thrown into prison camp, except from what I've read NK stopped enforcing that rule because it's the only way most of the country is still alive.

      The people of North Korea are serfs - there's simply no other word for it. When the majority of the USA is burning garbage to stay warm, the entire population is several inches shorter than Canadians, and the border to Mexico is blocked by barbed wire and guard towers to keep the Americans from emigrating, then you can make simplistic comparisons.

    7. Re:Predictable by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Insightful

      Somewhere, an intelligence analyst is rolling on the floor laughing at your post.

      Infiltrate the North Korean working classes? Secret Agent Man just sneaks in? If he somehow manages to get into the country, the first peasant to see him is going to run screaming for help from the army. According to everything they've heard in their lives, the West is a big scary monster out to kill them. How many Secret Agent Men are you prepared to sacrifice before you get one who lasts longer than a couple of hours before he's shot?

      More fundamentally, North Korea has a shedload of conventional artillery pointed at Seoul: the capital of South Korea, with a few million people. As soon as you do anything that they notice and don't like - possibly including cutting off food aid, but definitely including any Secret Agent Men - they can open fire and destroy more economic activity than their entire country is worth, several times over. If it weren't for this, the US would probably have just bombed the damn place already.

    8. Re:Predictable by roca · · Score: 3, Insightful

      It's absolutely mad to compare hunger and poverty in the USA to what happens in North Korea.

      When a significant percentage of Americans are eating rats, bark and grass to try to stay alive, and fleeing to Mexico to find food, then you'd have a comparable situation.

  8. Oh Baby Jeebus the hypocrisy by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 4, Insightful

    Seriously the hypocrisy of the Americans is astounding. In regards to this launch the North Koreans did everything by the book

    - They applied to the international regulatory authorities for space launch approval and orbital slot
    - They posted air and maritime notices
    - They had the international press to tour the launch site

    Now any other country doing this would not have any issues. But if it is Iran or North Korea then go fuck yourself because the Americans don't like you. Don't forget that after all these years Cuba still deserves that embargo, you know because they are such a threat to the Americans.
     

    1. Re:Oh Baby Jeebus the hypocrisy by stevenfuzz · · Score: 2

      Yeah, I mean the UN Security Council is really just a bunch of talking heads pumping out American Propaganda! Not. Yes, that's a not joke. I don't care.

    2. Re:Oh Baby Jeebus the hypocrisy by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Interesting

      I really don't care what the Americans think, but being from Japan, I think they should put NK in the ground.

    3. Re:Oh Baby Jeebus the hypocrisy by HBI · · Score: 2

      Other nations aren't doing underground nuclear tests to go with their ICBM tests.

      Yes, the difference between an ICBM and an orbital shot is the intended trajectory.

      --
      HBI's Law: Frequency of calling others Nazis is directly correlated with the likelihood of the accuser being Communist.
    4. Re:Oh Baby Jeebus the hypocrisy by CaptainLard · · Score: 5, Informative

      Now any other country doing this would not have any issues.

      I'm not going to argue that the US isn't grossly hypocritical but you can't call North Korea just another country. Not 2 years ago they torpedoed and sank a south korean navy ship! 2/5 of their population is currently in the military and up to 400k of the rest are in prisions/camps with a 40% mortality rate. The reason the population isn't in constant famine is because of food aid provided by countries such as the US under conditions that they not develop ICBMs! Their grand leader for eternity died decades ago. IMO, north korea filing a flight plan for a rocket launch is about the same as someone guilty of a knife attack applying for a gun. As for Iran, the US should get the hell out of the middle east but a regime who's goal is to destroy a nearby country (Israel) shouldn't get a free pass.

    5. Re:Oh Baby Jeebus the hypocrisy by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Insightful

      North Korea could have fed their people with the amount of money that went into this rocket launch. They apparently find it more important to impress the world than actually keep their citizens from starving to death. Also, before North Korea gets to complain about rape and murder, maybe they should consider shutting down those massive prison camps of theirs.

    6. Re:Oh Baby Jeebus the hypocrisy by ShanghaiBill · · Score: 5, Informative

      - They applied to the international regulatory authorities for space launch approval and orbital slot
      - They posted air and maritime notices
      - They had the international press to tour the launch site

      You forgot a few:

      - They promised to suspend weapons testing, including missile launches, in exchange for food aid.
      - They maintain one of the largest armies on the planet.
      - They launched an unprovoked artillery attack on an American ally just last year, killing mostly civilians.
      - They have never signed a peace treaty ending the Korea War. There is only a cease-fire. Technically we are still at war with them.

    7. Re:Oh Baby Jeebus the hypocrisy by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Informative

      Funny you mention that: for the last sixty-seven years, it has been the North Korean government that is doing the raping, murdering and plundering. But enough with the facts. Carry on, comrade.

