North Korea's Twitter and Flickr Accounts Hacked By Anonymous

First time accepted submitter njnnja writes "With tensions on the Korean peninsula continuing to rise, Anonymous hacked into the government-run North Korean Flickr site to post a 'wanted' poster for NK leader Kim Jong Un. It says that he is wanted for 'threatening world peace' and 'wasting money while his people starve to death.' They also hacked into NK's Twitter account and posted a link to the Flickr page."

Comments

How can you tell North Korea was hacked?

[Anonymous Coward]

They post less crazy things!

Re:How can you tell North Korea was hacked?

[MightyYar]

Look, just because we disagree with what they do doesn't mean this is right.

I think this is an extreme example of political correctness gone wild.

Re:How can you tell North Korea was hacked?

[Anonymous Coward]

Really? It's merely disagreement? Posturing with nuclear weapons = crazy. Being the darkest country on Earth = crazy. This computer setup = crazy. Their people are literally starving and this is how they spend what resources they have.

Re:How can you tell North Korea was hacked?

[Nerdfest]

They are threatening nuclear war. They should be taken quite seriously, posturing or not. It's effectively declaring war.

Re:How can you tell North Korea was hacked?

[Kaenneth]

Darkest?... or Greenest!

What's their energy use per capita? What are their greenhouse gas emission rates?

And don't forget their victory over obesity, less than .1% of the population is overweight!

Re:How can you tell North Korea was hacked?

[Anonymous Coward]

Nothing wrong with that. Let North Korea move, counter their move, the US will then destroy everyone there. Nothing left to worry about.

Re:How can you tell North Korea was hacked?

[Anonymous Coward]

Always look on the bright side!

Re:How can you tell North Korea was hacked?

[servognome]

... of death
Just before you draw your terminal breath

Re:How can you tell North Korea was hacked?

[Anonymous Coward]

thats cuz only the leader has access to food and is a pig.

Re:How can you tell North Korea was hacked?

[Anonymous Coward]

whats to disagree with? They threatened us and the world with nukes while starving their own people.

Re:How can you tell North Korea was hacked?

[girlintraining]

They are threatening nuclear war. They should be taken quite seriously, posturing or not. It's effectively declaring war.

Yeah, in the same way that when I flick someone off on the freeway, that's the same as making a terrorist threat to blow up every car on the freeway. And let's not even get started on how many times I've murdered people in my mind... I'd be a serial murderer. :P

Re:How can you tell North Korea was hacked?

[Anonymous Coward]

exactly. my plan is to give them a 30 day head start. Tell them they can shoot all the nuclear weapons they want at us for 30 days. The day after that, its our turn.

Re:How can you tell North Korea was hacked?

[Opportunist]

Are you the new spokesperson for the tobacco industry? If not, you should apply.

Re:How can you tell North Korea was hacked?

[JBMcB]

Look, just because we disagree with what they do doesn't mean this is right.

"On March 30, 2013, the North Korean government declared it was in "a state of war" with South Korea."
"On the night of April 3, North Korean military said it had "ratified" a merciless attack against the United States, potentially involving a "cutting-edge" nuclear strike, and that war could break out "today or tomorrow".

I'd say that's a bit more than a disagreement.

Re:How can you tell North Korea was hacked?

[AmiMoJo]

Crime is okay if the victim is nuts?

I think that is an example of demonising the enemy.

Re:How can you tell North Korea was hacked?

[cold fjord]

They also moved their nuclear capable aircraft into position.

You mean the same sort of aircraft they've been using to drop only conventional bombs in war for the last 68 years, and only 2 nuclear bombs in the world war prior to that?

The US postures with nuclear weapons, so are they crazy as well? The US has an advantage in that no-one can tell exactly how many nukes it has pointed at NK

North Korea has explicitly threatened the United States with nuclear attack. Could you point out the US making an explicit reciprocal threat of nuclear attack any time in the last 10 years? 30 years?

Every year the US flaunts its power right off NK's coast. Posturing indeed.

I would say you've got posturing down pat.

Re: How can you tell North Korea was hacked?

[JohnnyComeLately]

You have to be from the US or a 1st World Country, and have never gotten out of your safety bubble. The poorest of US citizens are insanely better off than those starving in 3rd world countries. Human rights are more respected. You've never watched a cop gun down a homeless guy who asked for some food in the middle of the sidewalk, with people all around them. And last I checked, despite 3 wars since WWII, we haven't told anyone that we'd nuke them. Back to the conditions, when was the last time you saw a 5 year old on the side of the street picking through the trash, next to goats and livestock, looking for food and other items for their family? I see it nearly every day in Afghanistan. North Korea is actually worse than Afghanistan, which is mind blowing if you've really gotten out in the world and seen the poverty and despair prevalent. Things you take for granted, or throw away, people would kill you for in quite a few places in the world.

And, numnuts, you are free. Not in the "Vandals" kind of way where you can walk into a deli and piss on the cheese, but post something up critical about your government. Now go sit and watch your door... Nothing... Right. Enjoy that (for now). Now, look for a job and apply. Enjoy the ability. Now, decide you want to drive from your state to the next. Enjoy the ability. Now, look out your window and decide what YOU want to do today. Enjoy that ability. Decide what you want to eat, regardless of what it is because nothing is out or rationed. Enjoy that. Make eye contact with a cop, smile, say hello, and not get beaten (LAPD and NYPD may be exceptions to this). Enjoy that freedom. Got a good idea, such as an Internet Search Engine, a Personal Computer named after a fruit, or goofy site to "Like" stuff your friends made, then go ahead and do it. Enjoy that freedom. Make millions and put it into your own account. Enjoy that for awhile, but keep in mind everyone in the government or with a lawyer is now gunning to take it from you. Enjoy that brief freedom.

Get it? Better yet. Don't get it. Get out and see the world. Spend 2 months in Eastern Europe, Africa, Asia, or anywhere undeveloped...then come back to me and complain about the US. The last point to make is the irony is the largest reserves recently found of oil is in the US. Are we invading ourselves now smartguy?

Re: How can you tell North Korea was hacked?

[Anonymous Coward]

the US which invades any country with decent oil reserves

Really? When did the US invade Indonesia? How about Russia?

Re:How can you tell North Korea was hacked?

[Anonymous Coward]

Dunno, speaking from experience, I like to posture before kicking the living shit out of my antagonist. It really makes his defeat that much more bitter.Kind of like Samuel L. Jackson reciting Old Testament prophesy, before he pulls the trigger in Pulp Fiction.Completely demoralize your victim before you turn them to a grease spot. Sometimes posturing is posturing, sometimes it's funny.
          Thank God that stupid Clinton bitch isn't around to fuck things up like she has in the mideast. That job is a mans work, anything women ever accomplished at the diplomacy table, was going to happen anyway. CLUE; they don't respect women in important positions and don't take us that seriously when we send one. Omama is one clueless monkey, political correctness will get us all killed yet. Dumbasses!

Re:How can you tell North Korea was hacked?

[flyneye]

Someone should tell him the Clinton administration is gone, it's O.K. to take off his Dads hippy tye dye shirt now.

Re: How can you tell North Korea was hacked?

[flyneye]

Well, let's check on this claim from my perspective.
I've watched cops do some horrible shit when no one was looking , from beatings to confiscating money and items. You can't open the paper without some story of a crooked cop, on the take, murdering off the clock, raping a suspect, running over kids because they wanted to drive fast without lights on. Now the political circumstances are different , but the corruption is the same.I wouldn't suggest eye contact in a crowd, you'll look suspicious.
I've seen 5 year olds used to steal goods from stores, I've seen a 10 year old sent out to beg for money for his dads meth habit. 8 and 13 year old girls pimped by their mother. No goats, but plenty of dog crap.
All this just from the little city I live in, man, you must be from the burbs!
        I can say what I want, but there's a much better chance of "homeland security", the FBI and Bob-knows-what other 3 letter agencies dropping it into a database for future purposes.
Well, aside from the food shortages, due to THEIR governments manipulation of it, because we have endless charities trying to get it to them, things are pretty much the same. A population of people too unconfident in themselves to revolt and do things right.
Man, you sound like a damn infomercial. Get you perspective from somewhere besides the T.V., your yippee professor or your peer group.

Re:How can you tell North Korea was hacked?

[Tastecicles]

You missed the Falklands War, didn't you? I lived through it. Mrs. Thatcher said "Send the whole bloody fleet down there!" and it was done. Argentina got their arses well and truly handed to them, which they have not forgotten - they deployed the Hand of God at the 1986 World Cup and deprived Britain of her rightful place as soccer champions. The only reason they haven't made good on their threats to retake the Falklands *now* is because they remember what happened *then*.

Oh, by the way: Argentina's current leader is a woman.

Re: How can you tell North Korea was hacked?

