Slashdot Mirror


North Korean Missile Raised To Firing Position, Says US Official

An anonymous reader writes with this snippet from CNN: "North Korea has raised at least one missile into its upright firing position, feeding concerns that a launch is imminent, a U.S. official told CNN Thursday. This comes as the world continued to keep watch for a possible missile launch by the secretive government, and a day before U.S. Secretary of State John Kerry is expected to arrive in the region. In the latest daily tough talk from the North, a government agency is quoted by the state-run media as saying that 'war can break out any moment.'"

636 comments

  1. And... it's gone by earlzdotnet · · Score: 5, Insightful

    Sounds like a perfect excuse for a preemptive strike

    1. Re:And... it's gone by jadv · · Score: 5, Insightful

      Preemptive strikes are only allowed on targets approved by the Halliburton Company.

    2. Re:And... it's gone by ColdWetDog · · Score: 5, Funny

      Raised position ....
      Preemptive strike ....

      MUST NOT!

      --
      Faster! Faster! Faster would be better!
    3. Re:And... it's gone by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Attacking North Korea means North Korea will level Seoul. Seoul is our ally.

    4. Re:And... it's gone by synapse7 · · Score: 0

      Reminds me an awful lot of Sadam hiding WMDs in the desert.

    5. Re:And... it's gone by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      This is disturbing - just look how few civilized areas a missile aimed at the east coast would track over.
      It would be near Toronto before it got noticed if it was missed by radar in northern Alaska.

      At least any weapons with a sufficient range aren't known to be part of DPRK's arsenal.

    6. Re:And... it's gone by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      When 35 nuclear cruise missiles fired from off-shore strike without North Korea receiving any warning, North Korea won't be able to do *ANYTHING* - they'll be gone.

    7. Re:And... it's gone by slashmydots · · Score: 0

      I'll do you one better. Al Queda - "we will attempt to build a nuke and launch it at you" = multi-country, multi-billion dollar war instantly.
      Iraq - "No, seriously, we don't have WMDs and would only attack Kuwait, not the US" = instant multi-billion dollar, full-scale war.
      North Korea - "We have a nuke, it's pointed at you. We're going to blow everyone up. Seriously, we're going to. Hey, look at our army" = nothing. And it's Obama's 2nd term so what the hell does he care what people think of him "starting" another war (North Korea "started" it). Oh no, maybe it might possibly maybe lose a Democrat 2% in the next election by proxy. Better not bomb North Korea. What a fucking joke.

    8. Re:And... it's gone by NatasRevol · · Score: 1

      North Korea will level Seoul

      LOL. They're probably only capable of raising one missile to firing position.

      --
      There are two types of people in the world: Those who crave closure
    9. Re:And... it's gone by lgw · · Score: 2

      Are there American /.ers actually worried about this? I'm starting to realize that the generation that grew up after the cold war was over is post-college now. (Get off my lawn!)

      The only scenario I find troubling is that North Korea launches some sort of missile, which then has some boost failure that drops it onto Seoul, or some nearby highly populated region where it might hurt someone. The level of corruption in tin-pot dictatorships is so high that successfully operating a high-tech weapon (without any critical part being somewhere on the black market instead of somewhere on the weapon) approaches zero.

      --
      Socialism: a lie told by totalitarians and believed by fools.
    10. Re:And... it's gone by meerling · · Score: 0

      That's what he's probably hoping for.
      Then he can whine about he's being suppressed and attacked by the big boys, and maybe get some UN Funding for reparations.
      Best thing to do is to wait. Either he'll realize his bluff failed, and put it away, or he'll actually launch in an act of pure stupidity.
      If he launches, assuming it doesn't quickly fail, ready your antimissile defenses if you have any, and it's sort of heading your way.
      (Their targeting has NOT impressed anyone so far.)
      Now if it reaches a target and either gets shot down or hits something, then drop a dozen or so cruise missiles on his military sites.
      If he runs his military over the border to anyone, stomp him into the ground with more forces than he has populace.

      Even that jumped up little troll knows it's unwise to wake the slumbering dragon.

    11. Re:And... it's gone by emho24 · · Score: 5, Insightful

      Worried? No
      Tired of war? Yes
      Tired of hearing the rhetoric? Yes

      --
      You must gather your party before venturing forth.
    12. Re:And... it's gone by Archangel+Michael · · Score: 3, Insightful

      So, when Obama preempts an attack on NK, you'll know he has been bought by Halliburton. Then what?

      I know, you guys on the left think there is an actual difference between (R) and (D), but being a (L), it is really hard to distinguish between More Government and More Government.

      --
      Agent K: A *person* is smart. People are dumb, stupid, panicky animals, and you know it.
    13. Re:And... it's gone by X0563511 · · Score: 5, Insightful

      Yes, detonating nukes nextdoor to China - what could possibly go wrong?

      --
      For large sets, this will be our guide even unto death, for the LORD will work for each type of data it is applied to...
    14. Re:And... it's gone by interval1066 · · Score: 1, Insightful

      If by "leveling Seoul" you mean marching that rediculous million man army armed with Soviet-era weapons across the parallel, sure, let's see how that goes.

      --
      Python: 'And then suddenly you have a language which says "we're all stuck with whatever the whiniest coder wants".'
    15. Re:And... it's gone by X0563511 · · Score: 5, Insightful

      Al Qaeda: actually attacked us.
      Iraq: no comment. I think this one was stupid as well.
      North Korea: China's autistic little brother.

      Surely you might see why blowing up NK might not be a wise choice...

      --
      For large sets, this will be our guide even unto death, for the LORD will work for each type of data it is applied to...
    16. Re:And... it's gone by i+kan+reed · · Score: 1

      They still have plenty of Korean War Era artillery.

    17. Re:And... it's gone by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0, Troll

      As if an american needs an excuse for a preemptive strike.

      You people are an embarrassment to yourselves. You're literally no better than North Korea themselves, you're just bigger and you have the resources to win. You're just as morally bankrupt, you still bully the world into submission, you torture and kill in the name of the state, you still demand one country respect international law while you violate it yourselves. And you have a leader who is such a transparent and ridiculous liar that one wonders why you're taken seriously at all, right up until you set off another one of your toys in the middle east.

      I always thought the worst part of a real, live nuclear war would be that no one would win, no one on earth, because we'd all be dead. No, the worst part would be that both sides would equally deserve it for being too arrogant and self-servient to back down. Warmonger fools like you cheerleading for the end of the fucking world.

    18. Re:And... it's gone by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 4, Insightful

      i predict that will never happen even if North Korea launches their missiles.

      neither China, Japan, nor South Korea will be happy about the radioactive wasteland next to them, or the radioactive fallout from the attack.

      then there would be outcry from everywhere that we needlessly killed civilians

      and a long list of other reasons.

      we will never launch a single nuke at North Korea.

    19. Re:And... it's gone by Holi · · Score: 0

      Yes because stopping a 1.6 million troop force will be simple.

      --
      Sorry, teleporters just kill you and then make a copy. A perfect, soul-less copy.
    20. Re:And... it's gone by phantomfive · · Score: 4, Informative

      Comments like this just show your ignorance. Go research the topic. North Korea can not win the war, but they can inflict massive damage, with millions dead.

      --
      "First they came for the slanderers and i said nothing."
    21. Re:And... it's gone by silviuc · · Score: 4, Insightful

      At least they don't say "yo dawg, they got chemical weapons and they're gonna' use 'em. Honest to GOD!!". They tuned it down to "they raised their missiles first. we decided a preemptive strike was the way to go". It's also cheaper than the charade with the military searching for something that never existed in the first place.

    22. Re:And... it's gone by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      everyone in Hawaii is all "zzzzzzz" about it.
      and not just because they aren't up yet.

    23. Re:And... it's gone by donscarletti · · Score: 1

      It would be near Toronto before it got noticed if it was missed by radar in northern Alaska.

      It would come in from the same direction as a nuclear strike coming from the former Soviet Union, i.e. exactly the direction that NORAD have all of their radars pointing.

      --
      When Argumentum ad Hominem falls short, try Argumentum ad Matrem
    24. Re:And... it's gone by Sir+or+Madman · · Score: 2

      Oh the memories! Except that N. Korea doesn't have any desert but does actually have WMD. Other than that, it's bang on!

    25. Re:And... it's gone by ArcadeMan · · Score: 4, Funny

      iPhone 5RAE*

      * radio-active edition

    26. Re:And... it's gone by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Al Qaeda: actually attacked us.
      Iraq: no comment. I think this one was stupid as well.
      North Korea: China's autistic little brother.

      Surely you might see why blowing up NK might not be a wise choice...

      Not to mention there's a nonzero, nontrivial chance that North Korea might accidentally blow itself up.

      Wait, hold on, I don't think I was clear enough. They might "accidentally" blow themselves up. I still have this feeling in the back of my mind that there will be some catastrophic "accident" (with sarcasm quotes quite obvious and heavy-handed, oh and just for good measure, boldfaced, too) that will be used as a pity story to beg for more aid, this time for humanitarian reasons. And hey, with that fewer starving plebs to worry about, that much more aid goes straight to the leadership, right?

    27. Re:And... it's gone by cusco · · Score: 4, Informative

      Seoul is within easy howitzer-range of a massive amount of very well dug-in artillery. They could be using WWI-era weapons and still tear the guts out of the South Korean economy in an hour. (I say 'economy', because no one in Brainwashington really gives a shit about the civilians, and the South Korean industry owners all live in Los Angeles and Honolulu.)

      --
      "Think about how stupid the average person is. Now, realise that half of them are dumber than that." - George Carlin
    28. Re:And... it's gone by interval1066 · · Score: 2, Insightful

      Uh, I disagree. Damage, yes, like a bulk in a China shop. Like a chainsaw massacre, probably not.

      --
      Python: 'And then suddenly you have a language which says "we're all stuck with whatever the whiniest coder wants".'
    29. Re:And... it's gone by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      ugh not this artillery shit again

    30. Re:And... it's gone by interval1066 · · Score: 0

      And knowing how they are armed shows "research", perhaps you need to study.

      --
      Python: 'And then suddenly you have a language which says "we're all stuck with whatever the whiniest coder wants".'
    31. Re:And... it's gone by NatasRevol · · Score: 2

      I'm sure a lot of 60 yr old ordinance, not kept in humidity controlled rooms, is effective.

      They may as well use slingshots & rocks. It'll have about the same effect.

      --
      There are two types of people in the world: Those who crave closure
    32. Re:And... it's gone by CastrTroy · · Score: 2

      Won't be so difficult when they're out-gunned, out-trained, and very importantly, out-fed. While DPRK may have a lot of people enlisted in their army, they are ill equipped to deal with an actual war, especially when it involves invading another country. They might be able to fend off some incoming forces for a while, but they only have a very small border. It's not going to be easy for them to sneak over.

      --

      Anthropic principle: We see the universe the way it is because if it were different we would not be here to see it.
    33. Re:And... it's gone by metlin · · Score: 4, Insightful

      In International Relations, we call this "audience cost". American population is pretty much war-weary at this point, and no sane politician would ever start a war or risk aggression and conflict.

      North Korea is counting on this. The chances of them attacking are pretty slim, and they are just posturing in an attempt to force us to give them better terms (be nice, or else...) -- except that we are calling their bluff.

      And the more we call their bluff, the more aggressive their posturing becomes. Eventually, one of our allies will either step in or ask for help, and that's when we will head to the negotiating tables.

      Either way, this is nothing new. The US goes through cycles of war and war-weariness. In about a decade, we'll be back, carpet bombing some random country for imagined slights.

    34. Re:And... it's gone by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Who needs to use nukes? NK doesn't have nukes, there's no need to use nukes to level NK. Besides, once you are dead, you don't care anymore, so no need to be scared.

    35. Re: And... it's gone by xorg8.3 · · Score: 0

      Comparing us to NK? You're a moron. We aren't acting like psycho nut jobs threatening other countries.

    36. Re:And... it's gone by localman57 · · Score: 3, Insightful

      Hypocritical would be if we constantly threatened to nuke Mexico, then told NK to knock it off.

    37. Re:And... it's gone by fightinfilipino · · Score: 1

      i wish i had some mod points for this. it's not NK that the US is worried about. It's CHINA.

    38. Re:And... it's gone by phantomfive · · Score: 5, Insightful

      North Korea acted like this three years ago, five years ago, seven years ago, fifteen years ago....this is how they act. It's not about war weariness in the US.

      --
      "First they came for the slanderers and i said nothing."
    39. Re:And... it's gone by jellomizer · · Score: 2

      I doubt it. If they fire first they become the bad guy, if we fire first then we are the bad guy.
      China is the key. If North Korea fires first China will be much less supportive then if we fired first.

      --
      If something is so important that you feel the need to post it on the internet... It probably isn't that important.
    40. Re:And... it's gone by jellomizer · · Score: 1

      Remember the Squeaky Axis of Evil gets the Grease.

      --
      If something is so important that you feel the need to post it on the internet... It probably isn't that important.
    41. Re: And... it's gone by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Insightful

      Yeah, tell that to the Iraqis and Afghans...

    42. Re:And... it's gone by localman57 · · Score: 2

      Exactly. Remember how effective the sanctions against Iraq were in Gulf War 1. Hungry Iraqi troops were surrendering in mass to US Helicopters. Going a lot farther back Napoleon was ultimately done in by cold and hunger, not opposing weaponry.

    43. Re:And... it's gone by cellocgw · · Score: 1

      Sounds like a perfect excuse for a preemptive strike

      Paraphrasing from "Second Foundation" :

      What would [US gov't] have done in the absence of [provocation]? Nothing. Therefore this [provocation] can only have been intended to make [US gov't] carry out [preemptive strike], so the correct response is to do nothing.

      --
      https://app.box.com/WitthoftResume Code: https://github.com/cellocgw
    44. Re:And... it's gone by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Seoul is in artillery range and NK has thousands of artillery pieces stationed near the boarder. it would be a massacer as US and SK forces couldn't take them out fast enough.

    45. Re:And... it's gone by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      neither China, Japan, nor South Korea will be happy about the radioactive wasteland next to them, or the radioactive fallout from the attack.

      Right, like Hiroshima and Nagasaki are burned out wastelands, morbid memorials of WWII... Wait, nope, they've been rebuilt long ago and you can go visit actual memorials built right on ground-zero.

      Public outcry and (understating it) breakdown of diplomacy with other countries are about the only reasons not to nuke.

    46. Re:And... it's gone by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Insightful

      Also, remind me again, who's the one threaning to start the war? Who's the one setting missiles ready? Oh, but you are just on dogooder, who doesn't understand who the asshole in this shit is. I'll tell you, it's NK, and i just wish someboby should bomb the shit out of them. Since china has been so relucdant to do anything about this situation, i say let them fucking handle this shit. NK needs to be put in it's position. Fuck them and fuck china for letting this shit go on for so long.

      This is not on USA.

    47. Re:And... it's gone by ackthpt · · Score: 4, Interesting

      No need for nukes with North Korea, anyway. They will easily be flattened by conventional missles. They are effectively defenceless and have a tiny infrastructure. Any war with them with missiles would be concluded before you heard about it on Slashdot.

      --

      A feeling of having made the same mistake before: Deja Foobar
    48. Re:And... it's gone by mjr167 · · Score: 1

      That's the thing about missiles... you typically see them coming (especially if they are fired from far away) before they hit. There is never "no warning." It's very obvious once a missile launches and it doesn't take much time to launch an artillery strike.

    49. Re:And... it's gone by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      It's completely different this time. You see, peace is racist now.

    50. Re:And... it's gone by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I don't think you understand the structural differences beteen WWII buildings and modern-era skyscrapers. Howitzers might inflict damage on the outside layer. Nothing would crumble, minimal casualties. Then Pyongyang turns into a radioactive glass parking lot.

    51. Re:And... it's gone by PraiseBob · · Score: 5, Insightful

      No. Intelligence reports suggest that they can't fit a nuclear warhead on any kind of missile with decent range. Plus, their missile tests are falling way short of reaching anywhere but South Korea, China, and maybe Japan, and their test success ratio has been low.

      There is basically no scenario in which North Korea can start a war and "win". The regime can kill a bunch of people at the cost of their own lives, but that is something only religious fanatics do. They are bluffing to get sanctions lifted, and clearly trying to bluff the US into a pre-emptive strike, in order to paint themselves as a victim. It won't work, but they don't realize it because their analysts work for a totalitarian regime and can't provide the unvarnished truth to the leadership.

      It's a sad situation all around. I mostly just pity the north korean people for their inept leaders.

    52. Re:And... it's gone by satsuke · · Score: 1

      Snarky comment aside, it is true that most of any ordinance from that era would be malfunctioning, the problem is that not _all_ of it would.

      Little in the way of actual damage to infrastructure, but it would still rattle the residents of SK knowing that it could cause damage.

    53. Re: And... it's gone by jitterman · · Score: 2, Insightful

      I can't entirely disagree with that sentiment. However, we aren't threatening to start a nuclear, all-out no-holds-barred attack on them either.

      --
      For conscience is the wound, and there's naught to staunch it
    54. Re:And... it's gone by Sir+or+Madman · · Score: 1

      Gulp. If only we had some kind of north warning system with long and short range radar stations near the arctic circle located mostly at sites that we should have built back in the 50s. But where are we gonna get something like that on such short notice??

    55. Re:And... it's gone by phantomfive · · Score: 1

      Uh, I disagree.

      That's because you haven't researched.

      --
      "First they came for the slanderers and i said nothing."
    56. Re:And... it's gone by Dancindan84 · · Score: 5, Funny

      Any war with them with missiles would be concluded before you heard about it on Slashdot.

      Maybe, but I bet someone would point out they saw it on reddit the day before.

      --
      "Always forgive your enemies; nothing annoys them so much." - Oscar Wilde
    57. Re:And... it's gone by Entropius · · Score: 2

      Are you saying they have trouble erecting their dongs?

      (Sorry, couldn't resist.)

    58. Re:And... it's gone by SolitaryMan · · Score: 4, Funny

      I still hope this can be solved by oral arguments.

      --
      May Peace Prevail On Earth
    59. Re:And... it's gone by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      True. This whole North Korea thing is distracting everyone from the real plan which is supposed to be the invasion of Iran and the start of WWIII in the Middle East.

      Damn these little tin pot despots and their posturing.

    60. Re:And... it's gone by dkleinsc · · Score: 1

      Going a lot farther back Napoleon was ultimately done in by cold and hunger, not opposing weaponry.

      Yes and no: Napoleon was done in by the Russian winter in 1812 combined with scorched earth and guerrilla-like tactics by the Russian partisan fighters, but it took Round 2 at Waterloo to actually finish him for good.

      --
      I am officially gone from /. Long live http://www.soylentnews.com/
    61. Re:And... it's gone by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      iPhone 5RAE*

      * radio-active edition

      That's how Microsoft would do it.

      Apple on the other hand would take the opportunity to rebred their iWhaterver lineup to RAD-Whatever, thus bringing us the RAD-Phone, RAD-Pad, and RAD-Pod (make your geiger counter sing!)

    62. Re:And... it's gone by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      bull in a China shop.

    63. Re:And... it's gone by cjjjer · · Score: 4, Interesting

      Exactly what they want so N.Korea can cry foul and point the finger at the US. What the US and allies should do is wait until a launch happens and then take action to defend their borders by destroying the missile, then see what they do. By doing this it shows that the US is not a war-hungry bully country.

      My $.02

    64. Re:And... it's gone by berashith · · Score: 1

      not worried, as this scenario keeps playing out the same way. NK makes threats because they want money and food. They do strange things to force the issues, because they dont have any other bargaining chips. My only worry is that no one believes the rhetoric anymore, and the last leader, while insane, was very savvy. We just dont know how the son will behave, especially when his rants get ignored.

    65. Re:And... it's gone by AmiMoJo · · Score: 5, Informative

      If you look at exactly what NK has said (not was what reported, what their actual statements correctly translated into English are) they have not threatened any more than the US has. They said they reserve the right to make a pre-emptive nuclear strike, just as the US does. They have not stated that they will actually attack the US, and have always maintained that their nuclear capability is for defence.

      Although NK wants to reunite Korea they don't want to level the South or kill all its civilians. That would be counter-productive, effectively destroying what they consider to be part of their own country and their fellow countrymen. What they do want to drive out is the US and the South Korean government which is regarded as a puppet of the former.

      The US has considerably military forces in that part of the world and every year runs war games just off the coast of the DPRK. Can you imagine for a moment if NK decided to play some war games in international waters off the US coast? Unlike NK the US has nuclear weapons in range of the mainland. I'm not saying that NK isn't aggressive or posturing, but you must try to see past the propaganda and consider what the enemies are doing too.

      --
      const int one = 65536; (Silvermoon, Texture.cs)
      SJW, n: "Someone I don't like, and by the way I'm a fuckwit" - AC
    66. Re:And... it's gone by Phrogman · · Score: 2

      There are minor differences but nothing that will greatly impact the important and powerful business interests that determine policy. Its mostly a difference between Extreme Right Wing and merely Right Wing from my perspective :P

      --
      "The first time I got drunk, I got married. The second time I bought a chimpanzee, after that I stayed sober" Arian Seid
    67. Re:And... it's gone by Forty+Two+Tenfold · · Score: 1

      And the US doesn't?

      --
      Upward mobility is a slippery slope - the higher you climb the more you show your ass.
    68. Re:And... it's gone by NatasRevol · · Score: 1

      How much of it would blow up upon launch, destroying artillery on the NK side rather than buildings on the SK side?

      --
      There are two types of people in the world: Those who crave closure
    69. Re:And... it's gone by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Insightful

      I don't think you understand that high explosives don't give two shits about when a building was constructed.

    70. Re:And... it's gone by Razgorov+Prikazka · · Score: 1, Funny

      Preemptive strikes are only allowed on targets approved by the Halliburton Company.

      Or by 20th Century Fox Television.... After all it was 20th Century Fox Television that produced M*A*S*H !
      ~Suicide Is Painless

      --
      rm -rf --no-preserve-root / ...and let /dev/null sort them out...
    71. Re:And... it's gone by MaWeiTao · · Score: 3, Insightful

      The regime can kill a bunch of people at the cost of their own lives, but that is something only religious fanatics do.

      Keep telling yourself that.

      North Korea would be far more successful in getting their way by opening up and being friendly, even if it were a facade, than the current tactic. They shut down a facility that was pumping tens of millions of dollars directly into their coffers. So it's hard to see any logic behind what North Korea is doing.

    72. Re:And... it's gone by flayzernax · · Score: 1

      While that might happen in all actuality. They would most likely blame it on the U.S. and spin it as a covert sabotage or direct attack then cry for more aid.

    73. Re:And... it's gone by AlecC · · Score: 5, Informative

      Yes, NK could be flattened with conventional missiles. But they have enough artillery pieces lined up on the border (14,000, IIRC), with ammunition, to send up to half a million shells an hour into Seoul for a day or so. Before they were incapacitated, they could kill maybe ten million people is South Korea. Yes, it would be pointless slaughter, pure vindictiveness. But I am not prepared to say they wouldn't do it.

      --
      Consciousness is an illusion caused by an excess of self consciousness.
    74. Re:And... it's gone by AlecC · · Score: 1

      It is not 60 year old ordnance, but it may be 60 year old designs - though I suspect it is newer. The one thing they have spend money on is conventional artillery. The have approx 14,000 guns (IIRC), believed to be well maintained and well emplaced in hardened bunkers, pointed at Seoul. It may well not be the latest precision targeted munitions. It doesn't need to be - Seoul is a large target. I saw a theoretical figure of half a million shells per hour. Obviously, that level would not be reached - but a tenth of that would be devastating.