    8. Re:Oh Baby Jeebus the hypocrisy by AK+Marc · · Score: 2, Interesting

      i ENCOURAGE you to criticize the USA. repeat: i ENCOURAGE you to criticize the USA. on the merits of the crimes the USA has committed in this world, which are many and large. do you understand me?

      The USA had slavery. The USA persecuted people for beliefs or skin color. The USA has the death penalty. The USA had concentration camps. The USA kills innocent civilians in war zones because it's easier to kill innocents than properly identify combatants. Gitmo.

      The USA has committed a large number of crimes, internationally and locally. Most legislation these days is unconstitutional. The government doesn't even follow its own rules, and worse, the voters don't care and encourage it.

      --
      Learn to love Alaska
    9. Re:Oh Baby Jeebus the hypocrisy by roca · · Score: 2

      The North Korean dictatorship pursues nuclear and missile weapons while its people starve. It maintains order with torture, arbitrary executions and a network of prison/slave labour camps. It sells nuclear and missile weapons technology to anyone who'll buy, making the world a more dangerous place. It is a very, very nasty regime. It blackmails countries into sending food aid by making promises to change, and then breaking them --- and aid is diverted to the military anyway. So yeah, anyone in their right mind doesn't like them.

      Here's some light reading:
      http://edition.cnn.com/2012/03/24/us/north-korean-refugees/index.html
      http://www.washingtonpost.com/opinions/north-koreas-hidden-gulag/2012/04/12/gIQASJP3CT_story.html
      http://www.guardian.co.uk/books/2012/mar/16/escape-north-korea-prison-camp

    10. Re:Oh Baby Jeebus the hypocrisy by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 4, Interesting

      ...you can't call North Korea just another country. Not 2 years ago they torpedoed and sank a south korean navy ship!

      If you had got past the initial hype, you could have found that when the S. Koreans asked Russia to review the findings of the S. Korean investigation, the report was never published because in the words of a US Ambassador to Korea it would be embarrassing to Obama and damage the S. Korean president. (International Herald Tribune, 31 August 2010).
      A leaked version of the report suggested a S. Korean mine was the likely culprit and that fragments of torpedo had been in the water much too long to have been responsible.

    11. Re:Oh Baby Jeebus the hypocrisy by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 3, Informative

      How many countries has NK invaded in the last 100 years?

      One (South Korea). There was this minor scuffle called the Korean War back in the fifties. Perhaps you might have heard of it.

      How many people have they killed?

      Lots.

      If anything, they are much more peaceful

      You tell that to the people who were kidnapped from Japan to train North Korean spies.

      It's a small, poor country, they are not a real threat.

      A small, poor country with nuclear weapons, spends over 30% of its GDP on the military, has a history of threats to turn Seoul into a "sea of fire,", not to mention torpedoing South Korean ships and shelling South Korea (only a few miles from Incheon International Airport, mind you) Just the kind of small, poor, safe neighbor you want to have in your backyard.

      If need be NK could be crushed in a few days.

      If it were that easy, it'd have been done already. Even if all of their missiles fail (leaving them unable to attack Japan), they can still easily decimate Seoul, as it's within artillery range of the North Korean border. NK also happens to have an unholy relationship to China, which is fed up with NK's antics, but is still geopolitically wedded to that nation. China will most likely be forced to intervene against any Western efforts to dislodge the Dear Leader.

      Last time I checked launching satellites doesn't goes against any treaty signed by NK

      They broke their agreement over nuclear development. That's why no one trusts them.

      no nation has the right to tell another sovereign nation it can't research rocketry or launch rockets into the ground.

      When that same nation comes begging for food which it can't buy because it spent all of its lunch money on rockets, we sure as hell do have the right to tell them how not to spend their money! And that is true even if the same nation doesn't keep threatening to take military action against the very same people offering aid.

    12. Re:Oh Baby Jeebus the hypocrisy by circletimessquare · · Score: 2

      do you live in alaska? (referencing your sig). this is the closest us territory to north korea

      they build missiles and nuclear bombs while their people eat leaves and starve, we are still technically in a state of war with them (the korean war "ended" with only an armistice), they repeatedly and continually lie about their intentions, they have for decades announced their hostile intentions to their neighbors and the usa, they are universally condemned by all countries in the world, including their only "close" ally, china, they are ruled by a mafia family that has built a cult of personality around the invincibility and infallibility of the favorite son who holds all power (currently a fat kid in his late 20s), they regularly attack and kill south koreans, and abduct japanese civilians, etc., etc.

      and this doesn't bother you

      an ac in a sibling thread summarizes it better:

      http://slashdot.org/comments.pl?sid=2783493&cid=39669961

      for not caring, you are a moron

      i am not flinging an empty insult. i am making a comparison of your attitude and the obvious facts of what you are dealing with in north korea and making an objective description of your intellectual abilities. educate yourself. then open your ignorant mouth. thank you

      --
      intellectual property law is philosophically incoherent. it is your moral duty to ignore it or sabotage it
  9. Re:Missle? by mug+funky · · Score: 5, Funny

    the "i" broke off just under a minute after posting.