[drinkypoo]

Just because you're not seeing these things doesn't mean they're not happening. Children are starving to death in the USA. Cops are killing people illegally. It happens less, it hasn't happened in front of you, but we are guilty of the very same shit as the Afghanis — the difference is not one of character, but one of degree. We have slavery here. We have murder by officials here. People are starving here. And if you really think you can just start up a business without interference from the state, you must be on everything known to man. They do produce a lot of heroin in Afghanistan... where I live, it costs more in permits than materials to build a house, and a convenience store can't have a chicken fryer because their bathroom isn't wheelchair-accessible and they literally don't have room to expand it.

Re:How can you tell North Korea was hacked?

[MightyYar]

You are attempting to superimpose your laws and morals on a regime that observes none of them. Everything is a crime in North Korea, and respecting the dictator's rights were he to live under our laws is nonsensical. One could make a pretty strong argument that anything done to undermine the regime there is morally just.

To directly address your rhetorical point:

Crime is okay if the victim is nuts?

It is perfectly fine to strip away the rights of a person if they are nuts in a way that endangers society.

I think that is an example of demonising the enemy.

The man is just about as close to a demon as a mortal can get.

Re: How can you tell North Korea was hacked?

[Anonymous Coward]

What shitty city do you live in? I've lived on both coasts and several places in between, and never encountered anything close to what you describe. Don't act like there's something wrong with a person who's never seen that kind of thing.

Re: How can you tell North Korea was hacked?

[AvitarX]

How is that different to the US which invades any country with decent oil reserves.

Like Canada?

while many millions of its own people barely struggle to survive.

Even in the poorest areas of the US, the trees have leaves, and their are small animals. It really isn't even a vague comparison.

Anyway, hope you like the troll food, I should know better.

Re:How can you tell North Korea was hacked?

[NiteShaed]

Big fan of BadAnalogyGuy are ya?

Yeah, in the same way that when I flick someone off on the freeway, that's the same as making a terrorist threat to blow up every car on the freeway. And let's not even get started on how many times I've murdered people in my mind... I'd be a serial murderer. :P

No. The freeway analogy here would be: In the same way that when I point a rocket propelled grenade launcher out my window at other drivers screaming "I'm gonna blow you straight to hell", that's the same as making a terrorist threat to blow up every car on the freeway. Which, it is.

Re:How can you tell North Korea was hacked?

[Anonymous Coward]

Thank God that stupid Clinton bitch isn't around to fuck things up like she has in the mideast. That job is a mans work, anything women ever accomplished at the diplomacy table, was going to happen anyway. CLUE; they don't respect women in important positions and don't take us that seriously when we send one. Omama is one clueless monkey, political correctness will get us all killed yet. Dumbasses!

I'll be so glad when your generation finally dies off.

Re: How can you tell North Korea was hacked?

[JTsyo]

1 Venezuela 211,169 - 297,571
2 Saudi Arabia 265,405 - 267,017
3 Canada 173,625 - 175,200
4 Iran 151,167 - 154,580
5 Iraq 115,350 - 143,103
6 Kuwait 103,998 - 111,500
7 United Arab Emirates 97,800
8 Russia 60,003 - 116,000
9 Libya 47,102 - 48,014
10 Kazakhstan 30,002 - 39,800

Only number 5 has been invaded. We're on pretty good terms with the rest other than #4.

Re:How can you tell North Korea was hacked?

[Anonymous Coward]

Who would be left to pay for your sex change operation?

Re:How can you tell North Korea was hacked?

[Tarlus]

We're talking about a hacked Twitter account here, people. Not a violation of human rights.

"Anonymous" isn't even representative of a particular country, anyway.

Re: How can you tell North Korea was hacked?

[Anonymous Coward]

Children are starving to death in the USA? Where? Our long obesity problem pretty much says the opposite is happening: We're dying from too much food.

Re:How can you tell North Korea was hacked?

[Anonymous Coward]

"Disregard that, I suck cocks!"

Re: How can you tell North Korea was hacked?

[Anonymous Coward]

So how much of oil is there in Afghanistan?

Re: How can you tell North Korea was hacked?

[servognome]

The poorest of US citizens are insanely better off than those starving in 3rd world countries.

The occupy Wall Street movement that represented the "bottom" 99% were actually just people on a global level who represented the top 4%.

Back to the conditions, when was the last time you saw a 5 year old on the side of the street picking through the trash, next to goats and livestock, looking for food and other items for their family? I see it nearly every day in Afghanistan

Even in relatively stable regions like Philippines and Thailand, living conditions were horrid. There was the banking/foreigner district that was just like any other western style city. But a few miles outside, you'd see the slums. You'd drive by people using their toilet which was a ditch by the side of the road, desperate people willing to give foreigners their children to provide them with a better life. I visited a British NGO school, where providing basic food substinance was key to fight hunger to allow kids to learn. It was painfully touching to see some of the children put a handful of rice in their pocket so they could go home and help feed their family. Security for business foreigners was top notch since they were the cash cows, meanwhile the majority were subject to police extortion or outright disregard.

Re: How can you tell North Korea was hacked?

[Tastecicles]

Entering "starving children in the usa" yields 2.3 million hits.

I don't think it's empty rhetoric.

Re: How can you tell North Korea was hacked?

[Tastecicles]

I don't think anyone really knows, there were massive lithium deposits found around 1998-2000 though... you know, that stuff used in laptop batteries and NUCLEAR TRIGGERS.

Re:How can you tell North Korea was hacked?

[servognome]

Hell Janet Reno was a pretty blood thirsty bitch too. Some of those women in power have bigger balls than some men, like Powell (who I respect deeply) but couldn't stand up to Bush and was forced to destroy his own credibility and the credibility of the US by presenting knowingly false or suspicious info to the UN to convince them we should invade Iraq.

Re: How can you tell North Korea was hacked?

[JohnnyComeLately]

I used to think reading comprehension was a dying art, but I guess it's just my ineffective writing. I will elaborate. The subject was human suffering. The subject was not crime. As you'll see in the replies below, your "daily" observations are not the norm, unless things have drastically changed since I left the US two years ago.

Which brings me to the next lapse in communication. When I write, "I saw this today in Afghanistan," it means I am seeing this first hand, in the country called Afghanistan within 24 hours of writing it. I saw it again today. This wasn't a meth addict. This was a boy who's family lives in dirt. Not figuratively. Literally. The scraps he gets before the goats got there (they were about 300 yards to my left), are for his family. There is no infomercial showing me this. I very rarely watch TV, possibly an hour every couple weeks. I haven't had a professor since I finished Grad School 13 years ago.

I've been around the world. I've seen Jamaicans who's "house" was a piece of corrugated steel leaned up against a tree, just 5 miles from a pristine Nike factory that likely made the shoes you're wearing, or some like them. I've been around Europe (France, Belgium, Germany, Luxembourg, Holland, UK, and a few others) where I see what freedoms and opportunities we, as Americans, enjoy that so many, like you, take for granted.

So, I'll conclude this with the same statement I made before: Get out of the US. See the world. Spend two months ANYWHERE. I don't care where. Anywhere outside North America, and then come back and complain about the US. It's nearly a rhetorical statement, because anyone outside of the US wouldn't complain. Why do you think most of the world tries to immigrate here? It's certainly not because of the picture you paint with your "daily" happenings and local newspaper articles. The corruption of our news media is also a completely different topic.

My main point still is undisputed: Even our homeless in the US are far better off than the suffering in many 3rd world countries, where people are literally starving to death on the street.

Re: How can you tell North Korea was hacked?

[drinkypoo]

Children are starving to death in the USA? Where?

In the USA. HTH, HAND.

Our long obesity problem pretty much says the opposite is happening: We're dying from too much food.

No, the fact that we have both a problem with diseases of excess (e.g. diabetes, gout) and a problem with children dying of hunger in the same country means that we're all a bunch of assholes who have forgotten how to care for our fellow humans.

Re: How can you tell North Korea was hacked?

[nobodie]

I would mod you up, but you are already up, so let me agree, but cautiously. Often, someone like yourself who has been in a real hellhole where there is war and suffering, confuse this with the parts of the world where there is just stupidity and suffering. What you saw was really worse. And, while you are right that the fools who post on /. about how we are sheeple and oppressed by the 1% and all the rest of their moaning and bitching are basically wrong, they also have a piece of truth that they build on.

Arguing against them, no matter how right and nuanced your ideas and understanding and facts, is hopeless. All it does is to stir them up. Ignore them and let them mutter off into the insignificance they deserve.

And I suggest, for yourself, that you remember that your experience in the hell of Afghanistan is unreproducible anywhere else in the world. You had a unique experience that no-one other than those there with you can imagine. This makes you unique, and it gives you a unique view of the depths of the world. I am sure, knowing humanity, that you also got to see heights of humanity that those who sat here reading the news also cannot imagine. I hope you can accept that you have been blessed by this experience, your scars are an honor.

I wish you peace

I approve.