      --
      Consciousness is an illusion caused by an excess of self consciousness.
    75. Re:And... it's gone by Hentes · · Score: 1

      It's just a single missile, so it was likely intended only to be a test. It would be over the top to attack because of a (failed) test launch.

    76. Re:And... it's gone by kernelpanicked · · Score: 3, Funny

      Any war with them with missiles would be concluded before you heard about it on Slashdot.

      Just to be clear, is that the original Slashdot posting or the dupe?

      --
      Ubuntu: If at first you don't succeed, blindly slap a sudo in front of it
    77. Re:And... it's gone by OakDragon · · Score: 2, Funny

      Jong Un, is that you?

    78. Re:And... it's gone by Phrogman · · Score: 2

      Someone already thought about that quite a while ago. We used to have the Distant Early Warning System (DEW line) up north, but that was dismantled and replaced with this:

      http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ballistic_Missile_Early_Warning_System

      As a side note, I almost ended up working in a DEW line station, I almost wish I had just for the experience.

      --
      "The first time I got drunk, I got married. The second time I bought a chimpanzee, after that I stayed sober" Arian Seid
    79. Re:And... it's gone by mabhatter654 · · Score: 1

      The issue I that we know they have missles, and we know that have some nukes...so how much of a mess are they going to make?

      Yes, we are conducting excersizes, but we do that every year... Until NK wants to call off the war they'll have to deal with it.

    80. Re:And... it's gone by AlecC · · Score: 2

      If by "leveling Seoul" you mean marching that rediculous million man army armed with Soviet-era weapons across the parallel, sure, let's see how that goes.

      No, by "levelling Seoul" is meant firing a barrage with the 14,000 well maintained, well dug in artillery pieces they have on their side of the border, aimed at Seoul. Conservative, old technology - but excellent for city busting.

      --
      Consciousness is an illusion caused by an excess of self consciousness.
    81. Re:And... it's gone by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      So we fire first, with a missile with the NK flag painted on it and some heavily insured obsolete piece of junk and we get the war started for Halliburton, and NK are still the bad guys.

    82. Re:And... it's gone by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Who needs to use nukes? NK doesn't have nukes, there's no need to use nukes to level NK.

      North Korea has nukes. Other than that, you're right.

    83. Re:And... it's gone by lgw · · Score: 5, Insightful

      All politics is local. As I see it, the son is making these ever-more-silly threats as moves on an internal-politics chessboard, trying to retain the power his dad accumulated.

      If you think his rants are being ignored, I'd say that's missing his actual objective. People around him are judging him by his rants, and the outside world isn't really the audience for them.

      --
      Socialism: a lie told by totalitarians and believed by fools.
    84. Re:And... it's gone by AlecC · · Score: 1

      Because China, the third largest nuclear power on the planet, regards NK as deep in its "sphere of influence", and would regard any serious attack on NK as tantamount to a declaration of war. You have a rabid chihuahua owned by a heavyweight boxing champion. The dog is not problem, but the owner will flatten you.

      --
      Consciousness is an illusion caused by an excess of self consciousness.
    85. Re:And... it's gone by Maxo-Texas · · Score: 1

      Iraq was more about Bush Jr's relationship with Bush Sr than it was about Iraq.
      Bush Jr was not as wise as his father.

      --
      She was like chocolate when she drank... semi-sweet at first and then increasingly bitter.
    86. Re:And... it's gone by AlecC · · Score: 1

      While you are entirely correct NK can in no way win any war, it is not obvious that they know that. Evidence from people who have been there is that they believe their own propaganda. They might, in their insanity, start a war they /thought/ they could win. Though they would lose, the carnage would be appalling.

      --
      Consciousness is an illusion caused by an excess of self consciousness.
    87. Re:And... it's gone by Phrogman · · Score: 2

      Plus its worth noting that Napoleon actually took Moscow but couldn't hold it in the end - something the German army failed to do in WWII.
      He was sick at Waterloo and thus not at his best and he faced a brilliant British commander AND a truly tough Prussian commander. It was really the Prussians who won Waterloo. The British held which was pretty amazing but if the Prussians hadn't made it to the French flank, the British would have been broken pretty soon.

      --
      "The first time I got drunk, I got married. The second time I bought a chimpanzee, after that I stayed sober" Arian Seid
    88. Re:And... it's gone by AlphaWolf_HK · · Score: 2

      Wow how does somebody get modded troll for suggesting that there probably isn't a conspiracy?

      --
      Careful with names containing L slashdot.org/~AiphaWolf_HK slashdot.org/~AlphaWoif_HK slashdot.org/~AiphaWoif_HK
    89. Re:And... it's gone by GLMDesigns · · Score: 1

      over-generalize much?

      --
      If you're scared of your govt then you need to further restrict its powers
      Vote 3rd Party in 2016 and beyond
    90. Re:And... it's gone by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      effectively destroying what they consider to be part of their own country and their fellow countrymen.

      Because North Koreans are especially known for empathy towards their countrymen. They put them in concentration camps because they love them.

    91. Re: And... it's gone by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      And Pakistan, and .. that's just the recent threats.

    92. Re:And... it's gone by mrchaotica · · Score: 2

      Hypocritical would be if we constantly threatened to nuke Cuba, then told NK to knock it off.

      Although you still have a point, it becomes less persuasive when you swap countries...

      --

      "[Regarding the 'cloud,'] ownership was what made America different than Russia." -- Woz

    93. Re:And... it's gone by Somebody+Is+Using+My · · Score: 5, Insightful

      At least not until North Korea is defeated and South Korea is left with the unhappy task of trying to integrate their economies and cultures.

      Germany faced a similar problem when the Communist Bloc collapsed and East and West Germany were re-united, but at least that unification didn't start with open warfare and didn't require them to undo three generations of increasingly strident anti-Seoul propoganda. Plus, they still had Poland as a buffer between them and Russia (which was facing its own set of problems at the time, too). But it's economy was weakened and pushed into a deep recession before it finally recovered

      A unified Korea, though, will have all sorts of problems in the beginning. It might end up - in twenty years - as an amazing economic superpower but the interim is likely to be quite painful. At least the Germany's economies were similar (both were highly industrialized). What does North Korea have to offer South Korea except for problems? Millions of untrained, starving peasants bred to hate their cousins? A decaying infrastructure that will soon be a century out of date? A border with the century's next superpower? Such a task might not just ruin the south's economy; it might push it over into an abyss causing enough chaos from which alternatives like the Kim's long regime seem sane in comparison.

      I don't envy South Korea, I really don't. Their options seem equally shitty at the moment: either live with an increasingly unpredictable madman to the north, or junk their economy for half a generation. And sadly, no matter which they way they chose, it still seems as if they may face a massive loss of life. I imagine at this point their sole hope is that Kim family gets thrown out and replaced by a more sensible group who are willing to gradually integrate the two countries into a unified natio Alas, the likelihood of that happening - especially without the massive loss of life - seems increasingly slim.

    94. Re: And... it's gone by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Didn't the us threaten to bomb Pakistan back to the stone ages via telephone?

    95. Re: And... it's gone by Forty+Two+Tenfold · · Score: 0

      You should lay off whatever you're using, dude. Unless by "us" you mean Canada, or Venezuela, or other country whose government isn't acting like a bunch of psycho nut jobs threatening other countries.

      --
      Upward mobility is a slippery slope - the higher you climb the more you show your ass.
    96. Re:And... it's gone by DutchUncle · · Score: 1

      Let's rephrase that: Republican mediocre president: Spend tons of money and lots of lives on vague possibilities, including going sideways from the original target. Democratic intellectual president: Give them enough rope to hang themselves, without doing anything rash.

      I'll take the guy with the brain between the ears, thanks.

      Besides, just TRY to see it from their side, poor and information-starved and paranoid and trapped in a historic backwater: "Everyone outside hates us, as of the last we heard". I'll bet it's closer to "everyone outside doesn't care about them, if they remember they exist at all", but they'll never hear enough unfiltered news to know that. I feel mildly sorry for the common folk there, much as I would for those with the bad luck to be born in the Dark Ages.

    97. Re:And... it's gone by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      Have you not seen the laughably bad propaganda videos on youtube, where they clearly state they will nuke the USA, with various stolen movie footage of the USA in flames?

    98. Re:And... it's gone by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Stratigicly what I worry about is them starting a conflict, and china hoping nk will use a nuke to take out our minimal manned ground force. The u.s. levy's most of the military might on fancy hardware thinking air strikes and drone attacks make ground troops not needed.

    99. Re:And... it's gone by Patch86 · · Score: 2

      Who from? Nobody- not the US, not South Korea, not nobody- wants a war. There's nothing to gain from a war. It would cause devastating loss of life, and there are no strategic resources or whatnot to be had. Although the Southerners would like reunification, they don't want to level half the peninsula over it (and nor do the Northerners). Everyone's much happier playing the waiting game and hoping North Korea sorts itself out somehow (in the exact same way as the USSR and China did, only smaller scale).

      The North is just trying to wring concessions out of their international rivals by rattling their sabres and making threats. The international community are just hoping they get bored of it like they always do. Nobody wants the situation to turn violent.

    100. Re:And... it's gone by berashith · · Score: 2

      I agree that the actions are more to impress people in his country than actually convince anyone outside. That makes everything fairly safe, as he can say what he wants without a real threat of pre-emptive action from the US.

    101. Re:And... it's gone by OakDragon · · Score: 1

      Not worried about missiles striking American territory, just worried about the mess in the region if something bad happens. That's bad enough.

    102. Re:And... it's gone by interkin3tic · · Score: 5, Informative

      Although NK wants to reunite Korea they don't want to level the South or kill all its civilians. That would be counter-productive, effectively destroying what they consider to be part of their own country and their fellow countrymen.

      This would be more convincing if the North wasn't currently killing its own civilians for imagined insults.

    103. Re:And... it's gone by interkin3tic · · Score: 4, Funny

      You're right! China could become polluted!

    104. Re:And... it's gone by AlphaWolf_HK · · Score: 1

      I don't think China cares much about NK anymore. They supported them back then because they needed more trading partners under the communist regime. However China officially abandoned communism as unsustainable back in the 80's, and have been thriving ever since. There really isn't any reason to back them on this anymore, and lately they don't appear to be doing so anyways.

      --
      Careful with names containing L slashdot.org/~AiphaWolf_HK slashdot.org/~AlphaWoif_HK slashdot.org/~AiphaWoif_HK
    105. Re:And... it's gone by mrchaotica · · Score: 1

      They shut down a facility that was pumping tens of millions of dollars directly into their coffers.

      That's the thing about this that makes the least amount of sense to me. I mean, kicking out the South Korean managers is just fine, but why not promote the most competent North Koreans to take their place and keep the factory operating?

      --

      "[Regarding the 'cloud,'] ownership was what made America different than Russia." -- Woz

    106. Re:And... it's gone by MachineShedFred · · Score: 1

      More than that, while there is a troop imbalance across the DMZ, the DMZ itself has enough explosives strewn about to launch another Apollo mission to the moon.

      South Korea, and the US Military stationed there, love landmines. They love them. They'd give them away with every Samsung and LG appliance sold if they could. It makes for one hell of an incentive to stay on your side of the fence.

      --
      Slashdot still doesnâ(TM)t support Unicode after it was added to the HTML standard in 1997.
    107. Re:And... it's gone by AlphaWolf_HK · · Score: 1

      Could end up being like Iraq where the politicians talked up a storm about how hard they'll fight to win, and what ended up happening is their soldiers came walking single file into the desert with their weapons holstered and their hands above their heads.

      --
      Careful with names containing L slashdot.org/~AiphaWolf_HK slashdot.org/~AlphaWoif_HK slashdot.org/~AiphaWoif_HK
    108. Re:And... it's gone by runeghost · · Score: 1, Insightful

      Does having "our closest ally" constantly threaten to nuke Iran count?

    109. Re:And... it's gone by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      You should check your keyboard. It seems to be replacing (Ft) with (L).

    110. Re:And... it's gone by dcollins117 · · Score: 1

      The only scenario I find troubling is that North Korea launches some sort of missile, which then has some boost failure that drops it onto Seoul, or some nearby highly populated region where it might hurt someone.

      There's a possiblility they could accidentally hit China. Then they'd have some 'splainin' to do. "Sorry about the whole Beijing thing. Bad aim."

    111. Re:And... it's gone by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      It's also cheaper than the charade with the military searching for something that never existed in the first place.

      Except no one knew that. Go back and look at all the quotes from both sides of the aisle and other countries talking about how Iraq had them. No one was in doubt they had them, democrats included, except of course when they couldn't find any (current/modern ones).

    112. Re:And... it's gone by LordLimecat · · Score: 1

      Might also have something to do with the immediate counter-strike on Seoul...

      Just saying.

    113. Re: And... it's gone by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Oh and Libya ("hope he dies soon"), Iran and Syria.

    114. Re:And... it's gone by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Russia is to the left, not up. If you go up you drop off the edge of the map.

    115. Re: And... it's gone by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Insightful

      Comparing us to NK? You're a moron. We aren't acting like psycho nut jobs threatening other countries.

      What, you mean by forcing other countries to adopt your absurd copyright laws? Tying your foreign aid to making sure people don't get birth control? Sending Monsanto crop as food aid and telling people they can't keep see to plant another crop? Installing a new dictator because he claims to be friendly to the US but still treats the citizens like shit? Refusal to abide by WTO rulings that goes against you and claiming it's not legitimate, but using it to suit your own purposes? The whole Iraq war which has been proven to have been started for fabricated reasons? Spying on other countries? Extraordinary rendition whereby people are kidnapped out of countries without any oversight? Bombing civilians and calling it cost of doing business? Generally acting like assholes like Americans are want to do?

      Sorry pal, the US may not be quite as beligerant as NK, but you're hardly keeping your fingers out of pies.

      Sorry, but American foreign policy has been on the edge of 'psycho nut job' for decades now. The tendency to treat everyone else on the planet as subservient to yourselves, and lots of other things.

      Individually, America has some really nice people. Collectively, America is full of assholes. It ends up causing an awful lot of people to decide "fuck you guys".

      Somehow you have an expectation that the rest of the world is here to support US interests when you refuse to acknowledge the interests of other countries.

      You're the moron.

    116. Re:And... it's gone by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Yes because stopping a 1.6 million troop force will be simple.

      posting AC to save mod points......

      If you recall, didn't Iraq have some seriously huge army? That army lasted a couple weeks. War isn't what it used to be.

    117. Re:And... it's gone by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      The evidence doesn't support that Al Qaeda had anything to WTC attacks.

    118. Re:And... it's gone by Dutchmaan · · Score: 1

      ...and don't you think that's EXACTLY what North Korea wants? They've painted themselves into a corner, they either have to launch an attack or be shown that their bluffing and lose the one card they have to play on the world stage, which is act belligerent until concessions are made to them. It's a moment of truth for NK, either launch an attack and let themselves face a full war with the west with international support, or lose face. Striking first would be a decidedly stupid move.

    119. Re:And... it's gone by GigaBurglar · · Score: 1

      Well said man. There is always a slant on these stories and most people, including the mere mortals on Slashdot, just don't have the ability to see things from a different perspective - they don't actually understand that what they know is just seen from their own perspective - what they see. NK are surely mental - how a country like that can call itself a republic, or even democratic, is just beyond words of stupidity. The west in general, from one country to the next, we're now all on board with a common foreign policy - and I don't agree with it.

      Vote me down - I don't care much for what people think.. they don't do it very often.

    120. Re:And... it's gone by geekoid · · Score: 1

      You're right! China could become unlivable!

      FIFY

      --
      The Kruger Dunning explains most post on /. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dunning%E2%80%93Kruger_effect
    121. Re:And... it's gone by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      Their support of NK has had nothing to do with communist fraternity for quite some time now. China's interest in North Korea is simple; they don't want millions of starving, desperate refugees flooding over the border into China.

      They are starting to lose patience because the North is becoming more and more belligerent, to the point that they are threatening the status quo.

    122. Re:And... it's gone by geekoid · · Score: 1

      ON iun the post pedantic way.

      There is not enough arming.

      Also some modern weapons can change course mid flight. This includes certain types of artillery.

      --
      The Kruger Dunning explains most post on /. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dunning%E2%80%93Kruger_effect
    123. Re:And... it's gone by bkr1_2k · · Score: 1

      Someone please mod this up. This is the only real future of a unified Korean peninsula, especially if "unified by war". Anything that changes the status quo is going to set the economy of South Korea back at least a decade, probably more.

      It doesn't really matter how much physical damage DPRK can inflict (and they can inflict serious physical damage, even if only for a short time) the financial damage is going to be almost incalculable.

      --
      "Growing old is inevitable; growing up is optional."
    124. Re:And... it's gone by broggyr · · Score: 2

      Shush, before someone offended by your comment tweets your picture and gets you both fired...

      --
      Irony? Yea, it's like goldy and bronzy, only it's made of iron!
    125. Re:And... it's gone by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Iraq - "No, seriously, we don't have WMDs and would only attack Kuwait, not the US"

      Citation needed. Maybe they had really destroyed their WMDs, but Saddam did everything he could to persuade the world they hadn't.

    126. Re:And... it's gone by Archangel+Michael · · Score: 3, Insightful

      There is little difference between extreme right wing and extreme left wing, and most of the area in between. Both sides are for greater Government control in people's lives, just in different areas. The real sad thing is, if you give government control over one area, it inevitably bleeds into more areas as its desire to consume rights increases. When people fear their government, there is something wrong. THIS is what most people don't get.

      Please notice, Obama has done absolutely nothing in regard to all those polices left wingers complained about GWB about (rightly so), and as often as is the case, has actually expanded those policies. Where is the outrage? Oh right, Obama passed ObamaCare so all is forgiven "He is better than GWB" line of pointlessness comes spewing forth from the mouths and keyboards of left wing drones.

      And we are just now finding out how much of a clusterfuck ObamaCare actually is, doing nothing that was promise except taking freedom from people and assigning more intrusiveness by the IRS. "But it is universal health care, yay that is good" line of crap is just stupid, bad laws doing bad things is never good, even if the goal is admirable. Doctors are quitting, because they can't afford to provide care for free, which is what ObamaCare is doing, Insurance Premiums are increasing even faster to cover the losses being imposed by ObamaCare, the Insurance Exchanges are costing twice what they thought and aren't providing any new services or getting people insured better. The whole thing is broken, but rather than scrap it, left wingers want to "fix it". You can't fix rose tinted viewpoints. These things NEVER work out as advertised and yet people keep believing it. You can't make this stuff up, and you can't fix stupid.

      So, yeah, i have a bit of disdain for those people who think that increasing government intrusion into the day to day lives of average people is a good thing, be they Right Wing or Left Wing.

      --
      Agent K: A *person* is smart. People are dumb, stupid, panicky animals, and you know it.
    127. Re:And... it's gone by geekoid · · Score: 1

      half million shell in an hour is only 35.7 firings per gun.
      so yes, doable.

      --
      The Kruger Dunning explains most post on /. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dunning%E2%80%93Kruger_effect
    128. Re:And... it's gone by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      It won't work, but they don't realize it because their analysts work for a totalitarian regime and can't provide the unvarnished truth to the leadership.

      Of course, that doesn't happen in free countries.

    129. Re:And... it's gone by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      so we strike them first - 15 seconds later, the rest of the inbred country. carpet bomb the entire country, readying it for re-planting....

    130. Re:And... it's gone by geekoid · · Score: 1

      and NK is actually threatening us.

      --
      The Kruger Dunning explains most post on /. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dunning%E2%80%93Kruger_effect
    131. Re:And... it's gone by farble1670 · · Score: 1

      Cuba

      our problem with Cuba was that they were threatening to allow russia to deploy nuclear weapons. sure, we hated them in the first place for specious reasons, but we weren't threatening to melt them into nuclear ash just because they were commies.

    132. Re:And... it's gone by geekoid · · Score: 1

      becasue wars mean people die. starting a war with NK means millions in Seoul will die.

      --
      The Kruger Dunning explains most post on /. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dunning%E2%80%93Kruger_effect
    133. Re:And... it's gone by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      So somehow we should believe you a random internet poster over the world news (not just america)

      I am sorry but I have very little faith in your translation abilities, and you have not reputation so I have zero faith in the accuracy of your statements.

    134. Re:And... it's gone by Animats · · Score: 1

      Intelligence reports suggest that they can't fit a nuclear warhead on any kind of missile with decent range. Plus, their missile tests are falling way short of reaching anywhere but South Korea, China, and maybe Japan, and their test success ratio has been low.

      They've achieved orbit. If you can reach orbit, you can potentially hit any place on earth. So far, they've only put a 100Kg payload in orbit. The smallest US nuclear weapons were around 50Kg, but it's not clear that North Korea can make a warhead that compact yet.

    135. Re:And... it's gone by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Except now China is weary of NK's outbursts. It's not like China gets anything out of their alliance with NK.

    136. Re:And... it's gone by bkr1_2k · · Score: 1

      Because you're looking at it from an external perspective. Kim Jong Il did the same kind of posturing. This is about Kim Jong Un consolidating power and making sure he isn't overthrown by the military, nothing more nothing less. This isn't really about getting anything from the US, though if it has that side effect, all the better.

      --
      "Growing old is inevitable; growing up is optional."
    137. Re:And... it's gone by geekoid · · Score: 1

      " abandoned communism as unsustainable back in the 80's"
      no they didn't. The abandoned Stalinist style of communism.
      This way they can be communist but not have actually caring about the long term of you populace. So now get to ave slave manufacture our goods! win win.

      --
      The Kruger Dunning explains most post on /. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dunning%E2%80%93Kruger_effect
    138. Re:And... it's gone by nobodyknowsimageek · · Score: 1

      You are either a shill for NK, or a stooge. NK has REPEATEDLY threatened imminent attacks on US soil in the past month. They even showed a video of KJU conferring with his generals, with a map of the USA showing missile tracks targeting several cities.

      The general consensus is that Kim is posturing mostly to strengthen his internal political position, but he is doing it in an extremely dangerous and unpredictable way.

    139. Re:And... it's gone by geekoid · · Score: 1

      Actually, this is far worse then other years., and we have an unknown. 20 year olds aren't known for their rational thinking.

      --
      The Kruger Dunning explains most post on /. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dunning%E2%80%93Kruger_effect
    140. Re:And... it's gone by thetoadwarrior · · Score: 0

      They probably don't have oil otherwise they would have been bombed already.

    141. Re:And... it's gone by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Have you not seen the laughably bad propaganda videos on youtube, where they clearly state they will nuke the USA, with various stolen movie footage of the USA in flames?

      That's the solution them, send the MPAA into North Korea - think that's what's termed a 'win win' situation...

    142. Re:And... it's gone by farble1670 · · Score: 1

      That's the thing about missiles... you typically see them coming

      cruise missiles are designed to fly at very low altitudes and very high speeds defeating traditional radar systems. of course, you might have trouble with the sonic boom.

    143. Re:And... it's gone by rubycodez · · Score: 1

      and those well dug in artillery are within easy striking distance of U.S. cruise missiles, smart bombs, etc. they'd be the first thing to go

    144. Re:And... it's gone by Reverand+Dave · · Score: 0

      Mod this up please.