  10. Re:Missle? by similar_name · · Score: 4, Interesting

    Aside from the misspelling I find the use of the word missile versus rocket interesting. They are essentially the same thing but the two words certainly have different connotations.

  11. Missle Failure by stevenfuzz · · Score: 4, Funny

    Apparently the AP is reporting that the missile broke up shortly after lauch, and has called the launch a failure. This is not entirely true. The missile broke apart releasing millions of pieces of paper simply stating "You are happy. North Korea make great party. You are not hungry.". According to officials in North Korea the launch was a great success.

  12. The jokes just write themselves by grouchomarxist · · Score: 5, Funny

    The missile was supposed to mark Kim Jong Un's ascension to power, but it failed to rise to the occasion.

  13. FAIL: Imagine if you were the head missle engineer by schwit1 · · Score: 4, Insightful

    His family and anyone he works with and their families are in trouble.

  14. Re:Missle? by jhoegl · · Score: 4, Funny

    Yes, one is designed to spawn fear and trepidation into the uneducated masses whilst the other is a peace time connotation for "WWWWEEEEEE we have packed, what is essentially 5 billion tons of explosives into this long tube and we hope it does what we want."

  15. I blame the name by damn_registrars · · Score: 2

    When the previous missiles were had names that were phonetically "Type O Dong", they were certain to work. Now that the missile names don't automatically lend themselves to silly jokes, they can't possibly work.

    --
    Damn_registrars has no butt-hole. Damn_registrars has no use for a butt-hole.
  16. They should have save money ... by jbeaupre · · Score: 2

    ... and hired SpaceX to launch their satellite.

    --
    The world is made by those who show up for the job.
  17. could you actually define the hypocrisy? by circletimessquare · · Score: 5, Insightful

    would this be like the hypocrisy that charles manson uses a gun, and the police use a gun, and so they are morally equivalent, and to criticize charles manson is hypocrisy?

    or a burglar breaks into your home, and the government forces you to pay taxes, so its all the same thing: robbery... hypocrisy!

    how about a drunk driver jumping the sidewalk and killing a pedestrian is the same as a drunk stumbling into a highway and getting hit... hypocrisy!

    yeah hypocrisy! everything is morally equivalent!

    please define the parameters in which the globally condemned mafia family who starves its people while it pursues nukes is the same as the government of the USA

    bonus thought (if you can handle more than one thought at a time): it is not required to like the USA to agree with my comment. it is actually possible *gasp*, get this radical craziness!: to dislike North Korea, AND the USA, for different, REAL reasons... at the same time! no freakin way! for real?

    rather than the genius level analysis you and parent poster demonstrate. "bad things from government A" = "bad things government B": hypocrisy!

    durrr....duhh...

    --
    intellectual property law is philosophically incoherent. it is your moral duty to ignore it or sabotage it
    1. Re:could you actually define the hypocrisy? by circletimessquare · · Score: 2

      those are bad things. now try to understand that those bad things are not the same as the bad things north korea does. and it is possible to dislike both governments at the same time. and it is also possible to criticize north korea when it launches a missile. what do you think of the missile launch from the mafia that starves its people while it builds nuke in defiance of the world? (not defiance of the usa, defiance of the world)

      is it possible to step back from simpleminded tribal thinking and criticize both countries? or do you find only reason to criticize the usa when north korea does something vile? why is that?

      put it this way: if next year the usa is found to be torturing some people in gitmo, what do you think of the person who comments "well, north korea has nuclear weapons, that's what we should be talking about today"

      what do you think of such a person?

      now look in the mirror

      --
      intellectual property law is philosophically incoherent. it is your moral duty to ignore it or sabotage it
  18. Re:Missle? by mug+funky · · Score: 2

    the Atlas vehicles were ICBMs IIRC.

    that said, the space shuttle was pretty much 2 ICBMs strapped to a giant fuel tank with a little help from the SSMEs.

  19. Re:Missle? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Interesting

    On the television, they had someone that clarified "Missile vs Rocket", in that they are exactly the same except for a guidance system.

    Eg, a rocket goes up and stops when it runs out of fuel or hits a target and detonates. A Missile has a guidance system to lock on to a target and deliver a payload.