[Soron]

One of the few times I approve of what anonymous is doing.

Re:I approve.

[sgbett]

Antagonising a rogues state into launching a nuclear attack?

Just to be devil's advocate like.

Re:I approve.

[DarkOx]

I don't think there is much to worry about. If our military flying in bomber to show off, in addition to our usual South Korea joint exercise does not do; I highly doubt abuse of their twitter account will.

Re:I approve.

[O('_')O_Bush]

With NK, damned if you do, damned if you don't. They are antagonizing themselves into a nuclear strike. Anonymous's hacking did not change the situation.

Re:I approve.

[Anonymous Coward]

Bring it on. The sooner this farce is brought to the inevitable conclusion, the better.

It's not like NK has ever overestimated its own power before.

Re:I approve.

[Hentes]

It would still hurt much less than another 60 years of them. North Korea doesn't have a sizeable nuclear stockpile, or any reliable means of delivery, and if they attacked first they could be conveniently wiped off the map without much protest from others.

Re:I approve.

[Anonymous Coward]

Antagonising a rogues state into launching a nuclear attack?

Dear NK,

Please Try it. Just try it. Take your best shot. Send up the balloon and let's settle it.

You too China. You can stick with your little puppet hellhole or you can join civilization. Do as you will; we'll handle you either way.

Re:I approve.

[Penguinisto]

Antagonising a rogues state into launching a nuclear attack?

This leads to a question: Does NK actually have a warhead that would 1) be small enough to fit on the top of a rocket, and 2) not be so heavy as to reduce their biggest rocket's range to a range that, say, the US couldn't care less about but Japan would still worry, etc?

It's one thing to toss around threats. It's less worrying when the threat maker has a bomb the size of a semi-trailer and a rocket that has a hard time lifting anything heavier than a large backpack, yanno?

Re:I approve.

[servognome]

What they've done isn't much different than the Cyber-fighters of Izz ad-Din al-Qassam, it just pisses people off.
Do you think they made the political situation better? The N. Korean government will claim that Anonymous was sponsored by the evil US and this is a precursor to a military strike on their country.

Their heart my be in the right place, but their method is childish. Real change will come about by providing the people of N. Korea alternative means to get information, not by pissing off the leadership.

Re:I approve.

[servognome]

Anonymous escalated the situation. You have a standoff where neither side wants to fight, nor wants to back down so they just flex and hurl words at each other. The last thing you want is somebody to come along and throw rocks setting things off.

Re:I approve.

[Anonymous Coward]

Random dudes on the internet being retarded in public has never, and will never, be acceptable as provocation.

Re:I approve.

[servognome]

Yeah, I'm sure China, Russia, and South Korea wouldn't mind dealing with nuclear fallout and mass numbers of refugees.

Re:I approve.

[DigiShaman]

Agreed. They have crude nukes now. Better they shoot their wad today than deal with a soviet style thermonuclear Armageddon tomorrow.

BTW, DHS will paying an extra visit to Houston. I'm guessing the fear of a shipped nuke to our port might have something to do with it. Being that I live here, I'm as ready as I can be.

Lets get this shit over with!

Re:I approve.

[servognome]

The US has so much military and economic involvement in the region that an attack on Japan or S. Korea will be treated like an attack on the US.

Re:I approve.

[servognome]

Why? Not letting inspectors examine non-existant WMD's, and imaginary ties to terrorist organizations was acceptable provocation.

Re:I approve.

[v1]

You have a standoff where neither side wants to fight, nor wants to back down so they just flex and hurl words at each other.

That's not the impression I get from all that's been happening up there in NK lately. They aren't behaving by anyone's definition of "rational". You can't negotiate or reason with someone that's living in their own self-centered world like they are. They simply don't care what the rest of the world does or thinks about them. And that makes them incredibly dangerous, regardless of what their military capabilities are. They could send a company of chickens with slow-fuse grenades across the border and start/re-ignore a war. They don't need nukes.

For all practical purpose, they are 100% unpredictable. You have no way of telling what they're going to do next. Not by looking at what they've already done, not by looking at how the world is responding to them. None of it matters.

So you can't say that any one action by any outside party is going to "be responsible for" or "will lead to." Anonymous is just another side-attraction in this entire spectacle. They won't likely accomplish anything that could be described as a "goal", but at the same time this won't change what NK does in the next 10 minutes let alone the next 10 months.

Re:I approve.

[robthebloke]

I'm actually inclined to agree. I'd rather NK launch an attack now, at a point in time when their previous yields have been in 1 and 7 kilotonnes, rather than later when they may in a position to deliver a 20Kt Nagasaki sized yield (which presumably, would require further R&D on their ICBMs, not to mention the bombs themselves). It's worth remembering that the first bombs tested by the US, UK, and russia were all static tests (by neccsesity), and that it was only after the first few tests that dropping a bomb from a plane was possible, and much later still that mounting them on warheads was possible.

Due to the 'work' of Dr A. Q. Khan, we have a pretty good idea of what nuclear technology they have at their disposal, as well as the exact capabilities of the missile designs he borrowed from china & the USSR. Short of some large unknown uranium deposits in North Korea itself, we also have a pretty good idea of how much fissile material they have available (One would assume we'd notice the huge scars on the landscape caused by uranium mining, so I'm assuming that they don't have significant deposits). It should therefore be possible to determine the maximum theoretical yield of a bomb in the future, and give us a pretty good idea of what they may be capable of now. I'm guessing that a nuclear attack on SK is the only realistic chance the NK has of being able to do any serious damage, since one would assume that the longer the distance the missiles travel, the more chance there is that it would be knocked out by an anti-missile missile.

This does of course raise a few questions. Firstly, what is the success rate of the ABM missiles? Have they improved since the fairly dismal (estimated) 10% success rate in the first gulf war? Would they actually be good enough to prevent an attack on SK? What would be the required density of deployment around NK to be able to provide complete safety to all surrounding countries? Secondly, if NK were going to launch a missile, is the intelligence gathering good enough to be able to identify a long range missile with enough time to make a pre-emptive strike? Going by some of the build up to NK's longer range tests, it would appear that there should be enough time. Going by there shorter range tests, the answer would appear to be no. Thirdly, if the intelligence services have been watching NK for some time, do they know where those nuclear device(s) are currently located, and is there anything they can do to knock them out now?

I was against the 'pre-emptive' rhetoric that led to the invasions of afghanistan and iraq, but frankly, if you're going to declare war, and then threaten the use of nuclear weapons, all bets are off as far as I'm concerned. If the US, china, or russia find themselves in a position to launch an effective pre-emptive strike against NK, I actually find myself leaning towards the notion that they should probably do so. It would seem to be the safer option than trying to knock a missile out of the sky.....

Re:I approve.

[Anonymous Coward]

America wouldn't have to resort to a nuclear strike to disable North Korea. They have enough conventional weapons and targeting systems to disable the country without creating a nuclear dead zone or fallout in other countries.

The only concern about that might come from North Korea themselves if they're faced with imminent defeat and they preform what might be called a nuclear hand grenade attack on the attacking forces. Yeah, they'd get the invaders but they'd take themselves out as well in a sort of death before dishonour sort of way.

Re:I approve.

[Anonymous Coward]

You too China. You can stick with your little puppet hellhole

The real mystery is why China "sticks with its little puppet hellhole" at all. They'd be a lot better off without NK destabilizing their neck of the woods.

Re:I approve.

[Anonymous Coward]

we are being real antagonistic when we feed their people while they build nukes and we dont like it. I believe we have a legitimate case for being angry,not them.

Re:I approve.

[servognome]

They aren't behaving by anyone's definition of "rational".

That's the biggest danger. Because they are acting irrationally, you can't expect them to react proportionally to any provocation. Rarely is there a single reason for a war, but stupid things can escalate tense situations into outright conflict. Tensions between Honduras and El Salvador turned to war over a stupid soccer riot.
The actions of an outside party may or may not influence the ultimate outcome, but it does hurt attempts to diffuse the situation.

Re:I approve.

[Millennium]

They should totally photoshop KJU's head onto some Chris-Chan stuff.

Re:I approve.

[Quasimodem]

All-hat no-cattle cowboys in office wanting to start that war was the provocation, Not letting inspectors examine non-existent WMD was only the cover.

Re:I approve.

[pspahn]

...non-existant WMD's...

Non-existent in the same way the cat in the box with the poison is still alive... or is it dead... do the WMD's still exist... or do they not...

Unless you can provide observation, uncertainty makes both existence and non-existence true.

Re:I approve.

[ub3r n3u7r4l1st]

A false flag attack is a great way to start a war without being look like the aggressor. Operation Himmler is one good example of such back in WWII.

Re:I approve.

[Anonymous Coward]

What was 'imaginary' about his ties? Saddam was paying out funds to the families of suicide bombers in Israel. See for example: http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/middle_east/2846365.stm

He was also not abiding by the terms of the ceasefire from the Gulf War.