      --
      I got here through a series of tubes
    145. Re:And... it's gone by geekoid · · Score: 1

      there have been calls fro inside China's communist party to abandon NK.

      And China wouldn't flatten us.
      1) War negates the debt.
      2) Our fire power is superior.

      It would be an ugly, ugly war and it would involve the whole globe.

      --
      The Kruger Dunning explains most post on /. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dunning%E2%80%93Kruger_effect
    146. Re:And... it's gone by AmiMoJo · · Score: 1, Troll

      "our arms are ready to fire and the exact coordinates are input to the warheads. Once we push the button, it will be fired, and the strongholds of our enemies will be turned to a sea of flames.''

      Are you saying that the US does not have the coordinates of all major cities of its enemies programmed in to its nuclear war-heads? The US can nuke anywhere in the world at the push of a button, as can France, the UK, Russia, China, possibly Israel... Does South Africa have ICBMs?

      The official statement from Mr Kim's regime kept up the barrage of inflammatory rhetoric, telling "all foreign institutions and enterprises and foreigners including tourists" in South Korea to "take measures for shelter and evacuation". It added: "The situation on the Korean Peninsula is inching close to a thermonuclear war due to the evermore undisguised hostile actions of the United States and the South Korean puppet warmongers."

      Which is exactly what the west is saying too. Official advice to UK citizens is not to visit NK as safety is not guaranteed. I somehow doubt that translation is accurate, by the way, since NK doesn't have thermonuclear weapons, only conventional nuclear ones. The only such weapons that would be in play would be the ones landing on NK cities.

      --
      const int one = 65536; (Silvermoon, Texture.cs)
      SJW, n: "Someone I don't like, and by the way I'm a fuckwit" - AC
    147. Re:And... it's gone by guttentag · · Score: 3, Funny

      No need for nukes with North Korea, anyway. They will easily be flattened by conventional missles. They are effectively defenceless and have a tiny infrastructure.

      Speaking of their infrastructure, most countries would be returned to the stone age by nukes. North Korea might actually be brought forward into the stone age by nukes.

    148. Re: And... it's gone by Reverand+Dave · · Score: 2, Insightful

      Individually, America has some really nice people. Collectively, America is full of assholes. It ends up causing an awful lot of people to decide "fuck you guys".

      Now while I can't argue directly with this I can say that the majority of the problem is that America is run by a bunch of assholes not so much full of assholes. While I do strongly consider myself an asshole of sorts I take slight offense to having the majority of my country placed in the same category as me.

      --
      I got here through a series of tubes
    149. Re:And... it's gone by denvergeek · · Score: 1

      I don't see what being a Lesbian has to do with anything.

    150. Re:And... it's gone by guttentag · · Score: 2

      North Korea: China's autistic little brother.

      I'd call that an insult to autistic brothers. Seriously.

    151. Re:And... it's gone by Reverand+Dave · · Score: 1

      That's not dangerous gamma wave radiation emanating from your phone, that's a feature!

      --
      I got here through a series of tubes
    152. Re:And... it's gone by realityimpaired · · Score: 1

      I'm sure a lot of 60 yr old ordinance, not kept in humidity controlled rooms, is effective.

      The ordnance itself? Probably not. The guns? As long as they're being properly maintained, they're probably still in working order.

      Ammunition isn't that hard to come by, even for a country with as many embargoes against it as NK. Some countries are still selling them stuff.

    153. Re:And... it's gone by Coward+Anonymous · · Score: 1

      Obama should have used NK's threats of a nuclear strike on U.S. soil as cause to move forward more big weapons like THAAD and announce big missile defense projects, perhaps in Japan, like those cancelled in Europe. This would increase the pressure on China to tone down their bulldog as it is would be working against Chinese interests.

    154. Re:And... it's gone by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      ... getting rid of our own nuclear missiles it just makes us look hypocritical.

      You assume that the same standards apply to all nations. How about this, the US has had nuclear weapons longer than any other nation and has not used them in warfare in 60 years? While NK and Iran threaten to nuke their neighboring regions ever few months.

      Let's try an analogy, maybe it will help you. It's just and right if I put you in prison for taking your machine gun to a high school. If I have to point a gun at you to get you to surrender and get into the squad car, that doesn't make me a hypocrite, it makes me a sane person trying to deal with your insane ass.

    155. Re: And... it's gone by OrangeTide · · Score: 2

      What, you mean by forcing other countries to adopt your absurd copyright laws?

      So copyright laws are equivalent to nuclear warfare? Hyperbole much?

      --
      “Common sense is not so common.” — Voltaire
    156. Re:And... it's gone by WuphonsReach · · Score: 1

      W76 is about 164kg (100kt warhead), W87 is 200-270kg (300-475kt), W88 is 360kg (up to 475kt).

      The WWII era bombs: Little Boy was 4400 kg and 28" across, Fat Man was 4,633 kg and 5' across.

      Minimum size seems to be about 150kg. They're not quite there yet.

      --
      Wolde you bothe eate your cake, and have your cake?
    157. Re:And... it's gone by mjr167 · · Score: 1

      My friends who were stationed on a ballistic sub once estimated that once they started firing they would not be able to offload their entire armament before getting sunk.

      Anyway, the Tridents (sub-fired nukes) are ballistic missiles. The cruise missiles (Tomahawks) are not nukes. Unless our armament changed drastically in the last couple of years and I missed it, we aren't nuking anyone with cruise missiles.

    158. Re:And... it's gone by PraiseBob · · Score: 1

      And the tiny satellite they put in orbit is tumbling, thus their ability to hit within 1,000 miles of the target they are aiming at is questionable. (Plus a tumbling warhead would burn up on re-entry)

    159. Re:And... it's gone by Hognoxious · · Score: 1

      However China's corrupt fucking ratbastard ruling elite of former commie apparatchiks officially abandoned communism as not giving enough opportunities for graft back in the 80's, and have been thriving ever since while most people are no better (or even worse) off than they were under Mao.

      FTFY

      --
      Confucius say, "Find worm in apple - bad. Find half a worm - worse."
    160. Re:And... it's gone by rhyder128k · · Score: 1

      By the time you get to 60, raising it to firing position is still pretty good.

      --
      Michael Reed, freelance tech writer.
    161. Re:And... it's gone by slimjim8094 · · Score: 1

      Why on earth do you think the US (or anyone else) would launch a preemptive strike? We have missile defense in the area. Japan's mobilized theirs, and have stated that they'll shoot it down if it comes anywhere near them. So this missile thing will either be "oh look, a shitty missile" or "oh look, we blew up your missile". Neither of which are inconsistent with the current policy of treating NK like a 3-year-old having a tantrum - don't respond to his outburst, but don't let him have the toy you told him he couldn't have until he behaved.

      --
      I have developed a truly marvelous proof of this comment, which this signature is too narrow to contain.
    162. Re:And... it's gone by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Agreed - we should send Jenna Jameson.

    163. Re:And... it's gone by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      35 shots per hours is a shot every two minutes. The heat load alone will slag their barrels.

    164. Re:And... it's gone by TWiTfan · · Score: 1

      When 35 nuclear cruise missiles fired from off-shore strike without North Korea receiving any warning, North Korea won't be able to do *ANYTHING* - they'll be gone.

      So would a good swath of South Korea and China. Or do you think fallout respects national borders?

      --
      The cow says "Moo." The dog says "Woof." The Timothy says "Thanks, valued customer. We appreciate your input."
    165. Re:And... it's gone by farble1670 · · Score: 1

      yeah, i was talking about knocking down their offensive capabilities with conventional weapons.

    166. Re:And... it's gone by dinfinity · · Score: 1

      Millions of untrained, starving peasants

      Does Foxconn have a factory in South Korea?

    167. Re:And... it's gone by ElectricTurtle · · Score: 2

      There is a lot more nuance in the Chinese/Korean relationship than that, especially in the last year or so. Kim Jeong Un has not made any pilgrimage to China, official or otherwise, since taking office, which many in China see as disrespectful (both elder Kims made such visits). "Ultimate Strategist" Kim is not giving China face (mianzi), not just in failing to visit, but in not responding to China's heretofore superficial gestures at mediation. Chinese Foreign Minister Hong Lei is starting to look really peeved in his press conferences and (in true career diplomat form) making all kinds of passive aggressive veiled denouncements that do everything but name DPRK directly.

      If you're trying to view the peninsula situation through 70-year old glasses, I'd really advise you to take them off and listen to what's really going on over there. The geopolitical situation of the early 50s is dead and buried, as are all the major players who created it. The generation in power on all sides has completely different motivations and perspectives.

      It's really hard to say what China would do. I've long said that China would probably try to take over the DPRK as a protectorate, since it needs Korea to stay divided. It can't let the DPRK fall from within or without, because either way will cause a huge refugee problem in the immediate term and huge economic rival in the long term (Germany Part II: Electric Boogaloo). Plus it could probably spin it in such a way as to look heroic to the wider world, eg "we're preemptively striking DPRK to save the world!"

      If you don't think the Chinese could/would do something that daring, I would advised you to study Chinese history, especially the Warring States period. There are a lot of instances where Chinese hegemons have feigned alliances and attacked ostensible allies when they least expected it. (The Chu/Yue/Qi triangle springs immediately to mind.)

      --
      I support the Slashcott and will not be reading or commenting from 2/10/14 to 2/17/14. Beta is steaming pile of dog shit
    168. Re:And... it's gone by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      And, why would China retaliate against the US? They have a large land army, but there's an ocean separating them from the US. The US Navy is far and away the strongest in the world, China's doesn't realistically pose a threat. As for nukes, there's MAD, but it'd be insane for China to fire their 240 nukes toward the US with 32 times that number being fired back. (Plus the technology gap, the US has had a lot more time to develop them.)

      No, China would be upset if the US destroys North Korea, but there's not much they would do about it. They'd lose a huge chunk of their economy to lose a very one-sided war. Maybe in a few decades the situation would be different, but China is a developing country and not a superpower.

    169. Re:And... it's gone by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      When I was stationed on the DMZ back in the 80's, they basically told us that if the North ever invaded, we were toast. They had so many troops and ordinance on the border that they could completely overwhelm us and a good chunk of the South before we could even respond. And that was back when we had WAY more nukes than we do today (and no fewer soldiers on the DMZ). Having the men and munitions to win the *war* will be cold comfort to the U.S. and South Korean soldiers killed in the initial *battle*.

    170. Re:And... it's gone by Above · · Score: 1

      Tomahawk missiles have been fitted with nuclear warheads. In theory they have all been retired from service, but I'm not sure I 100% believe that, or that they couldn't be returned to service in short order.

      In reality a nuclear Tomahawk is probably unnecessary. Use cruise missiles to take out all known SAM sites with conventional explosives, leave a few stealth fighters loitering with HARM missiles to take out any pop up SAM sites, and send in B1 and then B2 bombers to drop whatever we wanted, including nuclear weapons.

      I believe the reason the boomer crews believed they wouldn't be able to get off all of their ordinance is that firing is very noisy, and a Russian attack sub would be able to pick up that noise hundreds of miles away. If multiple missiles were going off without prior notice, or during a time of high tension, it would be attack first, and ask questions later. While NK has a sub or two, I'm not sure they have the capability to be a threat in this capacity.

    171. Re:And... it's gone by phantomfive · · Score: 1

      And it's less worse than other years as well. They haven't actually attacked anything, for example. So far it's been words and harmless actions.

      --
      "First they came for the slanderers and i said nothing."
    172. Re:And... it's gone by TWiTfan · · Score: 1

      I imagine that a well-trained million man army armed with AK-47's would fare pretty damned well against 35,000 U.S. troops armed with M-16's, even factoring in air support.

      --
      The cow says "Moo." The dog says "Woof." The Timothy says "Thanks, valued customer. We appreciate your input."
    173. Re:And... it's gone by Hognoxious · · Score: 3, Funny

      why not promote the most competent North Koreans to take their place and keep the factory operating?

      Because they're both in a concentration camp.

      --
      Confucius say, "Find worm in apple - bad. Find half a worm - worse."
    174. Re:And... it's gone by cusco · · Score: 1

      "Dug in" means that they're protected from standard attack vectors, such as bombs and cruise missiles. The stuff has been in place for 50+ years, they've had plenty of time to build emplacements and bunkers to protect it. Yes, smart bombs and whatever the 'Child of MOAB' bunker buster is called can do serious damage to those emplacements, at least in comparison to dumb bombs, but by the time they arrive the north end of Seoul would be a smoking ruin. Unless you expect to have a fleet of B-52s circling overhead in North Korean air space (at low altitude no less, because bombs take a while to land) there is no way to halt a surprise artillery attack.

      --
      "Think about how stupid the average person is. Now, realise that half of them are dumber than that." - George Carlin
    175. Re:And... it's gone by ninjagin · · Score: 1

      You, sir, are an artist.

      --
      .. pa-ra-bo-la, pa-ra-bo-la, 2 pi R, 2 pi R, where's your latus rectum, where's your latus rectum, 2 pi R
    176. Re:And... it's gone by cdrudge · · Score: 1

      there are no strategic resources or whatnot to be had.

      Some have estimated North Korea's rare earth mineral deposits to be over $6t USD. Not exactly chump change although I don't think enough to start a war over. But then again, I don't work for Halliburton or whatever the mining equivalent is.

    177. Re:And... it's gone by ninjagin · · Score: 1

      I'm violating my own rule to not reply to AC, but in this case I think it's important to do so.

      The difference between the 80s and today is that we have a plethora of new cluster bombs that can self-guide "bomblets" to hit magnetic or heat-identifiable targets. They're very accurate. We took out many hundreds of tanks in Iraq before they could ever get close enough to hit us. Sure, there would be some firing that could not be stopped, but we'd be able to inactivate most of the artillery within hours.

      For my part, I've always liked the idea of "rice-bombing", where we would take a million or so 1-lb bags of rice, attach little parachutes to them and drop them all over the DPRK. It would sow (no pun intended) more chaos than any weapon.

      --
      .. pa-ra-bo-la, pa-ra-bo-la, 2 pi R, 2 pi R, where's your latus rectum, where's your latus rectum, 2 pi R
    178. Re:And... it's gone by ackthpt · · Score: 1

      When I was stationed on the DMZ back in the 80's, they basically told us that if the North ever invaded, we were toast. They had so many troops and ordinance on the border that they could completely overwhelm us and a good chunk of the South before we could even respond. And that was back when we had WAY more nukes than we do today (and no fewer soldiers on the DMZ). Having the men and munitions to win the *war* will be cold comfort to the U.S. and South Korean soldiers killed in the initial *battle*.

      A friend joined the US Army as a dentist and served a tour in ROK, right up along the border. He had no illusions regarding his life expectancy, in terms of seconds, if hostilities recommenced. Those on both sides of the immediate border would be puree. Ultimately the North would be well done with a side of chips, but the cost of taking the Kingdom of the Kims out would be terrible.

      --

      A feeling of having made the same mistake before: Deja Foobar
    179. Re:And... it's gone by R3d+M3rcury · · Score: 1

      [...] they can inflict massive damage [...]

      Not a huge deal. I'm sure there are plenty of US companies that will be more than happy to come in and repair everything, if only the American taxpayer will pay them to do so.

    180. Re:And... it's gone by holiggan · · Score: 1

      No, no, no! Preemptive strikes are only used against enemies that can't retaliate and that hold valuable goods inside their boundaries.

      Oh, no, scratch that, I meant enemies that have "OMD" (real or otherwise)...

      It is not very clear yet if NK is a real threat or not (perhaps when they actually fire something at someone, somebody might think about doing a "pre-emptiy")...

      --
      "A sysadmin is a cross between a detective, a police officer, a gardener, a doctor and a fireman"
    181. Re:And... it's gone by amRadioHed · · Score: 1

      What 20 year old? Kim Jong Un is 30.

      --
      We hope your rules and wisdom choke you / Now we are one in everlasting peace
    182. Re:And... it's gone by phantomfive · · Score: 1

      You can't fix dead.

      --
      "First they came for the slanderers and i said nothing."
    183. Re:And... it's gone by cdrudge · · Score: 1

      I don't think China cares much about NK anymore.China only cares enough about them to keep them around as a buffer keeping South Korean allies (read: the US) away from their borders.

    184. Re:And... it's gone by khallow · · Score: 2

      Are you saying that the US does not have the coordinates of all major cities of its enemies programmed in to its nuclear war-heads?

      This detargeting happened in 1994. Sure, the US can nuke anyone at the push of the button, but it doesn't have coordinates already entered.

      I somehow doubt that translation is accurate

      Are you kidding? If Mr. Kim thought it'd sound sexier to claim he had an arsenal of unicorns and sentient black holes, he'd say that instead.

    185. Re:And... it's gone by Ksevio · · Score: 4, Insightful

      There's always going to be the extreme libertarian view that Government should be abolished and everyone should fend for themselves, but countries with GOOD governments tend to be much better than countries with little or bad governments. Now I'm not saying the US has the best government, but it's not a bad one (despite some bad things it does) and it won't help to cut it down so it just functions less efficiently.

      The mess of the health care act was because of the TeaParty/GOP/libertarians that are actually in favor of millions of people dying as a legitimate solution. It may sound crazy - because it is. Pretty much all other developed countries manage to provide health care to their citizens, but in the US we're worried about "death panels" killing off grandma and providing health care to women so we can't go there. ObamaCare was a first step - get everyone to have some sort of health care. A single payer would likely be more efficient than running through insurance companies, but that's too scary for some. We very much need more health care reform, but while some are offering solutions in reforms that will cover more people and bring down costs, others think the best solution is to drop tens of millions of people from the system and "scrap it". The system we had was fairly poor for those with money and horrible for those without - and costs were going up, yet people keep believing it's the American way that we should go back to. You can't make this stuff up, and you can't fix stupid.

    186. Re:And... it's gone by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Iraqis were not surrendering to helicopters because they were hungry. They were surrendering to helicopters so that the helicopters wouldn't turn them into hamburger or call in some fast movers to make a big ol' batch of crispy critter delight.

    187. Re:And... it's gone by phantomfive · · Score: 1

      Oh, saying they have Soviet weaponry is what counts as research for you? No wonder you're confused. Are you aware what that weaponry is capable of? The US has better weaponry, but they don't have something magic that will prevent damage. North Korea isn't weak like Iraq.

      Do you know what the battle plan is for a North Korean invasion? If not, what kind of research have you done exactly?

      --
      "First they came for the slanderers and i said nothing."
    188. Re:And... it's gone by Midnight_Falcon · · Score: 5, Informative
      Working in healthcare-related technology, I can tell you that ObamaCare has NOT caused doctors to quit, etc. What it's done is make doctors more accountable through the creation of ACOs and rating the patient outcomes and risks. Some of the worst-performing doctors end up moving to different practices, but generally, they remain practicing medicine. The exception is if they are retiring -- in which case, it makes more sense to go into an earlyish retirement than have to shape up your game. We didn't want those doctors anyway -- would you want a cardiologist who's track record says 2x more of their patients die than other doctors with similar cases?

      Please study the Affordable Care Act before making such bold declarations. Spending on medicare and medicaid is the largest portion of the federal government and savings need to be accomplished somehow. Some doctors might kick and scream, but their profession has been profiting handsomely from the existing system, and they know how to work it to maximize their income. For an older doctor, with a new system in place, it may not be worth re-learning how to 'game the system' if that's really what they've been doing.

      I really think the medicare/medicaid "shared savings model" is helpful in the long term for healthcare expenditures, which are spiraling out of control with no end in sight.

      I have never been, nor ever will be associated with either the Democratic or Republican parties if you're wondering.

    189. Re:And... it's gone by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Nuclear warhead, probably not. Chemical warhead, definitely. Previous missiles have passed over Japan, and the latest one shot the payload into orbit (albight an unstable one). If you can make orbit, guiding a warhead down to a city-sized target anywhere on Earth is merely an engineering problem.

      And yes, the regime is a bunch a religious fanatics, but the religion is nothing mainstream. Their religion is devoted to hero worship of Kim il-Sung (dictator that started the Korean War and ruled until his death in 1994). Even overly-friendly, former U.S. President Jimmy Carter recently commented on The Daily Show that the north Koreans view Kim il-Sung as something "like a cross between George Washington and Jesus".

    190. Re:And... it's gone by rubycodez · · Score: 1

      in point of fact there is way to halt surprise attacks, with a pre-emptive surprise attack. our ability to "bust bunkers" with many types of weapons has evolved far beyond what the ancient soviet-era doctrines the N. Koreans can imagine possible. 50+ year old methods including bunkers are useless, even the concrete of that era is a joke by modern standards

    191. Re:And... it's gone by hackula · · Score: 1

      Approved!

    192. Re:And... it's gone by khallow · · Score: 1

      How many of these smart weapons do we have? I doubt we have enough unless North Korea allows us to run another multi-week bombing campaign and puts all its gear out in the open to make things much easier for us. At least we know there's enough nukes to do the job.

    193. Re:And... it's gone by citylivin · · Score: 2

      "There is little difference between extreme right wing and extreme left wing"

      Well americans have never elected ralph nader so they never really had a chance to see an extreme left wing position. Even he wouldn't be "extreme" to a country like france.

      Obama is at best, centre right. But I am sure you already know that as you rightly complain that obamacare is far inferior to 100% publicly funded healthcare for 100% of citizens, which is really the only real alternative. The american system for sure needs to be scrapped in favour of a national healthcare system available to everyone with no fees, as most other 1st world countries have.

      --
      As a potential lottery winner, I totally support tax cuts for the wealthy
    194. Re:And... it's gone by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      What an idiotic rule.

    195. Re:And... it's gone by ImprovOmega · · Score: 2

      He actually turned 30 this year, and by 25 your prefrontal cortex is matured anyway. I'm afraid we can't blame his irrationality on biology at this point. Well, other than that he's the biological son of his batshit loco father Kim Jong-Il.

    196. Re:And... it's gone by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      1) The current posture of the United States is: ""The United States will not use or threaten to use nuclear weapons against non-nuclear weapons states that are party to the NPT and in compliance with their nuclear non-proliferation obligations." The United States refers to it as a deterent, and to be used in response to an attack, such as the warning issued to Iraq in the Gulf War (if you use Chemical Weapons, we might respond with nuclear weapons), not as a "pre-emptive strike."

      2) Very few states "want" a war with a major power. For example, Argentina did not "want" a war with the UK in the 80's. They would have preferred that the UK just hand over the Falkland Islands and not fight over them.

      3) I don't recall the United States / NATO throwing a fit every time the Soviets practiced with their Warsaw Pact allies during the Cold War in Europe for example. Remember the weeks of coverage of the threats back and forth when in 2008 the Russians had 3 days of "war games" right off our coast with Cuba?

    197. Re:And... it's gone by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Wait -- so you think your first two examples were good ideas?
       
       

      What a fucking joke.

    198. Re:And... it's gone by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Looking at the map the distance seems around 31 miles, which would require more than average range artillery.
      For comparison, a modern piece of 155mm US artillery (M777) with special shells only reaches 25 miles.

      The number of 170mm artillery pieces or rocket-launchers is a LOT lower in NK than the 14000 pieces you mention. There will be significant damage, don't get me wrong, but the threat is not as high as you make it out to be.

    199. Re:And... it's gone by Kelbear · · Score: 1

      This is a TERRIBLE reply.