    The end result is the same, we generally reserve the word "Rocket" for the ones without guidance systems, as such the context is correct when you refer to RPG as Rocket Propelled Grenade, and the kinds used in fireworks.

  20. Re:Missle? by Urban+Garlic · · Score: 5, Insightful

    Missiles can be magic. But a magic rocket is just stupid.

    --
    2*3*3*3*3*11*251
  21. Re:Missle? by Grishnakh · · Score: 2

    A "rocket" is generally anything that is powered by a rocket engine. A rocket engine is one which carries its oxidizer and fuel together, rather than using oxygen from the air.

    Of course, there's jet-powered missiles now (I believe the Tomahawk is one of these), so those, technically, do not qualify as "rockets".

  22. Re:Missle? by tomhath · · Score: 3

    A missile is something you propel toward a target. Could be a spitwad, an arrow, or something carrying an explosive weapon. A rocket is a device that's propelled by the exhaust of gasses (and it's self-contained, unlike an air breathing jet engine). A rocket is generally a missile (unless it's tethered, etc), but a missile doesn't have to be propelled by a rocket.

  23. Re:Missle? by icebike · · Score: 5, Informative

    They don't have much experience with Missile launches either.
    It appears the launch failed, the second and third stage as well as the payload fell into the sea..

    --
    Sig Battery depleted. Reverting to safe mode.
  24. Re:Missle? by mug+funky · · Score: 2

    everything since the V2 has had guidance though... you think NASA just pointed and hoped?

  25. Re:Missle? by YrWrstNtmr · · Score: 5, Informative

    The end result is the same, we generally reserve the word "Rocket" for the ones without guidance systems, as such the context is correct when you refer to RPG as Rocket Propelled Grenade, and the kinds used in fireworks.

    In the fighter jet world, it is generally broken down thusly:

    Missile - Powered, guided (AIM-9/AIM-120/ALCM)
    Rocket - Powered, unguided (2.75" FFAR)
    Smart bomb - Guided, unpowered (JDAM)
    Bomb - unpowered, unguided (regular MK-82 dumb bomb)

    For large thingies:
    Missile - Goes up, parts come down, guided, hopefully on target (ICBM)
    Rocket - Goes up, parts stay in orbit or semi-orbit (first stages of an orbital vehicle/payload)

  26. Re:Hey, China by DigiShaman · · Score: 2

    It's 2012, and the Chinese government is practically communist in name only. Actually, it's a pure totalitarian regime with a primary focus on self preservation of said regime. N.Korea is a problem for China because should the N.Korean government fall, there will be a flood of Korean refugees jumping the Chinese border. They simply don't want to be sucked into the geopolitical maelstrom that would ensue.

    China will avoid taking sides, but in the end both China and Russa would side with the US come decision time. Not without a some minor threatening words first, but they would fold easily. It's all politics.

    --
    Life is not for the lazy.
  27. Re:Missle? by Hognoxious · · Score: 5, Funny

    Cause of crash confirmed: they were holding it wrong.

    --
    Confucius say, "Find worm in apple - bad. Find half a worm - worse."
  28. Only a minute? by AlienIntelligence · · Score: 2

    That's pretty bad if the new leader's missle {sic} is only useful for a minute.

    I thought he was was younger than that.

    -AI

    --
    For me, it is far better to grasp the Universe as it really is than to persist in delusion
  29. Re:Missle? by MichaelSmith · · Score: 2

    Maybe the second and third stages, as well as the orbital payload are just dummies which represent the payoad which willl ultimately be attached to the first stage.

    --
    http://michaelsmith.id.au
  30. Quite clearly by AliasMarlowe · · Score: 2

    Darn all typos and abbreviations. The North Koreans obviously meant to refer to their Missal doctrines...

    --
    Those who can make you believe absurdities can make you commit atrocities. - Voltaire
  31. Re:Missle? by Hognoxious · · Score: 2

    It's been used in military history & wargaming as long as I can remember, which is a long time before the late 90s.

    --
    Confucius say, "Find worm in apple - bad. Find half a worm - worse."
  32. Re:Missle? by Truedat · · Score: 2

    In the fighter jet world, it is generally broken down thusly:

    Not seen one of those in the wild for some time, quick let me get my camera ;)

  33. Re:Missle? by RoccamOccam · · Score: 5, Funny

    R-r-r-amjet?

  34. Re:FAIL: Imagine if you were the head missle engin by darkmeridian · · Score: 2

    The hilarious part is that this is probably why all of their missile launches have been failures. If they keep killing or torturing the guys who are responsible for each failed launch, the next guys have to start from scratch without the benefits of learning exactly what went wrong. So let's let them keep doing this and laugh at how stupid and shortsighted they're being.

    --
    A NYC lawyer blogs. http://www.chuangblog.com/