Re:I approve.

[fustakrakich]

Yes, you can always tell a 'terrorist' by the targets they pick.

Re:I approve.

[joelito_pr]

Schrödinger was Saddam's science advisor?

Re:I approve.

[ladoga]

That's not the impression I get from all that's been happening up there in NK lately. They aren't behaving by anyone's definition of "rational".

Kim Jong-un trying to unite people behind him by building up imaginary foreign threat? Not exactly a novel idea or completely without rationale. He's a new leader, people are unsure of his power and some might want to take his place or get rid of him.

For all practical purpose, they are 100% unpredictable. You have no way of telling what they're going to do next.

Probably next he will just make more threaths. Threats don't kill, but they can coinvince some potential competitors in the political elite of NK that Kim Jong-un is not weak. Whatever the case the NK's dictator loves his power and using nukes would be the fastest way to throw it all away. He won't do that. As stupid as it sounds he's not crazy. It's debatable if lust for power that goes beyond the needs of your people is sane, but then many if not all(?) of our leaders would be crazy.

Re:I approve.

[ladoga]

That's not the impression I get from all that's been happening up there in NK lately. They aren't behaving by anyone's definition of "rational".

Kim Jong-un trying to unite people behind him by building up imaginary foreign threat? Not exactly a novel idea or completely without rationale. He's a new leader, people are unsure of his power and some might want to take his place or get rid of him.

For all practical purpose, they are 100% unpredictable. You have no way of telling what they're going to do next.

Probably next he will just make more threaths. Threats don't kill, but they can coinvince some potential competitors in the political elite of NK that Kim Jong-un is not weak. Whatever the case the NK's dictator loves his power and using nukes would be the fastest way to throw it all away. He won't do that. It might sound stupid to people who like to dehumanize their opponents, but he's not crazy (as in irrational). It's ofcourse debatable if lust for power that goes beyond the needs of the people is sane, but then many if not all of our leaders are crazy.

Re:I approve.

[Anonymous Coward]

60's and 70's central and S. America.

Europe is controlled. The US is controlled.

Right now the middle east...

Next, Africa...

N. Korea is only to distract you.

The bankers want their money. Don't be fooled.

Re:I approve.

[TapeCutter]

Sort of, he was deliberately vague about WMD's, he wanted his neighbours (ie: Iran) to think twice before opposing him. It was pretty much the same foriegn policy that Israel has had for the last 50yrs. NK is a very different beast, it has been making hollow apocalyptic threats for decades, the difference today is that China is no longer defending them at all costs and nobody is appeasing them with 'aid' money.

Re:I approve.

[24-bit Voxel]

Or...

Making the people more aware that life isn't supposed to be they way it is for them? Brainwashing is powerful and most of them were born into this, have never left, and know nothing else.

It's a powerful tactic.

Re:I approve.

[SeaFox]

Antagonising a rogues state into launching a nuclear attack?

If all it takes is some Internet trolling to start a thermonuclear war I hardly think we can call ourselves "safe" before this happened.

Re:I approve.

[Opportunist]

They may look like they're batshit crazy, but I highly doubt they are. Even if the rest of the population is kept in the dark (quite literally so), the leadership knows that they're in no position to even DREAM about surviving something like all out nuclear war against countries like the US. Hell, even delivering one single nuke somewhere where it actually could matter to the US is a wet dream at best. Unless UPS changes its policies considerably, that is...

The whole strongman show has another goal. First, of course, the own population, and to show them that all the "sacrifices" are necessary to keep North Korea free from US and SK "oppression". Then of course to put the US under pressure. It's essentially the equivalent of some schoolkid punk flipping you off and knowing exactly that you can't simply go over and beat the snot out of him because laws protect him. With NK and the US, it's basically "public outrage" that keeps the US from doing the same with NK. They actually count on us being so opposed to simply turning their beautiful pitch black night into glowing mushrooms that our governments won't do it.

Yet, the US not reacting makes the US look weak. I mean, there's some punk kid country flipping you off and you don't react? So what we do is try to "appease" them. And that's basically what they want.

Personally, I'm more and more a proponent of planting a few mushrooms across Pyongyang.

Re:I approve.

[Opportunist]

Don't speak for me, who said I don't?

Re:I approve.

[ohnocitizen]

But how hilarious would it be if twitter ended up being the reason?

Re:I approve.

[Opportunist]

I thought it was Heisenberg. It was kinda hard to say whether it was him or not, even when you knew where he was... or was he were you thought he is when you knew it was him?

Re:I approve.

[Anonymous Coward]

NK issues threats for various things going on on the southern side of the border, such as a giant Christmas tree and activists launching balloons filled with US-Dollar cash and SW radios. The threats do specifically mention artillery. Threats to life are probably standard procedure for NK.

Re:I approve.

[Anonymous Coward]

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Shelling_of_Mainila another nice example

Re:I approve.

[Nefarious Wheel]

SK has lost track of a couple of NK submarines, according to other sources.

Re:I approve.

[bentit]

I'm waiting for the video where they missile strike anonymous headquarters. By poking at the wrong people anonymous is about to be exposed.

Re:I approve.

[Anonymous Coward]

I think you are conflicted with "acceptable provocation" and "enough provocation".

Acceptable provocation is where you see that a country has gone to war and say "fair enough".
Enough provocation is where a country goes to war, and it makes no sense, but they have done it now and it's kinda too late and oopps was that a flash in the distance...

The wisdom you are looking for is "don't poke the bear".

Re:I approve.

[Anonymous Coward]

I was against the 'pre-emptive' rhetoric that led to the invasions of afghanistan and iraq, but frankly, if you're going to declare war, and then threaten the use of nuclear weapons, all bets are off as far as I'm concerned. If the US, china, or russia find themselves in a position to launch an effective pre-emptive strike against NK, I actually find myself leaning towards the notion that they should probably do so. It would seem to be the safer option than trying to knock a missile out of the sky.....

NK emphasises that "the South attacked first" in its view of the Korean War. Such a move will confirm NK propaganda as far as preemptive strikes go.

Re:I approve.

[gaspyy]

The biggest threat to SK right now is not nuclear, but the thousands of artillery units pointed to Seul, all in range. A surprise attack against this 10 million city would be both feasible and devastating.

Re:I approve.

[Anonymous Coward]

would not be the first time a social networking website has caused a little twit to have a fit.

Re:I approve.

[Maritz]

David..! I love all your lizard stuff. Can I have a T-Shirt?

Re:I approve.

[deimtee]

Personally, I'm more and more a proponent of planting a few mushrooms across Pyongyang.

So you'd kill a few million people who are trying to live as best they can in a shitty situation, just because you don't like what their dictatorial leaders have said and done?
You must be such a nice guy. Do you also advocate napalming everyone in an electoral district every time their senator takes a bribe?

If you don't like what Kim Jong Un and his friends are doing, target them, don't irradiate the poor slobs who have been oppressed by them for the past fifty years.

Re:I approve.

[Maritz]

Anonymous headquarters..? Uh..? In what way are these the 'wrong people'? You know anonymous is mostly 4chan gimps. I don't think they have a secret base anywhere just yet.

Re:I approve.

[AmiMoJo]

Sort of, he was deliberately vague about WMD's, he wanted his neighbours (ie: Iran) to think twice before opposing him.

So we should send weapons inspectors to Israel and then invade?

This is what pisses the rest of the world off. One rule for America and it's best buddies, another for everyone else.

Re:I approve.

[AmiMoJo]

That's not the impression I get from all that's been happening up there in NK lately. They aren't behaving by anyone's definition of "rational".

I guess you really don't understand NK then. Kim Jong-Un is consolidating his power in the face of increased rhetoric from a new South Korean leader and the US. Both sides keep escalating the situation but the North Koreans are not dumb or irrational when it comes to war. They know they can't win and won't start WWIII. They just need to strengthen their bargaining position and buy time to develop longer range missiles and a deliverable nuclear warhead so that they can feel safe.

In actual fact NK has been a bit more cooperative since Kim Jong-Un came to power, at least with countries that don't antagonize them. For example Japan has been able to repatriate some kidnapped citizens and their remains, and has managed to open up more of a dialogue than has been possible for decades. Japan has the right idea - powerful and modern military, the ability to get nukes within a month or two if needed but not actually overtly threatening to NK. Keep in mind that from NK's point of view moving nuclear capable bombers into position, as the US has done, is a direct threat of nuclear attack. If that sounds irrational consider how the US would feel if NK did the same right off its border.

Re:I approve.

[Krneki]

Explain to whom?

The rest of the world will look at them funny, while I doubt their population have any idea what the Internet is (and if they do, they already know how much bullshit is going on anyway).

Re:I approve.

[servognome]

I'm guessing that a nuclear attack on SK is the only realistic chance the NK has of being able to do any serious damage.