      "How about this, the US has had nuclear weapons longer than any other nation and has not used them in warfare in 60 years?"

      Jeezus, that just raises the question of, "what was the only situation in which nuclear weapons were used in warfare ever?"...doesn't help your point any.

      What you should be pointing out instead, is that the US has led all nuclear disarmament talks, and has achieved a dramatic decrease in nuclear arms worldwide, and shown interest in continuing this trend.

    200. Re:And... it's gone by CheeseTroll · · Score: 1

      Slightly OT, but I have an uncle who sold his dental practice, joined the Army as a dentist and served in Korea. Probably not the same person, since there are likely to be >1 dentist in the US Army, but it was interesting to hear about your friend doing the same thing.

      --
      A post a day keeps productivity at bay.
    201. Re:And... it's gone by Cro+Magnon · · Score: 1

      So, this is as good as he gets? That's a scary thought!

      --
      Slow down, cowboy! It has been 4 hours since you last posted. You must wait another few hours.
    202. Re:And... it's gone by Dr_Barnowl · · Score: 1

      "MMmmn, giant mutant mudcrab cakes!"

    203. Re:And... it's gone by AK+Marc · · Score: 1

      This supports the general rule of "FTFY" is only used by people who break things. It was more correct before you "fixed" it.

    204. Re:And... it's gone by Kelbear · · Score: 1

      "Sure, there would be some firing that could not be stopped, but we'd be able to inactivate most of the artillery within hours."

      That right there is the problem. During those hours of free-firing artilery on densely populated urban areas, innocent people are going to die in droves. Families will be cut to pieces or wiped out entirely. Nobody is disputing that the loss rate will be ridiculously lopsided in our favor, or that the war would be over incredibly quickly.

      But the reality is that there will still be a tremendous loss of life. American lives have value, South Korean lives have value, and even North Korean lives have value. War is fucking terrible and we should never forget that. If it's possible to find a way to avoid bloodshed, we should do so.

      The more convincing argument would be whether a war is a greater threat to lives than Kim Jong-Un starving his people to death. If fewer people would die in the long-term from having a war to out this dictator, I'd support it.

    205. Re:And... it's gone by interval1066 · · Score: 1

      Sure, pile out of that tunnel system they built and throw kimchi at everyone in the south. Let's hear your research, oh wise sage, complete with battle order for each unit.

      --
      Python: 'And then suddenly you have a language which says "we're all stuck with whatever the whiniest coder wants".'
    206. Re:And... it's gone by TheCarp · · Score: 1

      This of course assumes that you are looking for such an excuse, and thats all it would be.

      They are (likely) not actually planning war. This just isn't what you do when you are planning a war. If they actually were, they would be looking for slights, and laying out their narrative. They might directly threaten it, or toss out some ultimatums, but, if they were planning to launch that missle, they would raise and launch it before the media could report, and there would be an invasion.

      In fact, the only way I would read this as an attempt to start a war would be if this was an attempt to draw out a pre-emptive strike. They may believe that such a strike would allow them to start the war and still get chineese support, or they may be taking a page out of the US playbook and trying to draw the attack so they can claim they didn't start the conflict?

      Really though, I think they likely have become quite comfortable with using this sort of provocative act to get attention and are jockeying for the next round of talks. Or, its their new leader trying to play to internal interests and "look tough" (or maybe both).

      However, I want to offer another, less popular idea. Their "leader" is not actually in control and all this is an act by their military commanders to get themselves a good deal when the coup happens.

      I know, its a stretch, far out on a limb.... but... something really doesn't sit right with me about those photos of him sitting in front of US invasion plans. That sort of thing is staged, always. Why stage that? It doesn't even make sense, it smells fishy to me.

      --
      "I opened my eyes, and everything went dark again"
    207. Re:And... it's gone by rtfa-troll · · Score: 1

      So it's hard to see any logic behind what North Korea is doing.

      There is a guy with no clue how to rule in charge of a country full of ignorant crazy people. There's already been one attempt to kill him and take his place. He now needs a distraction; any distraction. He is very likely to get killed soon, so he has nothing to lose by doing all sorts of crazy stuff.

      I hope this logic helps you sleep.

      --
      =~ s,(.*),<sarcasm>$1</sarcasm>,g if any_point_you_wish();
    208. Re:And... it's gone by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      The song you referred to (which actually had lyrics, unlike the TV theme) was from the movie that they spun the TV show off of.

      And we can't strike preemptively because we don't want S. Korea's capitol to burn. If NK does strike, well, they're worse than toast, they're vaporized. I'm sure they know it, this is the same bluster that NK's been pulling since the war.

      Besides, a Democrat is in the White House. The last Democrat President to get us in a war was Kennedy, and it can be argued that Eisenhower got us into VietNam. Every war since VietNam was started under a Republican Presidency. In fact, every Republican President since Ford (who wasn't President very long) started at least one war.

      So I'm not worrying until 2016. Even then I'm not worrying, no point in worrying about the inevetable, for half a century no Republican has been at peace. You want war and the resulting defecits when we have to pay for it? Vote Republican. A vote for a Republican is a vote for war, because Republicans just can't help themselves; they're all chicken hawks.

    209. Re:And... it's gone by interval1066 · · Score: 1

      North Korea isn't weak like Iraq.

      Actually, in some ways, its weaker than Iraq. DPRK infrastructure is decades behind even Qatar. The only trains than run on a regular basis are the metros in the capitol, and a bi-weekly that runs north to Chongjin. They'd run it more but they don't have enough petrol for it. You bark a lot little doggy but I don't think you know as much as you think you do.

      --
      Python: 'And then suddenly you have a language which says "we're all stuck with whatever the whiniest coder wants".'
    210. Re:And... it's gone by kaatochacha · · Score: 3, Insightful

      You know, a country with a perfectly benevolent dictator is the ultimately perfect government, but the risk for corruption is so huge we try not be dictatorial. Same thing applies with your statement: yes, a really nice happy government controlling everything peacefully would be great. your objective should be to have the government have just enough power to do it's job, but no more. The argument should be over where that line is.

    211. Re:And... it's gone by kaatochacha · · Score: 2

      Oddly enough, the founder of planned parenthood was a big believer in Eugenics. Don't believe me? Look it up.

    212. Re:And... it's gone by AK+Marc · · Score: 1

      I agree. How can we be so stupid? Saddam had a "public" WMD program because if he was weak, he'd have a revolt. He had used WMDs to put down rebellion before, and had WMDs and a WMD program when we invaded. The WMD program was a PR program to make it look like he had or could have them, to help keep him in power. And we "found" WMDs as well. They were all inoperable and made in the USA, but they were actual and real weaponized WMDs. Is it treason if Reagan materially supported an enemy of the US when the enemy claimed to be an ally?

      If Kim Jong-Un didn't posture and such, he'd be dead and replaced by a general who thinks he has an actual chance of winning a war against South Korea. He's not as stupid or crazy as the media makes him or his father out to be. It's a job requirement. Like weekly meetings in a corporation. Weekly blustering and executions to keep your job. We are still in a war caused by us misunderstanding the job description of the person we overthrew, now we are looking to do it again. We (and the world) would be safer if we just disbanded the standing military and moved to a volunteer-for-draft system reporting to the UN. But the American Warmongers and military industrial complex wouldn't allow it.

    213. Re:And... it's gone by oddjob1244 · · Score: 1

      Any war with them with missiles would be concluded before you heard about it on Slashdot.

      Isn't this the same attitude we had about Iraq and Afghanistan? The people of NK see us as the enemy, not as the liberator from their wicked dear leader. They'll continue to fight us until every person that can shoot a gun is killed.

    214. Re:And... it's gone by AK+Marc · · Score: 1

      They aren't far off, and it only needs to be a small one to hit VLEO orbit and detonate over the US, wiping out most of the country's electronics in an EMP.

    215. Re:And... it's gone by cusco · · Score: 1

      I guess Shrub showed that Geneva Convention war crimes are nothing to be worried about any longer, so an unprovoked (a.k.a. 'pre-emptive') attack is probably in the Pentagram's war planning. I was referring to a surprise attack from Pyongyang, not DC.

      --
      "Think about how stupid the average person is. Now, realise that half of them are dumber than that." - George Carlin
    216. Re:And... it's gone by sjames · · Score: 1

      I'm primarily worried that someone will make too much of this and cause a real problem.

      I'm a bit concerned that NK has a leader foolish enough to play this game. There really isn't much of an updaide for him in this game yet he plays it anyway.

    217. Re:And... it's gone by sjames · · Score: 1

      Or greased.

    218. Re:And... it's gone by NatasRevol · · Score: 1

      "It is not 60 year old ordnance"

      Why would you assume that? This is NK. They can't keep the lights on much less manage & update ordnance.

      --
      There are two types of people in the world: Those who crave closure
    219. Re:And... it's gone by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      There's always going to be the extreme libertarian view that Government should be abolished and everyone should fend for themselves

      But not anywhere in the post that you replied to.

      Strawman arguments are lies.

    220. Re:And... it's gone by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Except that if you'd done more reading besides morons parroting morons you'd know that hardly any of that artillery can even reach the far northern suburbs of Seoul under ideal conditions. There's a few important border towns that will be hit, but losses in the capital will at worst be a few thousand people in places that can only be called Seoul in the most generous of contexts.

      It's damn near 40 miles from the DPRK side of the DMZ to the outskirts of Seoul. Good luck finding a gun that can reliably shoot that far after 50 years a disuse.

    221. Re:And... it's gone by Archangel+Michael · · Score: 2, Insightful

      If you don't understand the libertarian point of view, then please do not parrot the left wing "people are going to die, grandma is going to eat dog food, do it for the children" scare tactics. I don't buy it.

      Specifically, on Health Care issues, I don't have a problem providing IMMEDIATE life saving help to people, free of charge. In fact, we had that. I am not opposed to helping out a kid who is dying of cancer, get help.

      What I am opposed is Government telling me, or anyone else, that I have to pay for Paul to become Pauline because S/he is a prisoner and that is "basic human right". I am opposed to the guy who eats nothing but McD's and being 300 lbs overweight getting a triple bypass on my dime. I'm opposed to smoking being considered "Pre-existing condition". Sorry, I'm not heartless, I'm just realistic that "free" isn't really "free". You like 32 Soda bans in New York City? I don't, even if it is for the good of everyone. We don't need a fucking Nanny State.

      ObamaCare was not marketed as a first step, it was marketed as the "fix it all solution". As a first step(towards what??) , it would never have passed. If you want Universal Care, move to France or wherever, you are free to leave. I don't want it here, I've seen what it really means and it is just as ugly(possibly worse), but with a bit a "feel goodism" added in.

      The basic premise of "universal health care" is flawed and will break down. The only reason it has any resemblance of working now, is because the US still leads the world in medical innovation. Take the US out of the equation, and all medical advancements come to a snails pace. Of course, you'll reject this notion.

      Meanwhile Europe is going broke, along with the rest of the world (except China and Russia), under the weight of Socialistic market controls. And don't bother comparing small Scandinavian countries with monolithic culture, who's population isn't that of New York City, to the whole of the US of A, which is the size of all of Europe (population, area ....), and has varied cultures from Boston to Georgia, to Texas to California to Washington.

      Some people don't grasp the fact that One Size doesn't fit all.

      Of course, feel free to keep promoting systems that are breaking down.

      --
      Agent K: A *person* is smart. People are dumb, stupid, panicky animals, and you know it.
    222. Re:And... it's gone by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Nor is anyone else. And that's why NK still exists instead of a nice, peaceful little crater.

      That and the whole weird "China's pawn" situation.

    223. Re:And... it's gone by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      no they didn't. The abandoned Stalinist style of communism.
      This way they can be communist but not have actually caring about the long term of you populace.

      Did you just say that Stalinism was the caring-for-the-populace brand of communism? Do you know who Stalin was?

    224. Re:And... it's gone by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      >Meanwhile Europe is going broke,

      Wrong. Germany, with a highly-socialized society (including medical care) is doing just fine; it provides a perfect example of how providing health care can be done without screwing doctors, patients, business, or the society in general.

    225. Re:And... it's gone by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      It is utterly regrettable that tactical nuclear weapons exist for just that purpose.
      The thought of setting off a tac nuke to shut down an NK invasion force that close to China is deeply unsettling.....how would we respond if someone set off a tac nuke in Cuba or Mexico, right over our border?

    226. Re:And... it's gone by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      First rule of firearms... Don't point a gun at someone unless you intend to use it.

      Find the hole this guy is going to be hiding in and put a nuke in it... period.

    227. Re:And... it's gone by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Slashdot is, unfortunately, saturated with a lot of very left-leaning types that can't even handle a joke - much less a different point of view. Much easier for them to simply mod things down as troll or flamebait than have a real discussion.

    228. Re:And... it's gone by BitZtream · · Score: 1

      No, but not all nukes are the same size. Some are less dirty than others. Most importantly ... 'fall out' doesn't effect the world anything like you've seen on TV or read on the Internet/seen in Fallout the game.

      --
      Persistent Volume manager for Kubernetes - https://github.com/dwimsey/openshift-pvmanager
    229. Re:And... it's gone by KiloByte · · Score: 1

      I'm not aware of any close ally who's threatening to nuke anyone. If I read your allegations right, then Israel doesn't even admit having nuclear weapons, much less threatening anyone with it.

      --
      The creatures outside looked from Alt-Right to Antifa; but already it was impossible to say which was which.
    230. Re:And... it's gone by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Does South Africa have ICBMs?

      We cannot confirm nor deny this allegation.

    231. Re:And... it's gone by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I'm hoping some N Korean patriot high up in the military or political structure overcomes his training/indoctrination and greets Kim with a pocketful of C4...

    232. Re: And... it's gone by Flea+of+Pain · · Score: 1

      Good call. At least with nuclear war I won't have to deal with DRM anymore.

      --
      Do not argue with an idiot. He will drag you down to his level and beat you with experience.
    233. Re:And... it's gone by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      >Cruise misslies are not nukes

      Wrong again: the Air Launched Cruise Missile (ALCM - pronounced AL-KIM) has been nuclear capable for decades.

      https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/AGM-86_ALCM

    234. Re:And... it's gone by BitZtream · · Score: 2

      Do you know why we think N. Korea has WMD? Because they are telling us they do to scare Seoul and for posturing in general.

      Do you know why we thought Iraqi had WMDs? BECAUSE THEY WERE TELLING US THEY DID TO SCARE IRAN AND POLITICAL POSTURING.

      While you might think WMD in Iraq was a Bush excuse to go in, the truth of the matter is that the same kind of shit Kim is pulling was done by Saddam before we went in as well. If you weren't so concerned with your politics you'd know this, hell there is video documentation of Saddam talking about his WMDs on broadcast television as well as other 'intentionally leaked' tapes so he could try and avoid having Iran run over his ass. The end result is that it kept Iran out, but we called his bluff.

      --
      Persistent Volume manager for Kubernetes - https://github.com/dwimsey/openshift-pvmanager
    235. Re:And... it's gone by phantomfive · · Score: 1

      I prefer to mock your ignorance. Fool.

      --
      "First they came for the slanderers and i said nothing."
    236. Re:And... it's gone by MugenEJ8 · · Score: 1

      Naw... There's Nodongs to be errected in the first place!

    237. Re:And... it's gone by BitZtream · · Score: 1

      Uhm, just for reference. Saddam was intentionally misleading THE WORLD into thinking he had WMDs to avoid having Iran invade and wipe him out. Unfortunately, the US did it instead, so he was screwed either way.

      The point however is that at no point to Iraq claim not to have WMDs. They were in fact bragging about having them on their own televisions statements and intentionally 'leaking' videos of 'secret meetings' where he would talk about the various weapons they had ... just so Iran would think they had them.

      You can argue for/against invading them all day long and thats another story, but your utterly and completely ignorant of the actual WMD situation in Iraq before the war.

      Let me give you this really important hint. Fox news isn't the only one thats full of shit.

      --
      Persistent Volume manager for Kubernetes - https://github.com/dwimsey/openshift-pvmanager
    238. Re:And... it's gone by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I would love to see the slingshot capable of hucking a junk missile across international borders. Pure awesome.

    239. Re:And... it's gone by Deekin_Scalesinger · · Score: 1

      Hey now - the US has a desert! :)

      --
      "As the intrepid kobold companion continues his journey, he begins to wonder... if priests raises dead, why anybody die?
    240. Re:And... it's gone by Deekin_Scalesinger · · Score: 1

      and would be a nifty trick for them to leapfrog to polar flights since they haven't had smashing success with their rocket program thus far.

      --
      "As the intrepid kobold companion continues his journey, he begins to wonder... if priests raises dead, why anybody die?
    241. Re:And... it's gone by BitZtream · · Score: 1

      Just because they call Kim Jong Un 'Great Leader' or whatever doesn't mean that the ones who can actually carry out military orders are also his age and as irrational.

      And he's no longer in his 20's, but his 30's.

      And they've not YET fired a shot, they have in recent years actually fired artillery shells, hit South Korean soil and killed South Koreans.

      --
      Persistent Volume manager for Kubernetes - https://github.com/dwimsey/openshift-pvmanager
    242. Re:And... it's gone by BitZtream · · Score: 1

      sigh

      EMP's don't "wipe out" electronics.

      They disrupt the flow of electricity in active circuits. You'll have to reboot your phone, and the tower will need to as well. Your data will still be there just like it was before.

      This isn't the matrix or some other hollywood movie. EMPs are disruptive but not tragic unless you happen to be in say one of the newer aircraft that are 100% fly by wire or no chance of manual control. Your car probably won't even stop running if you're in motion and its builtin resets kick in fast enough.

      --
      Persistent Volume manager for Kubernetes - https://github.com/dwimsey/openshift-pvmanager
    243. Re:And... it's gone by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      The official statement from Mr Obama's administration maintained the hard-hitting rhetoric, telling "all civilian institutions and enterprises and civilians including foreign tourists" in North Korea to "take measures for shelter and evacuation". It added: "The situation on the Korean Peninsula is inching close to a thermonuclear war due to the evermore undisguised hostile actions of the North Korean regime."

      That feeling when you swap the statements of two governments heading for war with only minimum adjustments, and they sound plausible in the mouths of both...

    244. Re:And... it's gone by pspahn · · Score: 2

      For my part, I've always liked the idea of "rice-bombing"

      Two phases... phase one, release a statement that "rice-bombing" will occur and to prepare the boiling water because food is coming... Then, just bomb the shit out of the authorities who come to confiscate the food.

      Phase two... the actual "rice-bombing".

      --
      Someone flopped a steamer in the gene pool.
    245. Re:And... it's gone by evilviper · · Score: 1

      Does having "our closest ally" constantly threaten to nuke Iran count?

      Israel hasn't ever admitted to having nukes, so it's pretty hard to claim they've threatened to use them.

      In addition, it's quite different, since Iran started the threats, repeatedly talking about wiping Israel off the map (no, it wasn't just one mistranslation, so stfu you ill-informed morons).

      --
      Slashdot gets worse every day... Pipedot: News for nerds, without the corporate slant
    246. Re:And... it's gone by Ksevio · · Score: 2

      Immediate life saving help costs a whole lot more than preventative health care. It's the unfunded emergency care that makes health care cost so much for the paying customers - they've got to recoup that money from somewhere. Seems a bit contradictory that eating a lot is a pre-existing condition, but smoking a lot is not.

      I'm sure you're a healthy person that rejects health insurance, but some day you're going to be sick and want the help from insurance. Health insurance only works if you have it all the time, not just when you're sick. Pretty much everyone is going to need serious medical care at some point, so it's logical that they should get it now.

      The socialist countries (even the ones with crippling austerity measures) survive with their health care and are MUCH healthier than Americans.

      Do you really think the old system with tens of millions of people without access to health care was the BEST one? Been a bit short on other ideas...

    247. Re:And... it's gone by Borg453b · · Score: 4, Insightful

      Agreed.

      "We don't need a fucking Nanny State. ObamaCare was not marketed as a first step, it was marketed as the "fix it all solution". As a first step(towards what??) , it would never have passed. If you want Universal Care, move to France or wherever, you are free to leave. I don't want it here, I've seen what it really means and it is just as ugly(possibly worse), but with a bit a "feel goodism" added in."

      Personally I tire of hearing the "nanny state" rhetoric and the oh-so-democratic 'my-way-or-the-high-way' rant. I doubt neither an ultra-libertarian or a completely centralized system will lead society anywhere you'd like to live - but when the outset is overly polarized, you can only ever see the extremes. Balance people.

      --

      - Mad, ingenous - they've both left you puzzled -
    248. Re:And... it's gone by sosume · · Score: 1

      You are assuming that the US military does not have stealth missiles.

    249. Re:And... it's gone by kermidge · · Score: 1

      well, looking at a map, and the relevant missile sites as best I can puzzle out from recent news re which ones we're monitoring, I gather most of 'em are on NK's east coast; historically they've aimed their stuff east or south-east, out to sea. For one of them to hit, say, Seoul, it'd have to do one hell of a u-turn. One wonders if the missiles have destruct packages. I'd expect them to, it's basic self-protection.

      Think is, they haven't issued any warnings to ships or aircraft (I fergit the acronyms, something like NOTAMS) as they normally do. So, either they're still huffing and puffing, or they're gonna launch a few for 'exercise' and run the risk of hitting the stray freighter or fishing boat. That could get... interesting. Still, not much happened after they shelled an island or sunk that destroyer and killing 46 crew (if memory serves they never admitted the latter).

      Interesting times and all. What I find at least as disturbing as anything else so far is the level and kind of bullshit rhetoric coming out of US media. One can almost imagine an off-stage conductor waving his baton. Or maybe I just need more sleep.

    250. Re:And... it's gone by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      You are a moron. They don;t need any missile, most of Seoul is under the range of the artillery units permanently deployed in the border. If they decide to launch a massive attack, Seoul will be either leveled or heavily damaged based on the time the artillery will remain active.

      And don;t be delusional, the only way to stop conventional artillery is to destroy the launch positions, once the shells are in the air they can't be stopped.

    251. Re:And... it's gone by sosume · · Score: 2

      Actually, they are already paying massive amounts of money to keep the North calm, in food aid, bribes, joint industrial projects, and more. Most of that money ends up being spent on the military budget and maintenance of the party leaders and the royal Kim family. With them eliminated, there will be no need for such absurd military spending on both sides, so that will add up as well. Add to that the boom for the South Korean economy as they will get access to the massive unexploited resources of the North, and a massive increase in tourism, and I don't think they will suffer much more financial pain than they are already enduring.

    252. Re:And... it's gone by kermidge · · Score: 1

      It's "ordnance", not a misdemeanor charge. Sixty-year old tubes work fine if they've been maintained and not suffering fatigue. It would seem reasonable that shells are of more recent manufacture. For that matter a fair amount of all their arty is not particularly old, and they also do live-fire training with it. At least, according to bits and bobs I've read about it over time.

    253. Re:And... it's gone by kermidge · · Score: 1

      At the moment the only way NK could get a nuke into SK is by truck through one of their tunnels, or just possibly by boat. And that's assuming they have the odd extra device laying around.

    254. Re:And... it's gone by NatasRevol · · Score: 1

      Why would it be reasonable that they are of more recent manufacture?

      This is freaking NK we're talking about.

      --
      There are two types of people in the world: Those who crave closure
    255. Re:And... it's gone by Archangel+Michael · · Score: 3, Interesting

      The Spiraling costs are caused by a few different factors, of which most are not addressed by ObamaCare directly.

      1) Entitlement attitude. Everyone deserves the exact same level of care, regardless of ability to pay. Rich people do not deserve care they can pay for, and poor who cannot pay, deserve the care rich people can afford, but they themselves cannot.

      2) Insurance masking the cost of care.

      3) Disparate pricing models based on who is paying.

      4) Insurance middleman costs

      5) Malpractice Lawsuits (jury awards)

      None of those are fixed in ObamaCare. In Fact, ObamaCare makes it even more of a regulatory nightmare. Hell to apply for insurance at one of the Insurance Exchanges requires 60+ pages of paperwork by the IRS. Tell me, how does that make healthcare more affordable?

      And in spite of your protestations that everything is going honky dory, it isn't

      http://www.dpmafoundation.org/physician-attitudes-on-medicine.html
      http://news.heartland.org/newspaper-article/survey-doctors-dropping-out-medicare
      http://sanfrancisco.cbslocal.com/2013/03/28/california-health-care-costs-to-rise-under-affordable-care-act/
      http://www.nytimes.com/2013/01/06/business/despite-new-health-law-some-see-sharp-rise-in-premiums.html?pagewanted=all&_r=0
      http://www.bloomberg.com/news/2013-04-10/obama-doubles-estimate-to-4-billion-for-health-exchanges.html

      --
      Agent K: A *person* is smart. People are dumb, stupid, panicky animals, and you know it.
    256. Re:And... it's gone by AK+Marc · · Score: 1

      EMP's don't "wipe out" electronics.

      They disrupt the flow of electricity in active circuits. You'll have to reboot your phone, and the tower will need to as well. Your data will still be there just like it was before.

      The EMP pushes electrons in a wave, they go the wrong way through chips, jump traces, burn out capacitors, and *do* fry electronics. A "weak" one (like a solar flare) is more likely to cause bit errors in CPUs and RAM causing lockups and such in systems not resilient, but a stronger EMP can "wipe out" electronics.

    257. Re:And... it's gone by painandgreed · · Score: 1

      They shut down a facility that was pumping tens of millions of dollars directly into their coffers.

      That's the thing about this that makes the least amount of sense to me. I mean, kicking out the South Korean managers is just fine, but why not promote the most competent North Koreans to take their place and keep the factory operating?

      They've shut it down before. No reason to think that it is once again not just a scheme to put pressure on the SK government since their business men are losing even more millions also.

    258. Re:And... it's gone by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Because this hurts the SK economy too. True, it's a drop in the bucket for SK and it hurts NK's more, but he doesn't have much to bargain with.

      And I might be mistaken, but haven't they shut this facility down before?

    259. Re:And... it's gone by painandgreed · · Score: 1

      Yes, NK could be flattened with conventional missiles. But they have enough artillery pieces lined up on the border (14,000, IIRC), with ammunition, to send up to half a million shells an hour into Seoul for a day or so. Before they were incapacitated, they could kill maybe ten million people is South Korea. Yes, it would be pointless slaughter, pure vindictiveness. But I am not prepared to say they wouldn't do it.

      Yes, but SK also has lots of artillery bought with a larger military budget than NK. These things have state of the art anti-artillery radar and will track and return fire on incoming shells. This happened when their island was attacked a few years back. At a range of 12 miles they were able to fire back and score hits they say would have knocked out the NK artillery if they hadn't been loaded with practice rounds (their target practice into the sea being the excuse NK used to attack). The start of any war will be dueling artillery and even if it wasn't, Seoul has shelters for those people too once things start. Not to say there won't be damage but hardly ten million people. Any war started will begin the quick destruction of NK's defenses and offences.

    260. Re:And... it's gone by Archangel+Michael · · Score: 0

      I don't want to live in France. My French relatives don't really want to live in France, and would love to move to America.

      What I don't understand, is people who don't like what America is, and has, coming here, and complaining about how awful it is (Linus Torvalds for example). You love your country, stay there. I love my country and don't want it to be like Europe.

      OR, as my mom used to say, "If everyone else was jumping off a cliff, why do you want to join them". Don't get me wrong, there are things that I don't like about my country, namely the nanny state incremental-ism. I don't want, or need people telling me how to live my life. I treat others the same way I expect to be treated.

      In other words, don't tell me I can't have a 64oz BigGulp. I don't understand people who allow the government to tell them how to live, when they wouldn't let me do the same thing. Be very careful about telling others how to live, because you have given them the right to tell you how to live, and you just might not like it.

      --
      Agent K: A *person* is smart. People are dumb, stupid, panicky animals, and you know it.
    261. Re:And... it's gone by Midnight_Falcon · · Score: 1
      Where do you get this information from? I'm sorry but this is patently, incorrect.

      The major sources of healthcare expenditures spiraling are, in objective reality:

      1) Baby boomers retiring, causing a demographic shift toward an older population with less of a younger population to support it.
      2) Cost of care in a clinical setting -- hospitalizations, etc rather than care being delivered at the home. The home has become the preferred venue for care under cost reduction models.
      3) Uninsured individuals don't receive inexpensive preventative care and end up being hospitalizations when symptoms become critical -- and those end up being paid by Medicaid, medicare, or by YOU when you go to the hospital if the bill is unpaid and collections cannot recover the money owed.

      To respond to the links you sent -- yes, health costs will increase in the short-term, but under the shared savings model, all entities have an incentive to bring them down and the plan is to lower the expense.

      Everything isn't perfect with the Affordable Care Act, and I'm not trying to pretend it is. But I think in order to fit your political leanings, you misinterpret the reality of the situation and go with judgments that fit your predetermined conclusion. Everyone is entitled to their own opinion -- but not their own facts.

    262. Re:And... it's gone by Cederic · · Score: 1

      I'm confused. You seem to think that a nuclear capable nation isn't able to manufacturer simple explosives and steel tubes from which to shoot them?

    263. Re:And... it's gone by techno-vampire · · Score: 1

      As a point of reference, a battleship's 16" main battery had a max range of just over 28.66 statute miles. (That's 25 nautical miles, btw.) Unless they've built something like the Paris Gun, Seoul is outside of their range. Still, they could do massive damage to the troops defending the border.

      --
      Good, inexpensive web hosting
    264. Re:And... it's gone by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I think NK still claims they must have hit a mine left over from the '50s.

      There was an investigation that concluded that it was the N Koreans though

      http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/ROKS_Cheonan_sinking#Joint_Civilian-Military_Investigation_Group_.28JIG.29_report

      And towards the end of that wiki page

      A member of the North Korean cabinet who defected to the south in 2011, said on 7 December 2012 that the crew of the North Korean submarine which sank Cheonan had been honored by the North Korean military and government. The defector, known by the alias "Ahn Cheol-nam", stated that the captain, co-captain, engineer, and boatswain of the mini-sub which sank the Cheonan had been awarded "Hero of the DPRK" in October 2010

    265. Re:And... it's gone by MacOSXHead · · Score: 2

      I think maybe you should talk to some doctors. My brother is a interventional cardiologist and says that there are many doctors who are going to retire earlier due to the government control of medicine. ObamaCare is turning out to be quite a disaster in terms implementation and the regulations implementing it are only starting to be written.

      Also, as doctors are being driven out of private practice into health care corporations, more defensive medicine is being practiced (read more unnecessary tests) by these hospitals. The profits on these tests end up in the hands of MBAs instead of MDs.

      Your example of a cardiologist with a 2x "death rate" is a bad example. Rating systems like the one you tout cannot take into account that cardiologists that worry about these rating systems shy away from taking patients who are really sick and by definition are more likely to die. This happens all the time in interventional cardiology where a patient gets shuffled off to a cardiac surgeon because the cardiologist is risk averse. You can imaging that open heart surgery is orders of magnitude more expensive than having an interventional procedure.

      Finally, health care cost are soaring because people are living longer because of all the new expensive technologies.

      "The elderly (age 65 and over) made up around 13 percent of the U.S. population in 2002, but they consumed 36 percent of total U.S. personal health care expenses. The average health care expense in 2002 was $11,089 per year for elderly people but only $3,352 per year for working-age people (ages 19-64)"

      From: http://www.ahrq.gov/research/findings/factsheets/costs/expriach/index.html

      Health care costs are a serious issue and you attacking doctors is a simplistic and faulty approach to finding solutions to this problem.

    266. Re:And... it's gone by Archangel+Michael · · Score: 1

      Libertarianism is fairly definable and isn't really nearly what idiots leftwingers make it out to be. It isn't heartless, it just realizes that the state forcing people to do things is the very definition of tyranny. Libertarianism protects those people at the fringes better than one size fits all Leftwing, because it clearly defines WHY state power should be limited. Namely the appetite of the state is unlimited.

      In one of the posts in this thread, the left wing guy says "It was the first step" (ObamaCare), of course it is. But it was NEVER sold to the public that way, and it was NEVER explained that way by Nancy Pelosi and Harry Reid, and it was never voted on that way. BUT I knew what it was the whole time, and if people had to vote on it as these people WANT it to be, it would never have happened. Tyranny never arrives at once, it is incremental because it is deceitful.

      The same is being done with the Gun debate. But the left wing types like Diane "legal to hunt humans" Feinstein aren't going for the repeal of the 2nd Amendment, because they know that the public won't go for it. Instead, they are trying to repeal it piecemeal. That is deceptive and deception is evil, even if the intentions are good.

      As a Libertarian, I see through the lies of the tyranny, and realize what they are. Leftwingers think that their version of tyranny is somehow better because ... well it is their version. Don't get me wrong, right wingers are the same way. Unfortunately we don't have media explaining why tyranny is wrong, be it left or right wing versions (except perhaps John Stossel)

      I'm dancing, and you think I'm insane because you can't hear the music.

      --
      Agent K: A *person* is smart. People are dumb, stupid, panicky animals, and you know it.
    267. Re: And... it's gone by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      ...Generally acting like assholes like Americans are want to do?

      wont, not want...

      You're the moron.

    268. Re:And... it's gone by Bing+Tsher+E · · Score: 1

      in favor of millions of people dying

      Are you that much of a moron that you think what political position you support is going to prevent you from dying?

      EVERYBODY gets to die.

    269. Re:And... it's gone by habig · · Score: 1

      Do you know why we think N. Korea has WMD?

      Because we've watched them blow up nukes on seismographs?

      Not that this wasn't posturing too: but it's pretty cut and dried, unlike Iraq where everyone simply figured there was no way they didn't have them.

    270. Re:And... it's gone by Archangel+Michael · · Score: 1

      Immediate life saving does cost more, and I would put limitations on it. People doing stupid stuff and getting hurt should pay for their injuries. Fat people eating at McD's should pay for their heart attack, and not get triple bypass. The guy smoking two packs a day should pay for his cancer treatment, or not get it. I shouldn't pay for these guys' choices.

      Without incentive, there is no reform. ObamaCare doesn't offer ANY incentives, nor can it. All it does do is scare people into paying more for less. Which is why the IRS is involved. At some point, you're going to realize that there aren't enough people working and paying taxes to make this shit work, not the way Nancy and Harry figured it out (behind closed doors).

      I'm sorry, I don't trust politicians behind closed doors for a reason. Because it looks exactly like this. Screwed up law, we can't unwind and forever trying to "fix" it, when it is broken by design. I'd rather do nothing. Just because it is broken doesn't mean we can fix it.

      --
      Agent K: A *person* is smart. People are dumb, stupid, panicky animals, and you know it.
    271. Re: And... it's gone by AlecC · · Score: 1

      All the money goes to the military. Lights? Stuff them. Guns? Yeah!

      --
      Consciousness is an illusion caused by an excess of self consciousness.
    272. Re:And... it's gone by Midnight_Falcon · · Score: 2
      Sigh. I think you vastly misinterpreted my post -- I'm not attacking doctors. I'm just saying that the present system is stacked in favor of doctors who know how to work the system -- and you give the example of being selective and risk averse as to what patients they take. But I also get to look at (confidential) healthcare data -- and I see that there are definitely a few "bad apples" out there with inexplicably bad patient outcomes etc.

      What I'm attacking is the faulty logic of the comment I responded to, which seems to a libertarian-minded tirade stating we need to eliminate the Affordable Care Act, condescendingly referred to as "ObamaCare."

      You can see that in another post (reply) on this I have identified the demographic transition of older people, among other reasons, as being the chief factor for health care costs increases. Not the behavior of doctors..

      The example I gave about the cardiologist is an oversimplification -- there's a lot more factors that go into a real risk score (like Johns Hopkins ACG). And these measures are not perfect and we know they cannot be trusted alone, but can give us information about broad trends etc that can be responded to at the managerial level.

      And yes, I work every day in finding a better solution to health care costs. I work in health care technology, and I am unwilling to give information that could be used to identify me on this forum, but I work on the cutting edge of reducing costs and leveraging technology to better patient outcomes. The solutions I work with have been proven to work not just in the US but other countries.

      And I talk to doctors every single day.

    273. Re:And... it's gone by Archangel+Michael · · Score: 1

      Your 1) pairs with 1) quite nicely, thanks
      Your 2) pairs with 2) too, as well as 3) and 4)
      Your 3) is paired with 1). But it can be fixed by making them responsible for choices they make. Voucher system would work wonders giving people the ability to choose (choice, you left wingers love that word) what options they need for themselves.

      IF we as a society want to provide heathcare to people, we MUST (have to) provide an incentive to them to be proactive in their healthcare choices. It won't and cannot work otherwise. The state cannot mandate personal choice, and that is where the deficiencies come in.

      1) In otherwords, we cannot afford the promises we made to previous generations. Imagine that, politicians promising things that they cannot fulfill. AND you think doubling down on politician promises is going to be better? You're a fool.

      2) Cost of care can be fixed by allowing RNs to be able to treat colds and flu symptoms (etc). Take the strain off where the strain is, by allowing alternate methods of care. Best care I get is from my Nurse Practitioner, not my primary care physician. That model works, but we don't use it more because it bucks the medical establishment.

      3) I avoid hospitals, because exactly that reason. My care is less expensive because I look for alternate (non-hospital) locations for more of my care. In fact, many hospitals are building new facilities apart from the "Emergency" center. However, when I did need to go to the emergency room last year, my three hour stay cost my insurance 15,000 USD. It might have been cheaper to call a doctor to my house!

      --
      Agent K: A *person* is smart. People are dumb, stupid, panicky animals, and you know it.
    274. Re:And... it's gone by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Do you know why we think N. Korea has WMD? Because they are telling us they do to scare Seoul and for posturing in general.

      Do you know why we thought Iraqi had WMDs? BECAUSE THEY WERE TELLING US THEY DID TO SCARE IRAN AND POLITICAL POSTURING.

      Uhh, N. Korea Actually test detonated one so they aren't making it up. (it's a little primitive compared to what the US has but they are not lying on this one.)

      Iraq, They did have them, we sold it to them but what we actually found was that it was all dated and expired so basically useless. (Yes it was big intelligence failure and not just on the US part, and Saddam was acting like he had them but it was just talk.)

    275. Re:And... it's gone by Archangel+Michael · · Score: 1

      Germany's Health Care system is a ticking timebomb, with a similar "baby boom" generation that is quickly aging. They are having some of the very same issues we are having here in the states. Their doomsday is just a decade or so further down the road. They are, however, already cutting benefits and increasing costs to their people, under "shared pain" plans.

      Germany's social programs are not nearly as extensive as say France's. And I admire Germany's ability to keep Europe afloat. But the fact is, Germany is in much better shape because it is almost as industrious as America is. The real success of Germany lies with how successful their economy is. I fear that they are going to be pulled under by the likes of Greece. And Greece has long been the laughing stock of laziness in Europe, it is no surprise that it is failing now.

      --
      Agent K: A *person* is smart. People are dumb, stupid, panicky animals, and you know it.
    276. Re:And... it's gone by Cederic · · Score: 2

      Do you know why we think N. Korea has WMD? Because they are telling us they do to scare Seoul and for posturing in general.

      ..and there was me thinking it was something to do with their nuclear weapon tests.

    277. Re:And... it's gone by CaptainLard · · Score: 1

      Are you saying that the US does not have the coordinates of all major cities of its enemies programmed in to its nuclear war-heads?

      If I read GP's post correctly I believe he actually said

      I have no idea if these are accurately translated.

      Hope that clears it up. Regarding your second wild conjecture...

      I somehow doubt that translation is accurate

      Thermonuclear weapons landing on NK cities would indeed qualify as a thermonuclear war on the korean peninsula. I'll grant you that the US has a ton of baggage but I don't get how you can keep being so apologetic to the NK regime. Since you asked (ha I kill me), my take on the situation is that we got a 30 year old kid trying to out-blowhard all of the blowhards at the top of NK's military so no one tries to make a power play on him. Thats why the usual saber rattling (designed to get aid money for their hopelessly decrepit country) started to spiral out of control. Add in the sanctions preventing luxury goods being shipped to his palaces and he is backed in a corner and has no choice but to get even crazier.

    278. Re: And... it's gone by cheater512 · · Score: 1

      No but the cold war wasn't that long ago.

    279. Re:And... it's gone by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      The sanctions that have North Korea so angry at this time were for things like Ferrarris. Nobody with any authority there cares about "unifying Korea" and everyone who believes they do should take an IQ test. They, the tiny handful of powerful people who actually matter in the NK system, want to prosper personally and have been doing so for some time. Whenever they want something new, or need to defend the things they have, that's when the talk of "unifying Korea" starts again.

    280. Re: And... it's gone by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      "People doing stupid stuff and getting hurt should pay for their injuries."

      Who decides what is stupid? The government? I think healthcare either needs to be free for everyone, or not free for anyone. As soon as you start deciding who gets what and when, you've just become the new tyrant.

    281. Re:And... it's gone by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Now I'm not saying the US has the best government, but it's not a bad one (despite some bad things it does)
       
      It may not yet be a bad one, but it is doing everything it can to be one as soon as possible.

    282. Re:And... it's gone by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      They can't cross the DMZ on foot anymore than one of the armies in WW1 could have "just charged." They *must* eliminate southern hard points, anti-vehicle batteries and artillery to get anywhere, but with modern interception versus cold-war munitions they won't get very far at it. The only people North Korea can massacre are North Koreans.

    283. Re:And... it's gone by domatic · · Score: 1

      North Korea is a treasure house of natural resources if they were developed correctly:

      http://thediplomat.com/2012/08/30/north-koreas-six-trillion-dollar-question/

    284. Re: And... it's gone by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Be careful with commenting on stuff you don't know about. France and europe, for example. The USA is a public toilet. France is like one of those mansions you see, out of your reach and for the privileged.

    285. Re:And... it's gone by dywolf · · Score: 1

      again.
      you, like almost everyone here on /., know nothing about libertarian views and constantly put false words in their mouths.
      you are a moron spouting nothing but bullshit.
      and its particularly low quality bullshit.
      and naturally, again being typical /. bullshit, gets modded insightful.

      --
      The guy who said the election was rigged won the presidency with the second-most votes.
    286. Re:And... it's gone by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      and have always maintained that their nuclear capability is for defence.
       
      What the hell do you think they're going to say!?!?

    287. Re: And... it's gone by dywolf · · Score: 1

      Perspective AC. Perspective. You need some.
      there is big vast gulf of a difference between copyright and threatening nuclear war.

      --
      The guy who said the election was rigged won the presidency with the second-most votes.
    288. Re:And... it's gone by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      The return fire would be a joint South Korean / US operation. It would be immediate and it would not miss. Much of the first volley of shells would fall victim to CRAM http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Counter-RAM but there would be some losses. But the situation for NK artillery batteries is this: if you fire first, the return fire will be in flight before your rounds impact. If you aimed at the enemy's artillery you may eliminate them. You will be eliminated.

      This leaves the ground campaign. Our typical philosophy would mean that once we're engaged, we'd prove our strength immediately to produce the maximum probability of an early surrender. Armored columns approaching the DMZ could be eliminated early using the CBU-97 sensor fuzed weapon http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/CBU-97_Sensor_Fuzed_Weapon and mopped up by ground-attack munitions fielded by Raptors and Hornets. If the North contests the air, it won't be for long as they most likely do not possess an aircraft or weapon system capable of locating a Raptor, let alone actually trying to fire on it. And don't forget that B-2 saber rattling - that was to demonstrate what a REAL nuclear state can do.

      Hear that? Nuclear. Now think about deterrents. Kim moves one armor column, we wipe it off the face of the earth in a heartbeat, that's half a kilocasualty. He doesn't move another armor column because he'd just lose it, he moves his armor in smaller battle groups. The first wave gets picked off trying to sneak through the mountains 'cause they've got radar and IR signatures like an oil-rig fire. Another half a kilocasualty, and Kim stops advancing his armor, holding it in reserve because without a major political victory he may never be able to replace lost armor units. He's not pushing the DMZ without his armor assets for the same reason - his soldiers will simply die and he won't gain anything. This is not a 1-2 million slaughterfest. It's less lethal than a really hot summer.

    289. Re:And... it's gone by rmdashrf · · Score: 1

      Please do some back ground checks with someone who really has had some experience living in Europe, before you start blurting out nonsense.

      Europe is not going broke under the weight of Socialistic market controls. It's going broke because in the last 15-20 years everything that was governed by 'socialistic market controls' has been privatised, after which prices of those services started soaring and the actual service received dropped significantly.

      Due to privatisation, instead of just going to the GP and getting a prescription, patients now go to the GP, who tells them to get a some further tests with a specialist in the hospital, who in turn does some additional tests 'just to be sure', then another appointment at the GP later that person gets the same prescription. After privatisation, money is made by every additional bit of work someone does, resulting in lots of unnecessary steps. Also because hospitals are essentially competing with one another, every hospital now needs that multi-million CAT scanner that sits idle for 80% of the time. Previously if a test like that was required and no profit was made, a patient would be sent to a different hospital, Now patients pay for expensive equipment that sits idle most of the time.

      Same with the railroads; railroads are privatised after which the companies that run them are completely uninterested in actually maintaining the existing infrastructure, in turn resulting in degraded public transport. This goes on until the infrastructure is really broken and the private company has completely sucked dry the investment done by all previous generations of citizens, after which the government can buy their own infrastructure back at a premium.

      Electricity grid and telecommunications, same story.

      It's not the so-called 'Socialistic market controls' killing Europe, it's unbounded neo-liberalism and unchecked privatisation and short-sighted, short-term profits and pure greed of a relatively small group of people at the expense of generations of citizens who paid for good infrastructure with their taxes and saw their politicians squander it inside just a few short years.

      --
      Nihil in publicum sputa.
    290. Re:And... it's gone by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      The North Koreans just need to be freed from the current regime, and then left alone to fix thier own lives. They don't need handouts from the South.

    291. Re:And... it's gone by rmdashrf · · Score: 1

      Assuming that the NK top military are not religious nut cases or just outright stupid, the only reason for the sabre rattling, would be to divert attention of the general population away from internal issues and keep them in line; I would expect the levels of dissent among the NK population to be quite high.

      Does someone have any direct information on general position of the NK population of its leaders?

      --
      Nihil in publicum sputa.
    292. Re:And... it's gone by dywolf · · Score: 1

      my worry is, when everyone is being paid for by everyone else's dime, all of sudden it becomes, from one point of view, fair and even logical to dictate to other people "no you cant have that soda", "no, you need to exercise", and "uh uh no more smoking for you". since after all, we're paying for each other, why should you get to waste my money to keep your fat, smoking, disgusting ass alive ?

      and that to me is no fun. and scary.
      i like my steak. my bacon. my ice cream. my soda.
      and even though i keep myself fit, sometimes i wanna just say fuck it, and not exercise that day or week, and I do so.

      so while i dont think it would start out that way, i can see it quickly being eroded, and the restrictions (because "we're all paying for it") setting in.