This is a non-trivial problem that people who say "just wipe out NK" don't fully appreciate. Seoul is a city of over 10million less than 50 miles from the DMZ and is within range of thousands of conventional artillery pieces. Unless there is an incredibly coordinated plan, wiping out North Korea will probably mean sacrificing Seoul at the very least.
Even if war goes perfectly, how will the vaccuum of leadership and millions of already near starving people be handled? Ideally there would be a unified Korea, but that would mean China would have to cede political influence which is not a given.

Re:I approve.

[servognome]

Non-existent in the same way the cat in the box with the poison is still alive... or is it dead... do the WMD's still exist... or do they not...

Well non-existent in the sense that when you open the box there was no cat or poison. The receipt for the poison was a forgery, the cat hair came from a bear skin rug, and the witnesses who saw the person put the cat and poison in the box lied.

Re:I approve.

[maroberts]

Anonymous headquarters..? Uh..? In what way are these the 'wrong people'? You know anonymous is mostly 4chan gimps. I don't think they have a secret base anywhere just yet.

The base is distributed in parents basements worldwide

Re:I approve.

[servognome]

It's pretty easy to work up the masses into a nationalistic frenzy so that the leadership doesn't come out looking like war mongering aggressors. Look through history, it's filled with wars started for dubious reasons. The Spanish American War, Football War, Flagstaff War, The War of Jenkins' Ear, etc.

Re:I approve.

[Anonymous Coward]

And your average American would shrug and say , they werent American but one Bomb * on the homeland and youd be invaded not only NK but SK and Canada too.

If it was a nuclear bomb add China, Iraq and France to the list too.

Re:I approve.

[mlk]

But is NK likely to see them as random dudes on the internet or The Forces Of American Evil!

Re:I approve.

[Anonymous Coward]

No, they hacked NK, not the US.

Re:I approve.

[JohnnyComeLately]

You do realize nearly every military defeat is preceeded by your exact comment that it's "Just a threat." Kuwait didn't think Iraq would invade. Saddam didn't think the US would go to war, despite the buildup before January 1991. Afghanistan didn't believe we'd do anything when we said to turn over OBL and turn over those who planned 9/11. Poland didn't expect Hitler, as they'd just signed a "Non Aggression Treaty." History is ripe with examples where a threat was made, it was ignored, and those who ignored it paid dearly.

Re:I approve.

[JohnnyComeLately]

Good points to consider. We threatened with war when missiles were being placed in Cuba.

Re:I approve.

[Anonymous Coward]

It'd be like something off modern Real World, someone sneaks in to a friends twitter on phones and say they like another girl, RABBLE RABBLE PUNCH KICK ITS ALL IN THE MIND.
Then we have a nuclear war between friends.
Except this time it would be people dying and nuclear winter and then the Fallout game series. Bring it NK.
I'm sure my zombie-survival plan will work against nukes, right? Unless a nuke slaps my shit, that is.
Unless we are using Boardgame Online logic, in which case I get nuked and everyone BUT me dies. YES.

Re:I approve.

[DarkOx]

It takes two to tango. There was nothing stopping Saddam from shouting "wait wait stop ill cooperate, let the inspectors go where they want, and really I don't have WMDs" the moment the moment the bombs started falling and he knew we were serious. He would have had to follow thru at that point as well or face the invasion force on his door step.

He agreed to those inspections as part of the peace settlement in the gulf war; his lack of cooperation alone was grounds for invasion. Take an pbjective look at the Iraq situation for a moment and ask without the Benifet of hindsight was it really all that radical and I think the answer is no. Yes there were good arguments and know facts at the time for not doing it; but there were very good reasons to do it. If nothing else to put everyone on notice peace treaties have to be abided by or you loose the peace.

Re:I approve.

[TapeCutter]

I was 20ysr old when Saddam came to power. I don't agree that the means justified the end, but I do agree the world is a better place without "The Butcher of Baghdad" sitting in the middle of the middle east. If you haven't seen the video of his purge after his coup then you have missed one of the most chilling political advertisements of the last half century. Soon after that purge he became America's best mate and Rumsfeld sold him a vast arsenal under the "enemy of my enemy" principle, but about a decade later even Rummy couldn't stand the stench of the chemical attacks that the BBC uncovered.

It's a good thing that America "looks after its own" but it's foreign policy takes that ideology to the extreme. A lot of the serious trouble in the ME has snowballed from the "Iran hostage crisis", ie: At least two major wars are a direct result of America's need to "save face" and make a profit while doing so. The Yanks are not alone in this behavior but they are the dominant dog in any real fight.

Re:I approve.

[jabuzz]

I would expect all artillery positions in range of South Korea to be already identified and their precise positions recorded. Any opening of fire by North Korea would be followed by a rapid and devastating bombardment of the said positions.

While North Korea could cause damage to Seul, there is not a hope in hell that they could flatten it or even cause extensive/devastating damage before they are taken out.

Any actual invasion of South Korea would have to overcome the heavily land mined buffer zone on the South Korean side.

Re:I approve.

[Tastecicles]

There were WMDs, Rumsfeld had the receipts.

What was sadly lacking, however, was the means to properly store them, and when it came time, to properly deploy them.

So what the post-invasion inspectors found was a bunch of corroded and EMPTY barrels.

Re:I approve.

[cold fjord]

I'm afraid you've got a bit of a cock-up on the history front. You would benefit from reading a following, an excerpt of which is below: Who armed Saddam? - Some reality checks

Saddam's weapons came overwhelmingly from the Soviet Union & other Soviet Bloc countries (69% during this period), followed by France (13%) and China (12%) and a string of smaller suppliers. (For example, according to a 1984 SIPRI report, "During 1982-83, Iraq accounted for 40% of total French arms exports.") The figure for the US is 1%.

When it comes to Saddam Hussein's nuclear, chemical, and biological weapons programs, the picture is a little more complex. It seems clear that France was far and away the biggest supplier for the nuclear weapons program. Supplies for Saddam Hussein's chemical and biological weapons (which included dual-use materials also suitable for making agricultural fertilizer, pesticides, medicines, etc.) were bought from a variety of sources, which seem to have been primarily western European or Russian and primarily private rather than governmental. For one discussion of the role played by German firms, for example, in supplying Saddam Hussein's poison-gas and biological-weapons programs, see The leading role of Germany in arming Iraq

-----

A lot of the serious trouble in the ME has snowballed from the "Iran hostage crisis",

Change "Iran hostage crisis" to Iranian Islamic Revolution and you'll be closer to the truth. You would have made a huge mistake if you overlooked the role of ambition and scheming on the part of Persian, Arab, Muslim, nationalist, and socialist in the Middle East.

Blaming the woes of the Middle East on the United States and flashing pictures of Rumsfeld may be great fun, but it is also greatly off the mark. No American made Saddam use Oil for Food money to buy influence, weapons, and build 20 odd enormous palaces instead of buying medicine and food for his people. No American made Arafat steal a billion dollars from the Palestinians. There are plenty more examples of that. Much of their misery is self-made.

Re:I approve.

[Richard_at_work]

You realise that Saddam did exactly that in the weeks preceding the actual invasion? It reached a point in the rhetoric, and he caved (inspectors were allowed complete access, and several weapons in technical violation were handed in and destroyed) - but it didn't stop the invasion. The US pulled their inspectors shortly before, despite protests from those inspectors.

Re:I approve.

[sFurbo]

How often have Israel used their WMDs on enemy troops? How many times on their own population? As bad as Israel is, and as bad as it is what they have been allowed to do with the support of the US, there really is no comparison to Iraq under Saddam. Anyway, I don't read the GPP as saying that it was OK to invade anybody, he merely explained Saddams policies.

Re:I approve.

[drinkypoo]

So you'd kill a few million people who are trying to live as best they can in a shitty situation, just because you don't like what their dictatorial leaders have said and done?

That's not how it works. They're not trying to live as best they can any more than we are. If they were, they would be willing to die if necessary to stop their government from doing evil in their name. You know, just like if we were — I'm not saying that The People of the USA are good people. In general, we're assholes. You can tell because of what we permit to be done in our name.

Re:I approve.

[Anonymous Coward]

What you consider justification and what Kim Jong Un considers justification are not necessarily identical sets

What makes you think KJU will equate "Anonymous" with random dudes on the internet and not with the CIA? The CIA hacking nork's Twitter/Facebook and posting insulting pictures could well be imagined a cyber attack on critical national infrastructure. No need to investigate: the only people with motivation for such an attack are US/SK governments or government actors.

Re:I approve.

[Anonymous Coward]

I would expect all artillery positions in range of South Korea to be already identified and their precise positions recorded. Any opening of fire by North Korea would be followed by a rapid and devastating bombardment of the said positions.

While North Korea could cause damage to Seul, there is not a hope in hell that they could flatten it or even cause extensive/devastating damage before they are taken out.

Any actual invasion of South Korea would have to overcome the heavily land mined buffer zone on the South Korean side.

You are overconfident, better go read your Sun Tzu.

Re:I approve.

[deimtee]

When I said "live as best they can" I meant survive within the constraints of the situation they are in. They aren't bloody saints, but I bet that the vast majority of them would be decent people in a decent society, just like most americans would.

Also, that's not how it works because the ruling class on both sides would rather feed a few million peasants into the meat grinder than risk being targeted in retaliation.
People like the GP who explicitly condone this just make it easier for them. You should be standing up and saying "Leave the poor ground-down buggers alone and launch a surgical strike on the arseholes in charge"

Re:I approve.

[Kelbear]

Yes they can fire a nuclear warhead on a rocket, but only on short-range missiles that can hit SK and Japan(I think). They have bigger rockets that can't fit a nuclear warhead and pisspoor accuracy and long launch-lead times.

Their nuclear capability is thought to be quite weak, weaker than even the explosions in Japan in WW2. The small blast radius coupled with low accuracy means that the scarier threat is a massive amount of conventional artillery aimed at Seoul which can't be intercepted before they tear that highly populated city to pieces with shells at the outset of any conflict. Basically they're the hostage, and NK is pointing a gun at their head.

So while NK is assured to lose any kind of military conflict, they'll kill tens of thousands of innocent civilians in the first few hours, which makes a war with NK just as unpalatable as any other war, even though we have such a dramatic military superiority.

Re:I approve.

[Anonymous Coward]

Among rational people no. But in Libya they rioted and killed the US ambassador because of that guy who did the anti-Islam spoof movie. The linkage was the following: The spoof guy is a US citizen. the US government did nothing to stop the spoof guy therefore they are collaborating. Therefore it is OK to kill US government staff members.

Now try this: the anonymous group may or may not be US citizens but damn straight that Kim Jong will think they are. Next: the US government did nothing to stop them from posting inflammatory comments directed at him and therefore they are collaborating. Therefore Kim Jong has to do something else to save face.

Re:I approve.

[Anonymous Coward]

Yes. It's about time we used assassination of foreign leaders as a policy tool. This concept of lots of innocent citizens dying because of the behaviour of dickhead leadership is an anachronism and it is *this* in general and not spefically Kim Jong that is threatening world peace now that states have the power to project mass destruction on citizens of other countries at the flick of a switch.

Re:I approve.

[servognome]

Americans will get pissed off when theirs a spike in the cost of monitors, TVs and phones with LCD displayes as many major plants are within blowing up distance of North Korea. People freak out over $0.50 a gallon for gas. Regionaly disruption will cause a much greater impact on the technology we love.

Re:I approve.

[servognome]

On the bright side, I might actually be able to win a StarCraft 2 multi-player match

Re:I approve.

[Tastecicles]

erm... Trinity was the only static test before Hiroshima and Nagasaki (both retard drops from planes), since then the US has conducted **thousands** of test detonations from altitude, at ground level/on towers, submarine and subterranean.

Re:I approve.

[bentit]

Sorry. I forgot this is slashdot and will try to be more accurate with my posts. Also, considering NK is no joke (trying to keep straight face here) I should be more serious with my posts.

Re:I approve.

[servognome]

But the pre-text was they were directly involved with Al Quaeda, which there was no indication. That coupled with supposedly trying to gain nuclear capability which they could pass on to Al Quaeda was why we invaded.

If Saddam was so bad then why was Bush trying to normalize relations with Khadaffi, somebody who protected known plane bombers and sponsored terrorist activities. Not to mention our "friends" in Saudi Arabia where most of the 9/11 bombers came from.
The US government had a target in mind and they pushed forward the facts they wanted to hear to support it.

Re:I approve.

[servognome]

Remember the Maine!

Re:I approve.

[servognome]

Do you know how many sorties and missile strikes would have to be launched. These are positions up in mountains, and caves so are not easy targets. There's estimates they could hit Seoul with 10k-20k shells per hour. And god help us if they can get a nuke on a crappy rocket that can shoot 50 miles, Seoul is huge, even a poor strike near it would cause severe issues.

Re:I approve.

[whodunit]

This is a non-trivial problem that people who say "just wipe out NK" don't fully appreciate. Seoul is a city of over 10million less than 50 miles from the DMZ and is within range of thousands of conventional artillery pieces. Unless there is an incredibly coordinated plan, wiping out North Korea will probably mean sacrificing Seoul at the very least.

Thoroughly debunked. http://nautilus.org/napsnet/napsnet-special-reports/mind-the-gap-between-rhetoric-and-reality/#axzz2PjxGYDxd

Wasn't hard to guess passwords

[ackthpt]

The list included:

hateamerica
nukeamerica
likerodman
rodmanbff

Re:Wasn't hard to guess passwords

[BenSchuarmer]

bestk0rea
l1l k1m

Re:Wasn't hard to guess passwords

[Anonymous Coward]

password

They are experts you know..

Re:Wasn't hard to guess passwords

[Anonymous Coward]

luntlertwoo

Re:Wasn't hard to guess passwords

[Penguinisto]

123456 ...doesn't anybody remember Spaceballs?

(My lawn, you, vacate it, etc.)

Re:Wasn't hard to guess passwords

[chromas]

"6"? Really? Okay, grampa, back to the Alzheimer's ward with you..

Re:Wasn't hard to guess passwords

[Mashiki]

Really now? My password only goes "1234" jeeze you youngsters....

Re:Wasn't hard to guess passwords

[Jason Levine]

That's why I set all of my passwords to "12348". Nobody will guess that.

Oh... wait...

I need to change some passwords. (Maybe "12349".)

Re:Wasn't hard to guess passwords

[Anonymous Coward]

Spaceballs was a long time ago.

Their security has been beefed up since then. Hence the "6"

Re:Wasn't hard to guess passwords

[RivenAleem]

Under new password rules, you now have to include a number and an uppercase letter. But this was quickly guessed anyway:

Kimjong1

Re:Wasn't hard to guess passwords

[Anonymous Coward]

The list included:

hateamerica
nukeamerica
likerodman
rodmanbff

Hilary Clinton,
H W Bush,
G W Bush
Col Oliver North
Colin Powell,
Jamie Dimon
Rockafella,
Madoff,
Citi group,
WSJ,
BOA,
JP Morgan,
Glencore,
Tony Blair,
Ben Bernake,
The list is endless.....

and the password is 10 downing st

Best tweet from PDRNK

[Anonymous Coward]

#ratmeat

PLS don't waste the peoples amo on rats see local Commissar if hungry instead! KJU

Priorities

[Holistic Missile]

Apparently when NK was configuring their proxies and firewalls, they were so focused on keeping their citizens from getting out that they didn't pay enough attention to keeping people from getting in!

Re:Priorities

[PolygamousRanchKid]

they didn't pay enough attention to keeping people from getting in!

. . . they just couldn't fathom the idea why anyone would want to get in . . .

The hackers involve could have ended the current escalation. All they need to do, was to post this headline:

"The fearless leader Kim Jong Un has declared victory over the US! The leader's strong courage has frightened the US! They have halted their plans to attack the Peoples' Republic! The war with the US is over! They won't attack tomorrow, or the day after, etc."

Kim Jong Un might have like the idea, and adopted it as his own dogma. Thus, giving him a way out without anyone getting hurt.

Re:Priorities

[DigiShaman]

That got me thinking. Whomever was responsible for maintaining their social media communications must already have been executed via firing squad. As I know, failure of any North Korean isn't let off easy. Poor SOB. Glad I'm not him/her.

Re:Priorities

[Opportunist]

You have to excuse them, they don't really have any experience with anyone wanting IN, you know?

Re:Priorities

[Opportunist]

Unlikely, then the same happens that happened over here after the cold war ended. Great, proliferation is over, time to stop wasting money on guns and military and instead finally get the social services up. Better schools, better healthcare, better everything.

Took us almost a decade to get out of that dilemma, then we finally found someone willing to play war with us again. And this time, we won't make the same mistake and rely on a single enemy that might just sulk when he feels like he's not winning and go home, that war on terror is great in this respect. You can let it go on forever. If some country doesn't wanna play anymore, just pick another one at random and call it the new enemy.

Kimmie would probably just turn around and say the US broke their promise and now it's personal because the US aren't just an evil country, it's also a lying country and they dared to lie to the great beloved leader. They don't WANT to get out of this "dilemma", it's what gives them an excuse to keep those in power in power and happy.

Bonus points

[sc0ob5]

to anonymous for the Monkey Magic reference. :)

If this causes them to attack

[Sycraft-fu]

Then, well, it was inevitable anyhow and we might as well get it over with and kill them. Seriously, if they are really so thin skinned, so stupid, and so insane as to launch an attack over something like this, then it would happen sooner rather than later do to something else. In that case, let's have it happen sooner and just get it over with.