      --
      The guy who said the election was rigged won the presidency with the second-most votes.
    293. Re: And... it's gone by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Ask an RIAA lawyer.

    294. Re:And... it's gone by Bing+Tsher+E · · Score: 1

      intellectual president? really? you think choom is an intellectual?

    295. Re:And... it's gone by srjh · · Score: 1

      The first "F" stands for fixed?

      My interpretation made much more sense.

    296. Re:And... it's gone by Maxwell'sSilverLART · · Score: 1

      No need for nukes with North Korea, anyway. They will easily be flattened by conventional missles. They are effectively defenceless and have a tiny infrastructure. Any war with them with missiles would be concluded before you heard about it on Slashdot.

      Certainly before the third time we heard it on Slashdot, anyway.

      --
      Moderate drunk! It's more fun that way!
    297. Re:And... it's gone by Pseudonym+Authority · · Score: 1

      Are you fucking stupid?

    298. Re:And... it's gone by bloodhawk · · Score: 1

      I don't think you have any concept of the sheer volume of artillery that is sitting on that border. It is almost at the point where they could be lobbing rocks and still cause massive damage. As for skyscrapers, please show me these fabulous designs and materials they have been constructed out of that will withstand massive volleys of high explosives.

    299. Re:And... it's gone by hairyfish · · Score: 1

      I assume you're trying to make some association between Bush jnr's pre-emptive strike that had zero evidence and a possible Obama pre-emptive strike for which there is plenty of verifiable evidence? It's not the pre-emption to blame, it's the justification (which in the NK case is clear and present). If you want to see what less govt looks like, go live in Afghanistan. I hear it's working out real well for them right now...

    300. Re:And... it's gone by hairyfish · · Score: 1

      He can say what he likes, but he has now escalated this to the action of pointing weapons at our friends. It won't be much safer for him if this continues as the US will be forced to act. This will be very interesting from a technology point of view. This time around it isn't nomads living in caves or peasants in the jungle, this is precisely the type of battle of those trillions of dollars of US Defence spending have been designed for. If it goes off it will be extremely quick and devastating for the NK. I just hope we get to see this one in HD.

    301. Re:And... it's gone by Sardaukar86 · · Score: 1

      When 35 nuclear cruise missiles fired from off-shore strike without North Korea receiving any warning, North Korea won't be able to do *ANYTHING* - they'll be gone.

      Sure, if you don't mind your international relationships following suit and going up in a series of little mushroom clouds of their own. You'll also need a sense of humour about seeing your country's flag appearing forevermore in the OED and Collins definitions of the word 'overkill'.

      --
      ..Mullah or Pope, Preacher or Poet, who was it wrote: "Give any one species too much rope and they'll fuck it up"?
    302. Re:And... it's gone by hairyfish · · Score: 1

      I'm not sure you realise how missile defence works (or doesn't as the case may be). It's 50:50 at best, not the sort of odds I'd be depending on to decide if I live or die.

    303. Re:And... it's gone by hairyfish · · Score: 1

      If these 14000 pieces are lined up and dug in on the border, doesn't that make them a pretty easy target for a couple of thousand carpet bomb sorties? The US military might not have such a shining record at guerrilla style confrontations (Iraq, Afghanistan, Vietnam etc), but in an old fashioned big army v big army fight they have precisely the right arsenal to make very short work of you.

    304. Re:And... it's gone by thesupraman · · Score: 1

      Except their range is... not quite enough to get to Seoul.. northern most suburbs wont be happy though.
      And the repercussions would be somewhat complete.

      You really think the leaders (and by which I mainly mean the military, not the puppet) want to lose their nice comfortable positions?

    305. Re:And... it's gone by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Intelligence reports suggest that they can fit a nuclear warhead on any kind of missile with decent range.

      FTFY.

    306. Re:And... it's gone by AK+Marc · · Score: 1

      More like "fucked it up for you". Chinese middle class is much better off now than ever before.

    307. Re: And... it's gone by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      So copyright laws are equivalent to nuclear warfare? Hyperbole much?

      So... you're cherry-picking ONE of the points that was mentioned, comparing it to something that NK NEVER done before (yet), namely "nuclear warfare" (and, let me remind you that the US HAS dropped nuclear bombs on people before), to be able to claim that whatever was said about the US is pure hyperbole, right?

      Well... whatever it takes to prevent cognitive dissonance from reaching your brain...

    308. Re:And... it's gone by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Showing to the world, that if you're not pals with the US, you either get nukes (Iran, North Korea), or you get invaded (Iraq, Afghanistan), is not "continuing the trend" of decreasing nuclear arms.

    309. Re:And... it's gone by Paradise+Pete · · Score: 1

      How much of it would blow up upon launch, destroying artillery on the NK side rather than buildings on the SK side?

      It doesn't have to balance to be a threat and a deterrent. It doesn't even have to be close. A 90-10 ratio would suit the Li'l Dictator just fine.

    310. Re:And... it's gone by berashith · · Score: 1

      this would be devastating for the people of NK, but possibly not so much for the leadership. The leaders are already starving the population, and there is little electricity for the people, so they wont know if they are suffering for the war effort. Our fun weapons would make the countryside into a mudpit very quickly, but that wouldnt change things very much. That could make the war very difficult as the leaders have shown they dont care if the population suffers, and we cant make it much worse for them. The religious fervor surrounding the ruling family may take something drastic like the end of WWII to convince the people to quit the nonsense.

      At this point I dont think that pointing weapons counts. It is all rhetoric, and until something gets launched , and possibly actually detonates in a population center, then the US will not be forced to act. You dont put a hand on a petulant child until you are actually preventing harm, and words and missile launchers do neither.

    311. Re:And... it's gone by Forty+Two+Tenfold · · Score: 0

      Yes, your mother.

      --
      Upward mobility is a slippery slope - the higher you climb the more you show your ass.
    312. Re:And... it's gone by Luckyo · · Score: 1

      That's okay. When there's Less Government, Halliburton and friend will have even more chokehold on power structures.

      There's never a true power vacuum in human society. When it starts to form, something proceeds to fill the void.

    313. Re:And... it's gone by Luckyo · · Score: 1

      Considering the history of our propaganda machine, translation accuracy is highly likely to be low and intentionally misleading. We've seen this particular trick many, MANY times in the past.

    314. Re: And... it's gone by Luckyo · · Score: 1

      There is only one country in the world that has used nuclear warfare. It's the same country that is pushing current drakonian intellectual suppression regime known as copyright laws.

      So double whammy.

    315. Re:And... it's gone by Luckyo · · Score: 1

      This is one of the biggest problems with totalitarianism. It generally needs to actively suppress the most talented and gifted individuals to remain in power. This dramatically reduces the potential pool of talented individuals needed for advanced roles in society. Essentially you become limited to the pool of those who choose to become loyal in exchange for joining the ruling clique and gain a lot of power outside their role, and such power tends to quickly and effectively corrupt people.

      USSR skirted around this societal limitation by instituting close cities inhabited mostly by gifted people who were given significantly greater degree of freedom in both thinking and acting then general population. By necessity, these people were physically separated from general population, these cities were essentially closed fenced and guarded fortresses with much higher standard of living and were absent on official maps. They were also closely watched even while being allowed greater freedom, and were motivated by a polished combination of wealth, freedom and fear of losing both of these. It was basically a slightly different implementation of modern USA, built on slightly different ideological basis but that used largely the same crowd control tools within those confined islands inside the country that functioned on a completely different social and political system.

      In a way, it was an admission that Western system of motivators is very effective at fostering the gifted portion of the populace.

      However North Korea lacks the population numbers to do the same thing.

    316. Re:And... it's gone by gottabeme · · Score: 1

      Some doctors might kick and scream, but their profession has been profiting handsomely from the existing system, and they know how to work it to maximize their income.

      s/doctors/insurance companies/; s/profession/industry/

      That all doctors are comfortably rich is a myth. Talk to more doctors.

      --
      "Those who consume the bulk of goods are those who make them. We must never forget this secret of our prosperity."
    317. Re:And... it's gone by gottabeme · · Score: 1

      I work on the cutting edge of reducing costs and leveraging technology to better patient outcomes.

      Adam Savage: "Well THERE'S your problem!"

      Technology is not the solution to lowering costs or improving patient care. Neither is "leveraging" anything else. In fact, the problems we are facing in our healthcare systems now are partly due to technology and "leveraging" things. The very fact that you use such a corporate buzzword shows how out of touch you are with doctors.

      --
      "Those who consume the bulk of goods are those who make them. We must never forget this secret of our prosperity."
    318. Re:And... it's gone by gottabeme · · Score: 1

      I think you vastly overestimate the ease and speed with which 14,000 targets can be destroyed.

      You can't just drop a few CBUs from 20,000 feet and take out a few hundred artillery pieces at one time. You're talking about at least several weeks of targeted (ha) effort.

      --
      "Those who consume the bulk of goods are those who make them. We must never forget this secret of our prosperity."
    319. Re:And... it's gone by cusco · · Score: 1

      Yep, the Pentagon war gamers did so well in Iraq that eight years later we retreated with our tails between our hindquarters, leaving the religious fanatics and criminals in charge of a country that now hates us, and with hundreds of thousands of families who want revenge. And in Afghanistan we're still unable to control even the outer suburbs of Kabul, much less the countryside, in spite of a decade of bombs, tortures, massacres, murders, psy-ops, bribes, and propaganda.

      --
      "Think about how stupid the average person is. Now, realise that half of them are dumber than that." - George Carlin
    320. Re:And... it's gone by rubycodez · · Score: 1

      No relation to anything the Shrub did; the North has already committed acts of war against our ally South Korea, and moreover declared war on the USA. Attack is therefore completely justifiable and would do the world a favor.

    321. Re:And... it's gone by farble1670 · · Score: 1

      russian missiles pointed at our european allies? you can back and forth until you are blue in the face. each country was threatening the other. the point is that cuba was playing the nuclear game just like everyone else.

    322. Re:And... it's gone by lgw · · Score: 1

      What I find at least as disturbing as anything else so far is the level and kind of bullshit rhetoric coming out of US media

      But still you watch it? TV news is a net negative value in your life. There is no good channel. It's all hype and nonsense, and so very little signal for all the noise. If you stop watching, you won't miss it.

      --
      Socialism: a lie told by totalitarians and believed by fools.
    323. Re:And... it's gone by flayzernax · · Score: 1

      A very bad man, but indeed, some people actually bought into his propaganda or used it to suit their own ends.

    324. Re:And... it's gone by cusco · · Score: 1

      No, they never declared war on anyone but South Korea. What they said the other day was that they were withdrawing from the armistice between Pyongyang and the United Nations (IIRC the South Korean government never agreed to the armistice in the first place, but I don't have time to check). And "acts of war"? If you don't think that provocations have been regular and ongoing, from both sides of the border, for the last half a century then you haven't been paying attention.

      --
      "Think about how stupid the average person is. Now, realise that half of them are dumber than that." - George Carlin
    325. Re:And... it's gone by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Oh, grow the fuck up. Clinton used Haliburton. Bush used Haliburton. 0 uses Haliburton. When you need that size of support, there's pretty much only one company that can do it. The other option would be to increase our military manning back to peak Cold War levels.

      Do we have a convenient epithet to go with Haliburtoners, like we do with Birthers and Truthers? Maybe just Wankers?

    326. Re:And... it's gone by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Sorry man, but what an american might call "balance" is seen as totally right-wing free-market-yea-right bullshit in the rest of the civilized world, where we can demand free (or heavily subsidized) health care from our government.

    327. Re:And... it's gone by torroid · · Score: 1

      But so is war.

    328. Re:And... it's gone by theinvisibleduck · · Score: 1

      Just because your not associated does not mean that you don't have a bias, and just because you are doesn't mean you do. You could have chosen to say "I tend to side to the left" or "I believe so strongly in the left side I always vote socialist or communist" or the opposite.

    329. Re:And... it's gone by theinvisibleduck · · Score: 1

      I agree with you, though I must say I believe that this issue comes down to a fundamental American question of is life more important than liberty or liberty more important than life. Hence the gun debates, the healthcare debates, abortion, etc. Most things we argue about fall in this category. I personally, pretty much will always side with liberty, but acknowledge that there is an important balance, when possible. You cannot enjoy liberty if your dead, and you can enjoy life without liberty.

    330. Re:And... it's gone by theinvisibleduck · · Score: 1

      This is SO true. It doesn't preclude external war, and it is the most true thing I have read all day. I would mod you up to 6 if it was possible.

    331. Re:And... it's gone by rubycodez · · Score: 1

      Fat spoiled child declared war on US and south Korea at the end of March. sorry you missed it.

    332. Re:And... it's gone by cusco · · Score: 1

      According to some translations. Apparently there's an Asian equivalent to MEMRI. Other translations are a lot more ambiguous and refer to responding to attacks. Having done some translation over the years I find that whatever the US gov't official translation is should be taken with an entire sackful of salt until someone who actually knows the language can spell out the cultural context.

      --
      "Think about how stupid the average person is. Now, realise that half of them are dumber than that." - George Carlin
    333. Re:And... it's gone by Tore+S+B · · Score: 1

      Speaking as a social democrat living in Norway, a country which (like most socialized health care systems) beats the hell out of the US and most privatized health care systems, I have to say that granting everyone "the exact same level of care, regardless of ability to pay" - is a goddamned feature, not a bug.

      Believing in market forces does not mean having to abandon belief in human dignity, for goodness' sake.

      Comprehensive health care should be just as much a fundamental human right as the comprehensive justice care afforded by the legal system.

      --
      toresbe
    334. Re: And... it's gone by griffitj · · Score: 1

      And yet here you are reading the bullshit (and adding your own).

    335. Re:And... it's gone by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      How did we change subjects from NK missile strike to healthcare? IMHO all comments unrelated to the missile launch should be modded down for being off- topic.

    336. Re:And... it's gone by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      My thoughts are that even if a war were to occur it would be best for everyone, except for N.Korea, that they don't invade. Having N.Korea there provides a buffer between the US and China. S.Korea wouldn't go into economic melt down.

    337. Re:And... it's gone by kermidge · · Score: 1

      No, I _read_ the news; the stories are sometimes longer, with one hopes more depth, and no yammering on-air personalities or commercials. Besides, I read much more quickly than they can talk.

      Don't have a TV, haven't for going on six years. I watch a few shows off network sites and Hulu. When I had TV I like to think that at least for many decades I had a reasonable picture of what was what and filtered accordingly, always augmented by reading several newspapers of goodly variety.

    338. Re: And... it's gone by kbx911 · · Score: 0

      it's not that...it's the pent up frustration in countries like NK that have been at the receiving end of the mean foreign policy. For decades they have suffered, waiting all the while to get nuclear, and now they are, so they can say, come on we're ready to get fucked but we WILL fuck you up too.

    339. Re:And... it's gone by Midnight_Falcon · · Score: 1
      True, however, if you read the comment I was replying to, there was mention of (R) and (D), thus making me mention that I'm not associated with them.

      That said, I've had a very hard time coming up with a label for my political leanings that fits neatly into the box of anything, even "tending to side with x." The best bias label I can give you is progressive with libertarian leanings and a significant conservative streak. Hope that makes sense.

    340. Re:And... it's gone by kbx911 · · Score: 0

      so what? the US should try to right the wrongs only when NK gets this capability? This attitude will force NK to get there much faster. The best thing to do would be for the US President to address the world in an open-letter sort of Video on YouTube, as a message to NK, "look why are you guys so pisses? tell us what you think we did wrong, maybe we did do something wrong in the past, let's talk and try and correct it, no one needs to die"

    341. Re:And... it's gone by kbx911 · · Score: 0

      we keep talking as Idealists but we also keep forgetting that there are people who profit from war. You know who.

    342. Re:And... it's gone by DutchUncle · · Score: 1

      I think, as I said, that he has a brain between the ears. I think much less of the reformed drunk who preceded him (even less in comparison to his father, who was much more capable) who demonstrated repeatedly that he was short on clues.

    343. Re:And... it's gone by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Kim Jong-Un: Koryo never crashed.

    344. Re:And... it's gone by dmeiers · · Score: 1

      Ok, I don't see how health care has anything to do with North Korea raising their nukes into the firing position. I think it would be more appropriate for all comments about healthcare to be modded down for being off-topic.

    345. Re:And... it's gone by LienRag · · Score: 1

      Ironically, if they really went nuts they just would need to send a conventional missile to Fukushima's reactor 4 cooling pool. Just making some cracks in the pool would mean that the fuel rods will heat to spontaneous combustion temperature and as there would then be no way either to cool them anymore or to move them, the only solution would be to evacuate Tokyo. Of course they don't have the technology to target so precisely with long-range missiles, but just a small team of divers with infantry missiles shoud be able to do the trick...

    346. Re:And... it's gone by LienRag · · Score: 1

      Germany's economy was actually weakened by the decision to impose parity between east deutschmark and west deutschmark, decision which aimed at destroying east germany's industry in a move both of revenge and of assessing hegemony by the western leaders, disguising it as a populist policy to "welcome our brothers in the Fatherland"...

    347. Re: And... it's gone by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Dammit...where's the Insightful-and-funny moderation option?

    348. Re:And... it's gone by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      You know, a country with a perfectly benevolent dictator is the ultimately perfect government, but the risk for corruption is so huge we try not be dictatorial.
      Same thing applies with your statement: yes, a really nice happy government controlling everything peacefully would be great. your objective should be to have the government have just enough power to do it's job, but no more. The argument should be over where that line is.

      And yet efficient, large government countries exist in many places, with low to zero dictator problems. While a dictator may be a risk under a big government, it isn't a very big risk. To counterpoint, there are effectively zero medium/large developed countries with night watchman states, but quite a few small government countries with dictators.

      tldr? Your theory is contradicted by empirical reality. Thus I conclude your theory is wrong.

  2. boner by Black+Parrot · · Score: 5, Funny

    'nuff said.

    --
    Sheesh, evil *and* a jerk. -- Jade
    1. Re:boner by Endo13 · · Score: 5, Funny

      Came expecting juvenile penis references. Left satisfied.

      --
      There is no -1 Disagree mod. Slashdot.org/faq defines mod options. USE IT.
    2. Re:boner by K.+S.+Kyosuke · · Score: 1

      Yeah, that's the first thought that occurred to me...It's the North Korean version of modern multimedia performance art exhibits: The rocket's erection mechanism is directly connected to Kim Jong Un's arousal lobes. This way, you can always tell whether the Glorious Leader is watching a tank parade at the moment. (You don't want to know what the firing mechanism is connected to.)

      --
      Ezekiel 23:20
    3. Re:boner by SJHillman · · Score: 5, Funny

      You may not want to publicly advertise that juvenile penises make you come... or even that they satisfy you at all.

    4. Re:boner by Alain+Williams · · Score: 2

      Maybe juvenile, but I think quite accurate.

    5. Re:boner by MightyMartian · · Score: 1

      At long last, nuclear porn!

      --
      The world's burning. Moped Jesus spotted on I50. Details at 11.
    6. Re:boner by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Intergalactic inflatable juvenile penis advertising droids, Intergalactic........

    7. Re:boner by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Why does this remind me of the Dead Kenedys.

    8. Re:boner by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Left satisfied.

      Unlike your mom.

    9. Re:boner by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Because you're retarded?

    10. Re:boner by compucomp2 · · Score: 1

      Why don't you have a seat over there?

    11. Re:boner by steelfood · · Score: 1

      I see that coming has left you satisfied.

      --
      "If a nation expects to be ignorant and free in a state of civilization, it expects what never was and never will be."
    12. Re:boner by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      fact is, to make the comment you just made, means you're weary about people thinking you're a pedophile... which means, well, I think we all know who the real pedophile here is. Better get a new slashdot account.

  3. Misfire? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    So if this missile strikes, or is believed to strike the US or one of our allies before being intercepted, does this constitute an act of war? If North Korea indicates the original trajectory was not intended to strike the US or one of our allies, but an unfortunate flaw diverted the course, do we still retaliate?

    1. Re: Misfire? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I would say declaring war is an act of war? You know, like SK did a few days ago?

    2. Re: Misfire? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 3, Informative

      Huh? A few days ago? The Korean War was never resolved; they've just been in a temporary ceasefire since the fifties.

    3. Re: Misfire? by dragon-file · · Score: 5, Informative

      Actually they have, or had, an armistice since 1953. An armistice is actually a cessation of hostilities for the purpose of agreeing to a lasting peace. Cease fires, often confused with armistices, are usually the first steps in bringing around an armistice. The main difference between the two is that a cease fire does not have to include the intention of peace talks where as an armistice does. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Armistice

      --
      Whenever a player quits EVE to go play WoW, the Average IQ of both games increase.
    4. Re: Misfire? by Holi · · Score: 1

      Yes but an armistice is not the end of a war, it opens up a venue for peace talks. The armistice is over in cse you hadn't heard. But semantics aside the war has never been over.

      --
      Sorry, teleporters just kill you and then make a copy. A perfect, soul-less copy.
    5. Re:Misfire? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Funny

      So if this missile strikes, or is believed to strike the US or one of our allies before being intercepted, does this constitute an act of war? If North Korea indicates the original trajectory was not intended to strike the US or one of our allies, but an unfortunate flaw diverted the course, do we still retaliate?

      Yes nuke the bastards. The south is in dire need of more parking space.

      Oh sorry this is slashdot not the comments section on CNN...I get confused sometimes.

    6. Re: Misfire? by imikem · · Score: 1

      It never was a war. The term used was "police action" if I remember my history correctly. No declaration in Congress, which was the beginning of the new normal where the President has usurped war powers. That appears to be the way Congress prefers, so half of them can point fingers of blame for either the result of the conflict if it goes badly, or at the war power usurpation if it goes well. The other half then either blame the finger-pointers as unpatriotic, or bask in the success.

      Can't lose. Watch those campaign contributions roll in! Aka, "PROFIT!" in /. meme-speak.

      --
      Perscriptio in manibus tabellariorum est.
    7. Re: Misfire? by chiefmojorising · · Score: 1

      I'm pretty sure the Koreans will agree there was a war regardless of how we phrased our participation (we participated as part of a UN action). Not everything is about the U.S. :) I completely agree on your point about authorization, though. If there's a shooting war there damn well should be some sort of Congressional authorization. Anything else relegates the Constitution to nothing more than a musty piece of toilet paper.

    8. Re: Misfire? by bkr1_2k · · Score: 1

      It was a war to the Koreans. They're the ones that count in this scenario, after all. Whether the US declared war or not is irrelevant to the fact that it was a war.

      --
      "Growing old is inevitable; growing up is optional."
    9. Re: Misfire? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      One of the traditional uses of cease-fires is to collect the dead and wounded from the battlefield. Not so popular these days, you're expected to bleed to death quietly while watching the bullets pass overhead.

  4. Re:Wasnt /. supposed to be news site about compute by glop · · Score: 5, Informative

    News for Nerds. Missiles and "Wargames"-like situations fit the bill for me.