Please don't mistake this for me saying "We should go to war with NK!" I'm just saying that if something like this really did spark a war, I wouldn't blame the anon 'tards because the level of insanity, stupidity, and insecurity that it would take to start a war over something so trivial means it would get started over something else anyhow.

Re:If this causes them to attack

[Anonymous Coward]

I was going to post the same thing. Cunts don't need a real reason to be cunts... they make up the reasons to fit the circumstances as they go along.

Re:If this causes them to attack

[Anonymous Coward]

They're salivating over what's potentially the biggest an hero in all history, and get their lulz by prodding him into action. The fact that best korea's leader is threatening with nukes only serves to make the trolling that much harder and more intense.

Mostly because when on the internet if you talk the talk, you either walk the walk or GTFO. It's what invites so much drama.

Re:If this causes them to attack

[Anonymous Coward]

Not only that, but they'll have fewer nukes now than in a few years. We don't want them to fire off any, but if it is going to happen, might as well have them only get off 1-2 shots instead of 20-30

Re:If this causes them to attack

[LongearedBat]

Also, the longer we wait, the more powerful weapons they have time to accumulate. If the war had been fought fifteen years ago, then they wouldn't have been a nuclear threat. Now they are. Perhaps NK now feels that it has accumumlated enough that it might actually be ready to fight the war that it has been preparing for for so long, and it's once again testing and taunting its "enemies".

Re:If this causes them to attack

[cold fjord]

If this causes them to attack. . . Then, well, it was inevitable anyhow and we might as well get it over with and kill them.

So then you think there is no foreseeable downside to delivering personal insults to the leader of a country in which he is revered as practically a god (pharaoh being out of style) and in which you and three generations of your family can be sent to a "prison camp" for making a joke about said leader? Why hasn't personal insult been part of the messaging by South Korea, Japan, the US, and the allied powers in Korea? But maybe you're right, so the more the merrier. Might as well start rounding up "Anonymous" as a threat to world peace (that's inevitable too, right?) - the Hague should be able to find plenty of room for them. Or, if sauce for the goose is your thing, then just publish their real names and addresses and let nature take its course.

Re:If this causes them to attack

[drinkypoo]

So then you think there is no foreseeable downside to delivering personal insults to the leader of a country in which he is revered as practically a god (pharaoh being out of style) and in which you and three generations of your family can be sent to a "prison camp" for making a joke about said leader?

There is a possible down side, but there is a massive up side as well. The more he is mocked internationally, the more their own people will hear about it (though only a tiny percentage of what is going on in the world) and the more they will resist. The People of NK are responsible for the actions of NK just as The People of the USA are responsible for the actions of the USA. Yes, fixing one's government is difficult, but that doesn't mean one should expect someone else to do it for them.

Re:If this causes them to attack

[servognome]

I wouldn't blame the anon 'tards because the level of insanity, stupidity, and insecurity that it would take to start a war over something so trivial means it

Wars between somewhat reasonable nations have started for much less. Trojan War - dude seduces the kings wife, Pig War - almost turned to armed conflict between the US and Britain because somebody's shot a pig. Flagstaff war - natives didn't like the flag the British raised and kept chopping it down until armed conflict arose. The many wars between the US, native Americans and Mexicans came about because somebody said "God wants us to dominate from the Atlantic to the Pacific. Spanish American war started because there was an explosion on the Maine with no evidence of Spanish involvement, but that led to an extension of manifest destiny that claimed the entire Western Hempishere was a protectorate of the US, and the nice little base outside of US borders called Guantanimo Bay. The invasion of Iraq was based on testimony from people whose political interest was to lie, shotty interpretation of facts, and disregard for what intelligence people on the ground said. The Football War sparked after a soccer riot, which one side called genocide and that war was the only way to stop the other.
Honor, nationalism, political influence, and economics trumps rational thought

You.. You..You've done it now....

[Anonymous Coward]

How are we going to avoid global thermal nuclear war now?

You anonymous have really screwed up this time..

Re:You.. You..You've done it now....

[chromas]

That's easy: Don't press the Lockout Changes button this time.

Re:You.. You..You've done it now....

[Opportunist]

Global? Overdramatization much?

I don't even believe NK has any kind of system that could deliver a warhead reliably anywhere close to Seoul, let alone the US. And I kinda doubt that any country, not even China, is stupid enough to tie themselves to them and side with them. There are just far too many who wouldn't and would be more than happy to plaster the countryside with glowing mushrooms instead. Nothing's financially more attractive than to pay your national debt with ammo.

Re:You.. You..You've done it now....

[Tastecicles]

How about a nice game of chess?

Re:You.. You..You've done it now....

[Tastecicles]

oh, how about a TRUCK?

Rogue state's reaction

[GoodNewsJimDotCom]

Guess we're right on censoring Internet.

I believe the real reason these places censor internet isn't that they're worried of offensive things being said. I think the real reason they censor Internet is if we all hang out together in positive communities, the hate against us starts to fall apart.

One lousy million?

[Arancaytar]

The US military spends more than that every day just on dealing with his antics. Any enterprising bounty hunter should hold out for a lot more. :P

Re:One lousy million?

[servognome]

Dr. Evil licensed bounty hunter

Anyone could be "Anonymous"

[coffee-breaks]

because in Reality, "Anonymous" doesn't really exist. It was started by the b/tards on 4chan. Therefore, the term itself is meaningless. "Anonymous" has become the latest useful catch phrase used by the Corporate Owned Media spreading FUD. I wouldn't be terribly surprised if this so called "Anonymous" isn't some gov USA organization. Nobody is that dumb(except maybe the usual American moron) to actually believe NK is any kind of a real threat; the Real goal here is to try to involve China into some kinda regional war.

Re:Anyone could be "Anonymous"

[Anonymous Coward]

North Korean is a real threat. Just not a persistent one and not to the United States. No one thinks that the NPRK could hold out in a real war especially if they actually use a nuke on South Korea and assure their own destruction, but they could do some damage during one of their tantrums before being wiped out.

Re:Anyone could be "Anonymous"

[Anonymous Coward]

I wouldn't be terribly surprised if this so called "Anonymous" isn't some gov USA organization.

You wouldn't be surprised if it isn't?

And besides that...Duh! Of course anybody can be Anonymous; that's the entire premise.

Re:Anyone could be "Anonymous"

[Anonymous Coward]

I don't agree with this action so it must have been done by [disliked_group] shills

okay

morons

[Anonymous Coward]

they should stick to their intellectual capabilities

they've far overstepped what they're able to process and predict

their cultural centrism in this case has only served to make all our of lives worse, not better

Re:morons

[Maritz]

Who?

Haters gonna Hate

[Anonymous Coward]

Anon is just jealous that Pongo gets more tail than they do.

Bomb NK back to the Stone Age: Problem solved!

[Anonymous Coward]

..and while we're at it, send an assassination team for al-Assad, I think we've all had more than enough of his particular brand of bullshit, too.

Seriously, I'm sick and fucking tired of this North Korea batshit insane crap. Even the Chinese government, whom I have no great love for, is backing away from NK (Hey, we don't even know these assholes!).

hm

[fazey]

Oh you mean something else that can be used to keep the US public pumping money into this giant military beast? Then they can turn around and provide all the technology they use over seas to our local law enforcement and use it against us? Like... say... drones?

Snotty nosed brat

[englishstudent]

If you think back to the school yard, if some snotty nosed brat kept shooting off his mouth he would eventually get some sense knocked into him. In this case, the snotty nosed brat is Nth Korea. The softer approach (sanctions) clearly isn't working. Is there any other way to knock some sense into them without going to war? I'd personally like there to be no war, but I'd also like the bs to stop.

Re:Snotty nosed brat

[Overzeetop]

No, there's always one asshat who just never gets it until he's pummeled. After that he goes quiet until he's 35 and then takes out a school or a movie theater with an assault rifle.

NK = Hell on Earth

[allcoolnameswheretak]

Life in North Korea is worse than 1984. Entire families of people in North Korean concentration camps are living through hell on earth. The treatment of prisoners there sounds worse than what the Nazis did. I wonder if we should take North Korea's war mongering as a pretext to launch a massive, pre-emptive attack and finally free the North Korean population from their oppressors.

I know that it's not going to happen. But if you read up on Wikipedia and other sources of witness accounts of NK concentration camps, it kind of makes you wish that it would.

Re:NK = Hell on Earth

[preaction]

And what happened last time we used a pretext to launch a preemptive attack on an oppressive government? How did that go, both at home and abroad? We don't know, because it isn't done yet...

Re:NK = Hell on Earth

[Velex]

Damn it. My mod points expired yesterday. Will somebody else do the +1 honors, please?

Re:NK = Hell on Earth

[Charliemopps]

Yes, someone should attack North Korean and put that shit to rest for good. But it shouldn't be us. This is a South Korea, Chinese and Japanese problem. If they do not care to get involved, we certainly should not. The North Koreans have no capability of attacking us except the assets we foolishly have in the area. We're creating our own problem here and should back the fuck off and let the people that live their take care of themselves. Next thing to happen is they nuke a carrier group and we pretend to act all surprised?

When you're at a party and some crazy asshole shows up... go home. It's not your house. Let the owners be owners.

Re:NK = Hell on Earth

[Jason Levine]

North Korea (and their leader) are like one of those small, annoying dogs that yaps incessantly to prove it is big and tough. Only in this case, the small dog has sharp teeth and rabies. Sure we can still beat it up, but in the process we'll get bitten quite a bit and it'll hurt a lot. Any war between us and North Korea will be messy on a level that would make Iraq look like a clean war.

Remember, those people might be living through hell on Earth, but thanks to the North Korea government's total control of the media, the people think that the US is to blame. They really think that their benevolent government officials would love to improve the conditions, but that evil United States keeps flexing their evil muscles to keep them down. This level of brainwashing has been going on for generations and will be difficult to undo.

Re:NK = Hell on Earth

[Maritz]

North Korea (and their leader) are like one of those small, annoying dogs that yaps incessantly to prove it is big and tough. Only in this case, the small dog has sharp teeth and rabies. Sure we can still beat it up, but in the process we'll get bitten quite a bit and it'll hurt a lot.

Just kick its face off.

Wait, I just took the analogy too literally. Damn.

Re:NK = Hell on Earth

[Krneki]

It went as planned, now the US of A controls the Iraqi oil fields.

Or they had another reason to for the attack?

Re:NK = Hell on Earth

[Anonymous Coward]

Don't insult the Nazis' victims like that.

Further, you don't free populations from oppressors, you simply become new oppressors, killing hundreds of thousands of civilians in the process (Shock and Awe anyone?).

Re:NK = Hell on Earth

[Anonymous Coward]

It's gone pretty well for the citizens so far. They've got freedom, dangerous as it is.

Re:NK = Hell on Earth

[servognome]

But, but, I thought we were there to share democracy and free the people of Iraq from oppression so they would be our BFF forever.

Re:NK = Hell on Earth

[allcoolnameswheretak]

How am I insulting Nazi victims? Do you think that Jewish people have some kind of exclusive right to having suffered the worst, ever and forever? And that nobody may 'insult' them by taking this away from them? Get your head out of your ass!

Sorry, Anonymous didn't hack N. Korea's intranet

[daveschroeder]

In other news (aside from the Twitter and Flickr accounts):

Sorry, Anonymous probably didn't hack North Korea's intranet

Re:Sorry, Anonymous didn't hack N. Korea's intrane

[fustakrakich]

Gotta love "Anonymous"... using the Washington Post to pick their targets.

Unpredictable for 60 years and going...

[TiggertheMad]

For all practical purpose, they are 100% unpredictable. You have no way of telling what they're going to do next. Not by looking at what they've already done, not by looking at how the world is responding to them.

For 100% unpredictable, they have been pretty constant for the last 60 years. Bluster and sabre rattle, followed by small scale aggression. Yeah, they go blow some shit up every few years to show that they aren't to be trifled with, but they haven't actually tried to re-ignite the Korean conflict. They have been able to level everything within 30 mils of the DMZ with conventional artillery for decades and they have resisted the urge.

I think you can count on another 30 years of the same unless you poke them with a stick. Sane dictators aren't fond of death by nukes or SEAL teams. They like to die of old age.

Re:Unpredictable for 60 years and going...

[Anonymous Coward]

"Sane dictators..."

This is a contradiction in terms

China needs to man up

[Anonymous Coward]

NK is in their sphere of influence, time for them to man up and deal with the situation.

Re:USA is the real threat

[Maritz]

Leave DPRK alone!!

Perfect

[Anonymous Coward]

Now we know the Anonymous org is a sock-puppet shop-front for Western establishment
Nice try at hiding it with the Assage thing though
You gotta give the spooks props

oh well

[Anonymous Coward]

they need to be put on blast like everyone else

Who's the real pigdog?

[Impy the Impiuos Imp]

Hacking is wrong. This guy just wants to start nuclear war and kill hundreds of millions of people in the next few days, but two wrongs don't make a right. Let's keep things in a sense of proportion here.

Re:USA is the real threat

[Impy the Impiuos Imp]

Living as a slave under murderous dictators may be "peace" in your view, but give me liberty, or give dictators death.

Really?

[Anonymous Coward]

This is the best they could come up with? If they were REAL hackers, they would have done something a bit more... elegant, such as corrupt / destroy their military IT infrastructure, point the NK's ballistic missiles at say.. Beijing and fire them.. etc..

Missed the point

[Weaselmancer]

You can't open the paper without some story of a crooked cop, on the take, murdering off the clock, raping a suspect, running over kids because they wanted to drive fast without lights on.

You're missing the point. This happens everywhere, but only in a free society do you have the ability to open a newspaper and read about the ones that get caught. Oppressive regimes like North Korea do not report their failures.

Re:Missed the point

[dinfinity]

This happens everywhere

It does not.

Re:Missed the point

[Weaselmancer]

Hah! Show me a place without crooked cops. I'll wait here. But I won't be holding my breath.

Re:Missed the point

[flyneye]

Read about the ones that are politically convenient to report on. This is the newsmedia we're talking about. By the time the story gets edited the cop was a hero for it much of the time.If the cops are in the dumper generally, then they can be attention grabbing headlines. If the media is half right, half the time, they're wrong most of the time. What's left over is spun to political or profit agenda, and sorted for competition of luridity. Failures are reported if it is profitable, whether it is failure or not. They have one fat liar, we have several, the one in charge can run a drone up your butt now. They have many guns on them to make them swallow the "official" truth, we are gullible enough to go along voluntarily. You can't tell me how damn much better off we are, it's just a culture shift and skewed math away from the next guys truth. It's all so Catch 22, I can hear Yossarian ranting this.

Re:Missed the point

[dinfinity]

There is a difference between corrupt cops and cops that 'murder', 'rape suspects' or 'run over kids'.

I can't remember having seen _any_story like that about cops in my country in my entire lifetime. Sure, things like drug trafficking, nepotism and corruption certainly exist within our police force, but murder and rape? No.

And don't even try to assume that I must live in some totalitarian state where such stories are swept under the mat. My country is in the top 5 of the Press Freedom Index. Maybe you should broaden your horizon and come visit us.

AMERICA. FUCK YEAH!

[Anonymous Coward]

You want dangerous CRAZEE ?!!!!
Only one country has ever used nuclear weapons against human beings.
Twice.

Best mind yourself or krazee ol' unka Sam will pop a nuklear cap in yo ass!!


on the down-side, our (real) economy was just feebly starting to recover from the trillions of dollars squandered on the last two wars and the looting from the banksters.
on the plus side, enormous growth opportunities rebuilding DPRK in the image of the ROK/China. Of course, that's not gonna benefit the USA economy much.

Re:AMERICA. FUCK YEAH!

[Anonymous Coward]

And they ended a war that would've killed millions on both sides otherwise. The US obviously could've used nuclear weapons again in what is now North Korea during that conflict, but chose not to do so.

Re:AMERICA. FUCK YEAH!

[Tastecicles]

Hirohito had actually tried to surrender BEFORE HIROSHIMA. Little Boy and Fat Man were exercises in State-sanctioned mass murder, not ending a war - it had ALREADY ENDED.

Re:AMERICA. FUCK YEAH!

[servognome]

It was a pretty complicated situation. You had the statesmen trying to communicate a peaceful solution, but the ones in charge of the military refused to concede defeat. There were severe divisions within the ruling body. The Potsdam Declaration was rejected by the Japanese because it called for unconditional surrender. After the first atomic bomb, there wasn't initially consensus within Japan that the bomb had indeed been atomic in nature. The primary decision makers were still dead-locked about actually surrendering with the military adamant that they should fight on. The US dropped the second bomb shortly after to give the impression that it had a huge stockpile (both to the Japanese and the Soviets as the seeds for the Cold War were already planted).
The ministry finally accepted the Potsdam Declaration, but even then there was an attempted coup by the military leadership.

It's important to note that the conventional firebombing of Tokyo was deadlier than either atomic bomb. The psychological effect of the first atomic weapons was far more pronounced than the actual killing power.

Maybe Un's crew wants him out of the way

[Morocco Mole]

What if Un's generals are pushing this situation in order to get rid of him? I'm sure at least a few of them wouldn't mind moving up in rank themselves...

Missed a trick

[Martin S.]

Anonymous missed a trick if they wanted to be really offensive with their photo-shopping because the NK Missile is called "No Dong" in Korean.

You goin' Soviet on us?

[mr.mctibbs]

It is perfectly fine to strip away the rights of a person if they are nuts in a way that is a danger to the physical safety of other human beings.

FTFY

Re:You goin' Soviet on us?

[MightyYar]

Agreed - that is what I meant.