  5. Re:Wasnt /. supposed to be news site about compute by The_Wilschon · · Score: 2

    UID nearly 3 million... you're probably mistaken. "News for nerds, stuff that matters". Take a look at the history of the site. It's been around for a long time and covered a lot of ground.

    --
    SIGSEGV caught, terminating

    wait... not that kind of sig.
  6. Re:Wasnt /. supposed to be news site about compute by schivvers · · Score: 5, Insightful

    I believe this would fall under the "stuff that matters" part of the slogan.

    --
    Life's journey is not to arrive at the grave safely in a well-preserved body, but rather to skid in sideways, totally wo
  7. Obligatory "This isn't tech news!!!" post... by AtomicSymphonic · · Score: 1

    While this may not be tech-related, it's good to have this kind of news up on everyone's radar, just in case (no pun intended).

    1. Re:Obligatory "This isn't tech news!!!" post... by jadv · · Score: 1

      It is tech news if you start babbling away about the possible yield of that missile and the amount of damage it might inflict, and whether it will actually launch at all let alone reach its target, and what countermeasures the US, SK, Japan etc have in place and whether they will be effective against this type of missile, and so on and so forth. Lots of fun to be had, all of it very much tech-related. Not even counting all the fodder for jokes and off-topic remarks.

    2. Re:Obligatory "This isn't tech news!!!" post... by synapse7 · · Score: 1

      Just in case what? What are you preparing to do?

    3. Re:Obligatory "This isn't tech news!!!" post... by AtomicSymphonic · · Score: 1

      fire ze missiles!

    4. Re:Obligatory "This isn't tech news!!!" post... by Endo13 · · Score: 1

      but I am le tired!

      --
      There is no -1 Disagree mod. Slashdot.org/faq defines mod options. USE IT.
    5. Re:Obligatory "This isn't tech news!!!" post... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Well then have a nap but then FIRE ZE MISSILES!

    6. Re:Obligatory "This isn't tech news!!!" post... by mrchaotica · · Score: 1

      It's tech news if you talk about how a missile destroying their factory might affect Samsung's manufacturing yields...

      --

      "[Regarding the 'cloud,'] ownership was what made America different than Russia." -- Woz

    7. Re:Obligatory "This isn't tech news!!!" post... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      WTF Mate?

    8. Re:Obligatory "This isn't tech news!!!" post... by jadv · · Score: 0

      I take off my hat before you. Wish I could mod you up...

  8. yawn by larry+bagina · · Score: 3, Funny

    shit or get off the pot.

    --
    Do you even lift?

    These aren't the 'roids you're looking for.

    1. Re:yawn by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Funny

      If the missile stays raised in the firing position for more than four hours, Kim should call a doctor.

    2. Re:yawn by Endo13 · · Score: 1

      Kim: "Why oh why did I take the blue pill?"

      --
      There is no -1 Disagree mod. Slashdot.org/faq defines mod options. USE IT.
    3. Re:yawn by Jawnn · · Score: 4, Funny

      Touche'. I was was waiting for someone to take the "erect" tangent.
      Warning: the following text includes crude racial stereotypes, which we normally wouldn't stoop to, but Kim is such a douchebag, we'll make an exception. Oh, and apologies to Team America too.
      "Ooo, rook at my rarge erect missre, eveybody. Rook and be afraid. Trembre at the though of it penetrating your airspace and viorating your fertire plains, over and over. Now give us food and money."

    4. Re:yawn by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Somebody +1, somebody!

    5. Re:yawn by jitterman · · Score: 1

      You really should have logged in - you deserve credit. Good joke.

      --
      For conscience is the wound, and there's naught to staunch it
    6. Re:yawn by interkin3tic · · Score: 1
      Longer than four hours, but you're right that it can't stay up indefinitely.

      As a result, once the fuel/oxidizer combination were fed into the missile, it could maintain a 'ready to launch' condition for several days, or even weeks, like the R-27 SLBM; however it could not be kept longer than this, because of tank corrosion caused by the red fuming nitric acid. A fueled Musudan would not have the structural strength to be land transported, so would have to be fueled at the launch site

      Wiki on Musudan Missile I suppose it could be empty. It IS just posturing. Maybe they ran out of fuel or the oxidizer and can't afford more. Or maybe they did try firing it and it didn't go off. The article says it wasn't clear why it's just sitting there.

    7. Re:yawn by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      I'm ashamed to say I read that in the voice. On the other hand, AMERICA FUCK YEAH

    8. Re:yawn by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I believe it's pronounced "brue piwr"

    9. Re:yawn by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I haven't logged in since 2006 and I damn well won't start now.

    10. Re:yawn by jitterman · · Score: 1

      Hm.. that's about when I created my account. I don't know what I did to scare you away, but I apologize :)

      --
      For conscience is the wound, and there's naught to staunch it
    11. Re:yawn by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      plains

      prains*

  9. Re:Wasnt /. supposed to be news site about compute by MBGMorden · · Score: 2

    It's "stuff that matters".

    Slashdot is news for nerds. Nerds care about just about anything remotely tech or science related as well as any major news story like this even if not tech related.

    Its actually not much different than a normal news site except for most of the "celebrity" gossip and reality TV crap is filtered out - unless it has some technology tie-in.

    --
    "People who think they know everything are very annoying to those of us who do."-Mark Twain
  10. Thanks for being a good little dictator. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    NK is playing it's part as the world's bad guy, for which they'll be paid with loans, aid, and concessions.

    I'm already bored with this show. Wake me up if anything actually happens.

    1. Re:Thanks for being a good little dictator. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Only from China, will they get that. Bush II did it already, and it does not pay off.

    2. Re:Thanks for being a good little dictator. by Shompol · · Score: 1
      Maybe they just want the internet money.

      .

      .

      Swiss Delegate: Ah, Mr. Abootman. It's the global world summit leaders. We want to talk to you about the strike.

      Stephen Abootman: You... You do? You wanna negotiate?!

      French Delegate: No, we were just wondering if, when you're all dead, we can use Newfoundland for a new global theme park.

      [Mr. Abootman drops the phone and begins to weep. He walks away with his hands over his eyes]

      Kyle: [picks up the phone] Hello? Will you just give this guy something, please?!

      Swiss Delegate: Excuse me?

      Kyle: [Mr. Abootman leans on the door, crying] He just doesn't wanna look like an idiot, so he wants everyone to think the strike was for something. Ehjust, just give him anything!

      French Delegate: Well, we could give Canada some small consolation pirize

      Kyle: If they give you something small, will you end the strike?

      Stephen Abootman: Well they... act like they're giving Canada a lot so everyone thinks I did a good job?

      Kyle: Can you act like you're giving him a lot?

      Swiss Delegate: Well, why not?

      [Canada, moments later. Mr. Abootman steps outside to the podium and makes an announcement]

      Stephen Abootman: We have won! [no one reacts: they're all too tired to]

      Lumberjack: Well how much did we got?

      Stephen Abootman: Well, we uh, we didn't get everything that we wanted, but... we nogotiated hard and... we got these... [holds up some coupons] coupons to Bennigan's! And... [holds up a bag of sweets] free bubblegum... for every Canadian. [his aide steps forward and claps really fast. Other Canadians begin to clap their hands] These coupons entitle every Canadian to a free meal at Bennigan's. With the purchase of a meal at equal or greater value, of course.

      Aide 1: We did it! [aide 2 steps forward and claps really fast. Other Canadians begin to clap their hands]

      Stephen Abootman: My friends. This is the greatest victory in Canadian history. [headlines follow: The Canuck Reporter has "Canada Wins The Strike." Canadiety has "Strike over! Canada Victorious!." Canada Today has "Strike Victory Party Set For Next Week."] [http://www.spscriptorium.com/Season12/E1204script.htm]

  11. 90s song cover by Nidi62 · · Score: 2

    "Bombs over Pyongyang" does have kind of a nice ring to it...

    --
    The only thing necessary for evil to triumph is for it to be pitted against a slightly greater evil
  12. Re:Money by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0, Insightful

    And what would you chest-thumping neocon thugs offer as an alternative? Remember, they don't have any oil, so "ten year invasion" isn't really a good answer.

  13. Re:Wasnt /. supposed to be news site about compute by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Or am I mistaken?

    Good point. If you, personally, the user "coffee-breaks", were killed in an airstrike, that wouldn't count as "Stuff That Matters", either. To anybody.

  14. Urgh by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

    Last year my friends and I started a "North Korea bombing someone" pool, given they did it every five years or so... And I got week of anniversary of North Korea for $30....
     
      I really don't want anything to happen though, that would be the most guilt ridden six hundred bucks I've ever received.

  15. A North Korean Rocket? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0, Funny

    Isn't a North Korean rocket the ballistic equivalent of an American geography lesson?

  16. Re:Wasnt /. supposed to be news site about compute by Nidi62 · · Score: 1

    And where do you think many computer components are made? I'll give you a hint: it goes by the initials ROK, and happens to still technically be in a state of war with North Korea.

    --
    The only thing necessary for evil to triumph is for it to be pitted against a slightly greater evil
  17. Re:Wasnt /. supposed to be news site about compute by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

    The missile OS is linux.

  18. should've quoted down more by rjejr · · Score: 5, Insightful

    Here's the paragraphs further down the page - "After the raising of the missile Wednesday, it was not clear to U.S. officials why the North Korean government did not proceed with the firing. The U.S. official cautioned that the raising of the missile could have been just a trial run to ensure the equipment works or an effort to "mess" with the United States and the allies that are watching for a launch at any time." This happened yesterday. If it was important there would have been at least 1 big explosion by now.

    1. Re:should've quoted down more by robinsonne · · Score: 0

      The U.S. official cautioned that the raising of the missile could have been just a trial run to ensure the equipment works or an effort to "mess" with the United States and the allies that are watching for a launch at any time.

      For some reason I read allies as "aliens."

    2. Re:should've quoted down more by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      It was rainning they couldnt light the blue touch paper.

    3. Re:should've quoted down more by grumpyman · · Score: 0
      Meanwhile in North Korea, "Up position!", "Down position!" "Up position again!"

      .

      Frankly I believe the hard-on is for Grandpa's birthday. May be it just contains tons of fireworks.

  19. Re:Wasnt /. supposed to be news site about compute by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    "...stuff that matters."

  20. Re:Wasnt /. supposed to be news site about compute by bobstreo · · Score: 1

    Or am I mistaken?

    Where do you think a large amount of your computer/television... components come from?

    Yeah that would be South Korea

  21. The right thing to do... by PortHaven · · Score: 1

    Is mostly ignore them, set up a bunch of anti-missile systems. Have the missile successfully shot down over NK territory before it even enters S. Korea.

    Then sell lots of anti-missile systems to Europe, Asia and the rest of the world.

    1. Re:The right thing to do... by prefec2 · · Score: 1

      If they cannot reach the US with their missiles, it is also not possible to reach European states. They could reach Russia's Asian part, but I highly doubt that they want to shoot at the Russians.

    2. Re:The right thing to do... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Informative

      Have the missile successfully shot down over NK territory before it even enters S. Korea.

      Sure. First, you have to invent a boost-phase interception capability.

      Come back to us in 30 years.

    3. Re:The right thing to do... by serviscope_minor · · Score: 2

      I highly doubt that they want to shoot at the Russians.

      I'm sure Putin would love to show a nice big fat show of strenght to prove Russia is still a super power. That would probably be pretty much the most suicidal move possible.

      --
      SJW n. One who posts facts.
    4. Re:The right thing to do... by SJHillman · · Score: 1

      You seem to think that our anti-missile systems are foolproof. They're far from fool-proof... especially when it comes to taking down a missile over enemy territory (which would be an aggressive move on our part to begin with). When it comes down to it, every second counts when trying to shoot down missiles, and that means keeping as close an eye on every sabre-rattler with launch capability.

    5. Re:The right thing to do... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Wouldn't that be a win-win-win? Putin gets a show of strength, America doesn't have to get involved in another quagmire, China doesn't have American troops marching against its border.

    6. Re:The right thing to do... by serviscope_minor · · Score: 1

      Wouldn't that be a win-win-win?

      More of a win-win-win-lose so badly there's noone left to even remembmer they've lost.

      --
      SJW n. One who posts facts.
    7. Re:The right thing to do... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Wouldn't that be a win-win-win? Putin gets a show of strength, America doesn't have to get involved in another quagmire, China doesn't have American troops marching against its border.

      China demands we help them deal with these Russians invading one of their allies else they start seriously hindering trade with all those US corporations exploiting the region for cheap labor, and...

    8. Re:The right thing to do... by ubersoldat2k7 · · Score: 1

      Yeah, that worked out fine for Putin in Chechnya.

    9. Re:The right thing to do... by gtall · · Score: 1

      This is true, however, I think it would be great field testing for improving missile defense. And, just as a comedic afterthought, the U.S. should rate Nork missile launches, but not with numbers. Think categories: Rick Perry material, Loonie-Toon material, Wile E. Coyote grade, meh, rock star, Bingo!!! The last being an ancient Catholic word meaning "hot damn".

    10. Re:The right thing to do... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Well that is a different kind of a situation. In Chechnya, they want to occupy a territory which (some) of the population is strongly against. An attack by North Korea would only be a strike mission. It would be an fairly easy victory. Like the US in Irak. However, if they would stay for an occupation then the situation might be very unpleasant. But why should they do so. The Chinese could do that.

    11. Re:The right thing to do... by rubycodez · · Score: 1

      we have it, and what a great opportunity to test new laser systems with complete plausible deniability. NK would never know

    12. Re:The right thing to do... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I suppose you are privy to all technology in possession by the US government? Why should we believe that you know that boost-phase interception capability doesn't already exist?

      There is a post below by SJHillman that seems to also imply complete knowledge of US missile defense capability. What is it with you guys? Military tech is 50 to 100 years more advance than what is known to the public sector.

    13. Re:The right thing to do... by shutdown+-p+now · · Score: 1

      Seeing how Chechnya is firmly a part of Russia now, it did work out fine indeed. Are you, by chance, confusing the first war in Chechnya (under Yeltsin) with the second one (under Putin)?

  22. Go for it. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Excellent. The North Koreans should launch the missile and go away. Chances are that it will either explode during launch or land in the Sea of Japan.

  23. it's been a week thus far? by TerraFrost · · Score: 3, Insightful

    Five days ago North Korea was moving their missiles and they're only now getting them in firing position? How long does it take to ready a missile? Seems like the US had patriot missiles halfway across the world in South Korea in less time than it's taken the North thus far.

    1. Re:it's been a week thus far? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0, Funny

      It's cute that you consider Fox News a creditable source of information

    2. Re:it's been a week thus far? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      The US isn't using ox carts...

    3. Re:it's been a week thus far? by prefec2 · · Score: 4, Interesting

      You forget that North Korea is not a real threat to the US or anyone else. they might cause some damage to South Korea or Japan if they start a war, but they will not last long, as their weapons are outdated, their troops are not in great shape. And they are so energy dependent on China that they would run out of fuel after a few days (if not hours).

      The real thing this is all about: Kim wants to show to his military that the atomic are suffice to keep the South and all the capitalists from the US out of the North, because they have these nuclear weapons. If that works, they have a weaker position in requesting special treatment for the military releasing resources to supply the population and turn the economic system. So he needs some sort of international acceptance of their nuclear weapons.

      This is not a preparation of war against anyone outside of North Korea, it is an attack on the power of the military in North Korea.

    4. Re:it's been a week thus far? by Experiment+626 · · Score: 2

      Have you found any factual errors in the linked article or do you just really like ad hominem fallacy?

    5. Re:it's been a week thus far? by ichthus · · Score: 3, Funny

      Don't rush him. Kim Jong Jr. has the muscle shirt on, and the Def Leppard cranked -- phych-ing himself up for the right moment.

      (Or, maybe he's waiting for a phone call with the go-ahead)

      --
      sig: sauer
    6. Re:it's been a week thus far? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      So you're saying Fox News *is* a credible news source?

    7. Re:it's been a week thus far? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      I'm with the AC. It's not worth my time fact checking Fox News. I'd rather simply assume whatever they say has not been said, verified, or in any other instance be worthy of being taken seriously until it's positively verified by hearing other, legitimate, sources say the same thing.

      Ad hominem? No, just lack of trust.

    8. Re:it's been a week thus far? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I didn't click the Fox link, but the statement in that post has been reported by numerous other news sources as well.

      It's not really cute how people like you see a Fox News link and immediately start criticizing them. I guess you deserve points for not calling them Faux News.

    9. Re:it's been a week thus far? by AvitarX · · Score: 1

      They have plenty of artillery that can hit SK population. They would be able to many injuries and deaths, and lots of infrastructure damage.

      They wouldn't last, but they aren't harmless.

      --
      Wow, sent an e-mail as suggested when clicking on "use classic" banner, and got a fast response that addressed my msg
    10. Re:it's been a week thus far? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Considering this is from the broadcasting corporation that won a court case allowing them to lie on air without any legal ramifications... one must take ALL their articles with a grain of salt.

    11. Re:it's been a week thus far? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I thought it was because Kim was an Apple fan-boy and wanted to put Samsung (and by extension, Android) out of business. Samsung has a very large and elaborate corporate headquarters in Seoul.

    12. Re:it's been a week thus far? by Spy+Handler · · Score: 1

      They're not any less accurate than, say MSNBC. The articles are all written by journalism grads who only have a cursory understanding of technology and military issues. Read any mainstream press articles on something you know a lot about (for most of you that would be computers) and you'll probably find many errors.

      One thing Fox has going for them is that they haven't rigged pickup trucks with explosives to show how dangerous GM trucks are. No creditable news organization would do that. Oh wait, NBCnews has...

    13. Re:it's been a week thus far? by Spy+Handler · · Score: 1

      Apple, Blackberry, Nokia, HTC all benefit if nuclear war levels the Korean peninsula. Also pretty much all Taiwanese chip manufacturers would benefit since their biggest competition would be gone.

      Sony, Panasonic and Sharp would also benefit from LG and Samsung being gone, but Japan is pretty close and sometimes downwind from Korea so they could be hit by radioactive Rodan creatures.

    14. Re:it's been a week thus far? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      You're confusing them with MSNBC.

    15. Re:it's been a week thus far? by GLMDesigns · · Score: 1

      That court case was not FOX only. AFAIK all major broadcasting companies filed amicus briefs w Fox. The case of the matter is that mistakes/lies are hard to distinguish and that news companies could be ruined by lawsuits trying to defend itself in cases regarding what is a mistake; that which does not enough evidence; and a lie. Add to that the problem of defending yourself and maintaining anonymity of confidential sources ... what a mess.

      --
      If you're scared of your govt then you need to further restrict its powers
      Vote 3rd Party in 2016 and beyond
    16. Re:it's been a week thus far? by asylumx · · Score: 1

      Do you also require people to disprove articles from The Onion before discarding them as unreliable?

    17. Re:it's been a week thus far? by asylumx · · Score: 0

      I think it's funny how people always try to bring up MSNBC as if it's the counterweight to Fox News. It's not. MSNBC has an obviously biased spin but Fox News is more than just a bias. They actually report falsehoods as truth and do not apologize for it. They've even fought law suits to retain their right to report those falsehoods. A better counterexample for Fox News would be The Onion -- except that The Onion is explicitly intended to be satirical.

    18. Re:it's been a week thus far? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Just for the record, I keep hearing the "reporting falsehoods" claim about Fox. Do you have some concrete examples? Usually when I hear that claim about Fox I wonder if it just means "I don't like what they're reporting"

    19. Re:it's been a week thus far? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Seoul would look like grozny before the second carrier air group arrived, with millions dead. You are intensely ignorant of KPA capabilities.

    20. Re:it's been a week thus far? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      No, it was Fox defending their right to knowingly broadcast as truth information they knew was false because the law does not say they can't.

      That is a hell of a position for an alleged news organization to take...

      The amicus briefs were mostly from news organizations which were concerned with the use of whistleblower laws leading to Federal intrusion on editorial decisions, not the facts of this specific case.

      In the Florida courts: Case No. 2D01-529 (Consolidated with Case No. 2D01-530), L.T. No. 98-2439 Div. D, Judge Ralph Steinberg:
      NEW WORLD COMMUNICATIONS OF TAMPA, INC., d/b/a WTVT-TV vs. JANE AKRE

    21. Re:it's been a week thus far? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I've got family in South Korea, you insensitive clod!

    22. Re:it's been a week thus far? by Kelbear · · Score: 1

      That's their point. Why link to fox news when you could link to a credible news source? Might as well just link to your crazy uncle's tumblr blog, he could use the hits.

    23. Re:it's been a week thus far? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      It's really ironic to read about Juche (their "self-reliance" national philosophy) among reams of "they depend on this and on that from the outside world". Maybe the message is "STOP sending help"?

    24. Re:it's been a week thus far? by asylumx · · Score: 1

      They filed a fucking lawsuit to protect their right to do it: http://www.philly2philly.com/politics_community/politics_community_articles/2009/6/29/4854/fox_news_wins_lawsuit_misinform_public

      And here's a clip as an example, where they claimed that solar power only works in germany because they have more sunlight: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=IRIIpXZF5dE

  24. Re:Wasnt /. supposed to be news site about compute by Myopic · · Score: 1

    You're mistaken. I'm glad to have cleared that up for you.

  25. Re:Wasnt /. supposed to be news site about compute by fustakrakich · · Score: 2

    Gentlemen! Please...!

    --
    “He’s not deformed, he’s just drunk!”
  26. Where's China? by sgage · · Score: 4, Insightful

    China has been growing in economic and military influence, and seems to want to be taken seriously. If that is the case, this is their moment. They could put an end to this nonsense in a minute. They need to understand that it would be in their own national interest to smack this puppy on the snout, fast and sharp. If they just let it fester, and it leads to armed conflict, they will lose face.

    There are just so many ways that this can go wrong...

    1. Re:Where's China? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 3, Insightful

      Not really. Right now, the US is spending money dealing with this issue while China quietly goes about its own objectives. Like a good game of 'Go', often the proper response to activity on one side of the board is to ignore it and continue to build on the opposite side. North Korea provides a good distraction and they know enough to realize that lil Kim is just putting on a show for his people.

    2. Re:Where's China? by asmkm22 · · Score: 1

      They can't even see the missile through all that smog.

    3. Re:Where's China? by Phrogman · · Score: 1

      Bonus points for using "Go" as your example. With regards to strategies, we might find that once this whole NK thing is completed - however that ends, that the Chinese have made some important moves elsewhere that go unnoticed. China is really gearing up to become the preeminent superpower down the road. They are no where near there yet of course but if their economy continues to improve the way it has, and they continue to do all the manufacturing for the rest of the world, that may well change sooner than we think.
      I expect a conflict between the US and China over Taiwan in the next 8-10 years.

      --
      "The first time I got drunk, I got married. The second time I bought a chimpanzee, after that I stayed sober" Arian Seid
    4. Re:Where's China? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      And when China wants to deal with anyone in the region beyond economic trade, why would anyone listen? China is being perceived as politically worthless on the international stage. They can economically bully people, but can they bully Russia? The EU? The US?

      Why team up with China, a second-rate "superpower"; when you can team up with the EU, a former but established superpower with historical ties to virtually everyone?
      Why not team up with Russia, a badass former superpower who can invade the country of Georgia, get criticized by the international community and shrug it off?
      Why not team with the US, a shaken, but still dominant superpower who invaded not one, but TWO countries since the turn of the century and is willing to play chicken, full-scale-war-style with North Korea?

    5. Re:Where's China? by Tim12s · · Score: 1

      Good game of Go... Yup. Its playing out more like a game of San Marco.

    6. Re:Where's China? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      The problem here is, just as with Go, the USA's moves arguable have dual purpose. America basically have an excuse to openly bolster it's Asia focused military might and they are making good use of it. China start to make significant gains only once war breaks out and North Korea, South Korea, and the USA have to spend resources on the conflict.

  27. Shoots and ... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

    misses the Pacific Ocean.

  28. Just like in the movies by DiceRoller · · Score: 1

    James Bond will step in any minute to save us... any minute now...

    1. Re:Just like in the movies by ichthus · · Score: 2

      James Bond, nothin'. It's time for Psy to kick some ass. :)

      --
      sig: sauer
    2. Re:Just like in the movies by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Not until the countdown reaches 007.

  29. No sources quoted - none. by xxxJonBoyxxx · · Score: 5, Insightful

    Isn't it awesome that we have entire news stories telling us we're on the precipice of war - without one single person quoted? CNN doesn't even bother to include a tag like "quoted on condition of anonymity" anymore - they just take their directions from the White House press office and fill in "official" wherever it would have made sense to have a real person substantiating a dubious claim.

    1. Re:No sources quoted - none. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      I was think "sad", but "awesome" works, too

    2. Re:No sources quoted - none. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      They all have an agenda. See Bad Religion - "Only Entertainment" the trick is to read multiple sources and try and read between the lines.

    3. Re:No sources quoted - none. by rubycodez · · Score: 1

      I've seen plenty of quotes right from the ruler of NK himself. nothing more needed.

    4. Re:No sources quoted - none. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Modern News isnt about actual reporting its a ratings industry where most people with ADD(HD) and some form of degree go.

    5. Re:No sources quoted - none. by gtbritishskull · · Score: 1

      Is the white house saying that we are on the precipice of war? If so, I haven't heard it. And it would also be a terrible idea to have the Secretary of State (the TOP diplomat) in the war zone where he could get blown up. The fact that Kerry is in South Korea means that the white house does NOT think we are on the precipice of war. NK is just being NK, and the white house is keeping a close eye on them.

      So, does that mean that CNN is not a mouthpiece?

  30. Really Sad by tommyatomic · · Score: 0

    Its like they want to be bombed back to the stone age just to see what it would be like. Korea's like a retarded kid poking a bully with a stick to see what would happen.

    OR put in automotive terms its a D-bag in a souped up golf cart revving the cart in neutral next to an 400hp arial atom because he doesn't realize how massively outclassed they are.

    The US has issues dealin with targets moving in the shadows. But give the combined might of the US Army-Navy-Airforce-and-Marines a fixed target with borders and a Flag and the US ambassador will be busy ignoring a UN resolution against reducing a country to glow-in-the-dark rubble before breakfast. N-K has a huge army. I think like 4th or 5th largest. I feel a great swell of pity for the families of the members of the North Korean army.

    1. Re:Really Sad by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      The US has issues dealin with targets moving in the shadows. But give the combined might of the US Army-Navy-Airforce-and-Marines a fixed target with borders and a Flag and the US ambassador will be busy ignoring a UN resolution against reducing a country to glow-in-the-dark rubble before breakfast. N-K has a huge army. I think like 4th or 5th largest. I feel a great swell of pity for the families of the members of the North Korean army.

      Are you familiar with the term mutually assured destruction? I don't know what kind of artillery N-K has but the kind China and Russia have can reach from North Korea to Seoul. And no, that is not the rocket based one that you possibly could intercept.
      Just rumbling in Iraq style without having a look at what actually is going on first can lead to a lot of South Korean casualties that could have been avoided otherwise.

  31. Re:Wasnt /. supposed to be news site about compute by dragon-file · · Score: 5, Funny

    Gentlemen! Please...!

    You cant fight in here! This is the War Room!

    --
    Whenever a player quits EVE to go play WoW, the Average IQ of both games increase.
  32. North Korea... by ZankerH · · Score: 5, Funny

    What a bunch of seoulless, warmongering scum.

  33. quit watching! by AndyKron · · Score: 2

    Just knowing that someone is watching my missile move into an upright position would be enough to piss me off.

    1. Re:quit watching! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I am now sure you dont have a girlfriend. I love having her watch it rise.

    2. Re:quit watching! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Hell yeah! Your girlfriend also loves watching me slide in and out of her honeypot. I record the backdoor sessions so she can watch them later :)

  34. LAUNCH IT ALREADY by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    I want doomsday. Launch the fucking missile and let chaos rain !

  35. Re:Wasnt /. supposed to be news site about compute by Freddybear · · Score: 1

    "News for nerds" is just a slogan, it doesn't really mean anything.

  36. Re:Wasnt /. supposed to be news site about compute by Twinbee · · Score: 1

    Think of it like a good newspaper. Techy stuff, plus only the most important of the most important world news.

    --
    Why OpalCalc is the best Windows calc
  37. Fire Ze Missile by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    http://www.albinoblacksheep.com/flash/end

  38. Blackmail. Kim Jung Un's Daddy copying by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    ...t was not clear to U.S. officials why the North Korean government did not proceed with the firing.

    Because N. Korea will then "negotiate" for some "aid" from the US and they'll lower the missile - blackmail just like Dad.

    The Chinese are probably thinking, "Fuck! We should have let MacArthur do his thing!"

    1. Re:Blackmail. Kim Jung Un's Daddy copying by imikem · · Score: 1

      Presumably meant to be funny, and I did chuckle, but MacArthur did indeed want to go on and topple the Chinese government. In 1950 it had been only a year and change since the Communists had routed the Nationalists, so their hold was still somewhat tenuous. That was what got him sacked.

      --
      Perscriptio in manibus tabellariorum est.
    2. Re:Blackmail. Kim Jung Un's Daddy copying by Stargoat · · Score: 1

      And here I thought it was because he was a shitty general bucking for political office who was rude to the sitting POTUS.

      --
      Hoist Number One and Number Six.
    3. Re:Blackmail. Kim Jung Un's Daddy copying by imikem · · Score: 1

      From what I have read, Truman was willing to endure quite a bit of rudeness from MacArthur, but the general's talk of attacking China was threatening to split the coalition, and he had to dump the guy.

      --
      Perscriptio in manibus tabellariorum est.
    4. Re:Blackmail. Kim Jung Un's Daddy copying by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      >but the general's talk of NUKING China

      FTFY

  39. Re:Wasnt /. supposed to be news site about compute by westlake · · Score: 2

    Or am I mistaken?

    A North Korean missile launch would alter the world's political, economic, and military landscape beyond recognition. But I would expect it to be a very intense, very dangerous, environment for the nerd and the geek.

  40. Re:Money by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

    ten-year, $3 trillion invasion, you mean.

    But we can't pay for social services! In our own country at least.

  41. De f'hurst by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    No, no, approaching with your gun ports open is a sign of respect!

  42. Re:Wasnt /. supposed to be news site about compute by ichthus · · Score: 2

    More likely Windows CE.

    --
    sig: sauer
  43. Re:Wasnt /. supposed to be news site about compute by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    That totally makes sense now. Back in the 80s we must have allowed the North Koreans to "steal" our computer technology...the thing is we allowed them to steal the plans to the WOPR.

  44. Re:Wasnt /. supposed to be news site about compute by serviscope_minor · · Score: 2

    And where do you think many computer components are made?

    *cough*

    That's where they're designed. They're made just over the border where the labour is really cheap. At least they were intil NK closed the business park to the south last week.

    --
    SJW n. One who posts facts.
  45. LAPD by sycodon · · Score: 2

    If Kim had a shotgun and behaved like this in L.A., LAPD would have plugged him about 40 times by now.

    --
    When Fascism comes to America, it will call itself Anti-Fascism, and tell you to give up your guns.
    1. Re:LAPD by gtall · · Score: 1

      If Lil' Kimmy had a shotgun aimed at a S. Korean maiden and behaved like this in L.A., they'd call in the negotiators. Now if he did it serially and kept getting out of jail and every time used a bigger more lethal weapon and threatened more people at one time, then I think they'd be tempted whack him.

    2. Re:LAPD by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      If a random LAian was of the opposite sex and had a pickup truck that was a different make, model and color than Kim's, LAPD would have plugged HER about 40 times by now.

    3. Re:LAPD by AlecC · · Score: 1

      Even if a goon with a heavy machine gun (China with nukes) was holding 50 people (Japan, the US) hostage?

      --
      Consciousness is an illusion caused by an excess of self consciousness.
    4. Re:LAPD by PolygamousRanchKid+ · · Score: 4, Funny

      Wow! So Kim would be in rehab with Lindsay Lohan . . . !?!?!

      Now that is one reality show I would watch!

      --
      Schroedinger's Brexit: The UK is both in and out of the EU at the same time!
    5. Re:LAPD by sycodon · · Score: 1

      Nice...:-)

      --
      When Fascism comes to America, it will call itself Anti-Fascism, and tell you to give up your guns.
    6. Re:LAPD by Maxwell'sSilverLART · · Score: 1

      If Kim had a shotgun and behaved like this in L.A., LAPD would have plugged him about 40 times by now.

      ...with 930 shots fired, three dogs killed, and a small child wounded.

      --
      Moderate drunk! It's more fun that way!
  46. Re:Wasnt /. supposed to be news site about compute by jtownatpunk.net · · Score: 1

    All of our stuff is made in areas that NoKo could realistically harm. Good tablets and phones come out of SoKo. Good cameras are made in Japan. Just about everything else is made in China. It'll matter when you can't get a new phone.

  47. Re:Money by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    The invasion of Iraq took a couple weeks. The occupation and nation-building was what drug on for 10 years. In the case of NK we could probably go in wreck a bunch of stuff then leave and let China or SK move in and do all the hard work.

  48. LOL by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Why did the chicken cross the road?

    To get out of range of North Korea's Missiles...

  49. Re:Money by MightyMartian · · Score: 1

    Which is different in what way exactly from how the past two administrations dealt with NK?

    --
    The world's burning. Moped Jesus spotted on I50. Details at 11.
  50. Typo in headline by EvilSS · · Score: 1

    Shouldn't it read: North Korean Missile Raised to Failing Position, Says US Official

    --
    I browse on +1 so AC's need not respond, I won't see it.
  51. Its almost like... by GReaToaK_2000 · · Score: 0

    They want to be provoked or attacked. I'd like to believe they wouldn't be stupid enough to pull the trigger, but this is the closest they've ever gotten.

    The other thing that confuses the hell out of me is that we are so bent on preventing Iran from getting nuclear weapons yet, NK has been working on this since the beginning of the Bush (duh-bya) terms and we have YET to take them very seriously. We are sort of taking them seriously but it's still nothing like what we do with Iran.

    So, is it that we don't think they'll do it OR do we think they will and we can go in and flatten them and setup right next to China? But, isn't SK close enough for us?

    Now to the paranoid stuff... Who's behind this? Is it an attempt to get another war started? We have a LOT of interest in that area, Japan, SK, Malaysia, Philippines, etc. What is the point of this for NK to do this? and why aren't we taking this as seriously as we do Iran?

    We have seen in the media that NK is portrayed a whining baby with dangerous toys.

    China probably doesn't want to do anything because they are so close but if they felt threatened they could just run over them and be that much closer to SK.

    So again, what is the deal with this? I hope that it's just saber rattling and NK will back down but they've done it enough that if they back down again it will only prove to most of the other nations they are a joke.

    Oh and another thought occurs, is this a diversion? Could they be in league with Iran and/or Syria? I know we as Americans tend to have the attention span of a goldfish but still... This is really a threat we shouldn't be totally scoffing at.

    I know this didn't come out exactly as I intended but it's the culmination of a lot of thoughts I've been "noodling" around for a while about NK.

    Thanks.

    1. Re:Its almost like... by turp182 · · Score: 0

      Here are my answers to your questions from the US position:

      1. Iraq War - We knew they didn't have WMD (we wouldn't have attacked otherwise, I guarantee). It was about oil and "sins of the father" for not finishing the job (the elder Bush showed much wisdom in not finishing the job).
      2. Afghanistan War - Reasonably justified as a response to 9/11 as terrorist were training there. Maybe the US just wanted more heroin on the world market...
      3. Not attacking Saudi Arabia, the source of 19 out of 20 of the 9/11 terrorists - Oil. And heavy-handed monarchies are our friends, if they have oil.
      4. Not attacking North Korea - No oil, no resources; nothing to gain. South Korea probably pushed the US to not attack due to potential damage to Seoul (after the stupidity of the "Axis-of-Evil" State of the Union address, like something out of a comic book).
      5. Our Obsession with Iran - They share a border with Israel, there is no other reason.

      Why does China provide fuel and resources to North Korea? To keep them from doing shit like they have been doing lately...

      I'm not sure why North Korea is acting as they are, I believe the new leader is trying to assert himself and prove to his military that he is capable (of what I do not know).

      --
      BlameBillCosby.com
    2. Re:Its almost like... by u38cg · · Score: 1

      It's simpler than that. We understand very little about the internal dynamics of the North Korean government, but you can be fairly sure of one thing: Kim does not have the option of picking up the phone and asking the US or anyone else for a quiet chat. He's riding a tiger, and he has to ride the line between being killed by one of his people and starting a war where he'll be killed by one of ours. As for our response, it's the best way to manage it. NK would not take kindly to a short sharp shock and they have the manpower to be a bloody nuisance - fighting them would be Japan 1945, not Iraq 2003.

      --
      [FUCK BETA]
    3. Re:Its almost like... by meza · · Score: 1

      5. Our Obsession with Iran - They share a border with Israel

      Iran shares a border with Isreal? Is this from the new Iranian "Google maps" we just heard about?

    4. Re:Its almost like... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      ... Iran - They share a border with Israel

      You slept through Geography class, didn't you.

    5. Re:Its almost like... by mrchaotica · · Score: 1

      The other thing that confuses the hell out of me is that we are so bent on preventing Iran from getting nuclear weapons yet, NK has been working on this since the beginning of the Bush (duh-bya) terms and we have YET to take them very seriously. We are sort of taking them seriously but it's still nothing like what we do with Iran.

      On the contrary: the US has allowed NK to have nuclear weapons precisely because it does take NK's army seriously, since it is actually capable of inflicting damage on something we care about (i.e., Seoul).

      In contrast, Iran can't do shit so there's no downside to the US taking a hard line.

      --

      "[Regarding the 'cloud,'] ownership was what made America different than Russia." -- Woz

    6. Re:Its almost like... by turp182 · · Score: 1

      My bad, make that:

      5. Our Obsession with Iran - They are close enough to Israel to be a threat.

      I suck at geography (shoot, I looked at a map and still got it wrong).

      --
      BlameBillCosby.com
    7. Re:Its almost like... by Hatta · · Score: 1

      The other thing that confuses the hell out of me is that we are so bent on preventing Iran from getting nuclear weapons yet, NK has been working on this since the beginning of the Bush (duh-bya) terms and we have YET to take them very seriously. We are sort of taking them seriously but it's still nothing like what we do with Iran.

      Iran is a threat to Israel, and the Israel lobby has a massive amount of influence in DC.

      --
      Give me Classic Slashdot or give me death!
    8. Re:Its almost like... by Culture20 · · Score: 1

      5. Our Obsession with Iran - They share a border with Israel, there is no other reason.

      *Cough*
      Iran was the intended recipient of the message expressed in the Afghanistan/Iraq squeeze. None of the above states shares a border with Israel, but Afghanistan and Iraq share borders with Iran.

    9. Re:Its almost like... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Have you noticed the waterway that Iran is next to, the thin narrow one with the large slow oil tankers going through it that carry some significant percentage of the world's petroleum supplies?

      We care about Seoul for humanitarian reasons. We care about the Strait of Hormuz for national security reasons.

    10. Re:Its almost like... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I suck at geography (shoot, I looked at a map and still got it wrong).

      Same excuse for history?

    11. Re:Its almost like... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      NK has been working on this since the beginning of the Bush (duh-bya)

      Your memory might not, but the history goes back further than that. http://www.armscontrol.org/factsheets/dprkchron

    12. Re:Its almost like... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      NK has been working on this since the beginning of the Bush (duh-bya) terms

      Your memory might not, but the history goes back decades earlier than that.

      http://www.armscontrol.org/factsheets/dprkchron

  52. Re:Wasnt /. supposed to be news site about compute by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    If you don't think someone threatening to shoot missiles at you is "Stuff that matters", you're a fucking moron.

  53. Cat and mouse game by sl4shd0rk · · Score: 1

    I wonder how many more "ok for real this time..." the NK has left in them. Not sure what Kim and Co. are expecting the rest of the world to do. They are really only two possible outcomes: one is to put everything away and try and work out the sanction problems, two, pull the trigger and be decimated.

    Either way, NK has changed itself forever, they just don't realize it yet. There's no way they are going back to their "old ways' after this.

    --
    Join the Slashcott! Feb 10 thru Feb 17!
  54. Re:Wasnt /. supposed to be news site about compute by interval1066 · · Score: 1

    mod up, I love peter Sellers references.

    --
    Python: 'And then suddenly you have a language which says "we're all stuck with whatever the whiniest coder wants".'
  55. ABL by WindBourne · · Score: 1

    Bring on the ABL and take it out.
    Likewise, we should launch our minuteman III next day.

    --
    I prefer the "u" in honour as it seems to be missing these days.
    1. Re:ABL by sosume · · Score: 1

      What does the Alaska Baseball League have to do with North Korea..?

    2. Re:ABL by WindBourne · · Score: 1

      LOL; I showed American Basketball League.
      Instead, google for 'ABL YAL-1.'

      --
      I prefer the "u" in honour as it seems to be missing these days.
  56. Re:Wasnt /. supposed to be news site about compute by interval1066 · · Score: 1

    a Russian form of dos

    --
    Python: 'And then suddenly you have a language which says "we're all stuck with whatever the whiniest coder wants".'
  57. A pre-emptive strike of MREs and candy bars by gestalt_n_pepper · · Score: 3, Interesting

    should distract the entire populace of NK thoroughly and destabilize the regime. Particularly, if we included enough Dove chocolates. Man, I love those things.

    --
    Please do not read this sig. Thank you.
    1. Re:A pre-emptive strike of MREs and candy bars by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Um.. you realize it'll all just get collected by and used to feed the NK army right?

    2. Re:A pre-emptive strike of MREs and candy bars by RabidTimmy · · Score: 1

      I thought NK populace and NK army were synonymous.

    3. Re:A pre-emptive strike of MREs and candy bars by Ungrounded+Lightning · · Score: 1

      A pre-emptive strike of MREs and candy bars should distract the entire populace of NK thoroughly and destabilize the regime.

      Unfortunately, South Korea has been bombarding the North with propaganda leaflets for decades. To mitigate this, the North Korean propaganda machine has claimed these are germ warfare weapons. Many of their people literally believe that even touching something dropped by the US or North Korea will cause their hands to rot off.

      --
      Bantam Dominique roosters crow a four-note song. Once you've heard it as "Happy BIRTHday" you can't NOT hear it that way
    4. Re:A pre-emptive strike of MREs and candy bars by CaptainLard · · Score: 2

      One nitpick: doesn't a regime need to be stable before it can be destabilized?

  58. They need a spanking by TheSkepticalOptimist · · Score: 1

    China needs to give North Korea the spanking they so dearly need and tell them to start playing nice with others in the neighborhood.

    I also find it hilarious that the US went after Iraq for supposed WMD that never existed, but when North Korea actually has and flaunts them the US does nothing. I guess its just easier to bomb the shit out of an impotent nation then one that can actually raise their missiles.

    --
    I haven't thought of anything clever to put here, but then again most of you haven't either.
    1. Re:They need a spanking by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      We didn't go after Iraq because of the imaginary WMD's. We had an airhead president that wanted to prove something to his father and killed 100K+ people doing it.
      We have a much smarter president now, who won't be goaded into spending a ton of money on a foolish cause, so there's no comparing the situations.

    2. Re:They need a spanking by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      We did Operation Iraq Liberation for reasons that had nothing to do with WMDs.

    3. Re:They need a spanking by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      There are some reasons to not go after NK, for starters, it has nukes, so attacking it with a conventional force would be devastating. Nuking it would make them look like the bad guys and may ruin potential resource gathering they want to do afterwards.

      Other reasons are that NK could certainly do a lot of damage to countries the US doesn't want to see hurt. For example south korea, for example china.

      Also, china is holding a hand above NKs head. For now.

      But this is the US, so I am betting the main reason is there isn't anything they really want in NK or they don't think that they will be able to take whatever they want there, having china in position.

    4. Re:They need a spanking by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Well it certainly wasn't as complicated to go after Iraq. They had isolated themselves with their behavior. They said they had WMDs, mulitple intelligence agencies from different countries said they had WMDs, they had provided support for Al Queda both financially as well as providing them a place to train, etc. It's not like we just went and beat up on Iraq because it seemed like a cool thing to do. I'm still not sure they didn't have WMDs. We found mustard gas (a chemical weapon) that was old and largely ineffective, so to say we found nothing is not entirely accurate. They had lots of tunnels running over the desert there. They had lots of notice we were coming. How do you know that their WMDs weren't moved to Syria to be used at a later time? Or Turkey, or take your pick?

      Everyone is pretty sure NK is just blustering for more aid than they deserve (which would be 0 in my estimation). If we bomb them at this point we become the big bully who killed someone because they said they had a gun. Now if they produce a gun and start shooting at us (or SK) then all bets are off.

    5. Re:They need a spanking by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      The biggest reason is that Iraq has oil, and the US wants it. NK has no natural resources in enough abundance to be of interest to anyone. This is the main reason why the US isn't invading.

      Every war started hinges (ultimately) on two things. Land and resources. Any other pretext is just useless pandering.

  59. whatever by Korruptionen · · Score: 1

    Look... they just figured out how to use the hydraulics to raise the missile. Everyone is giving them WAY too much credit. lol

    1. Re:whatever by davidbrit2 · · Score: 1

      I wouldn't laugh it off just yet. Now they're duct-taping half-empty soda bottles to it, and setting up an air compressor.

  60. Re:Wasnt /. supposed to be news site about compute by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Well... we can spin it in a techie way...

    North Korea is threatening to annihilate the best average internet connection country on the planet.

  61. Re:Wasnt /. supposed to be news site about compute by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Elitism on an internet forum, running in the Special Olympics, etc...

  62. Re:Money by NoNonAlphaCharsHere · · Score: 2

    (same AC you responded to).
    "Nation building"??? "Nation building"???????

    BWAHAHAHAHAHAHA!!!!
    If by that you mean "giving shittons of money to Haliburton and Blackwater and the like", then yah. Otherwise, no, not so much.

  63. Kim Jong-un by Camembert · · Score: 2

    I must say that I much preferred Kim Jong-un when he was doing Gangnam Style.

  64. Re:Wasnt /. supposed to be news site about compute by cusco · · Score: 1

    And some of the really weird shit, like the theft of a million pounds of maple syrup.

    --
    "Think about how stupid the average person is. Now, realise that half of them are dumber than that." - George Carlin
  65. The LAST thing the Russians want.. by swb · · Score: 0

    Is brinksmanship with someone other than the United States.

    An attack by North Korea would pretty much demand a Russian response, but the problem the Russians have is that they don't really have a well-oiled and high tech military to respond with.

    They have creaky, Soviet-era military technologies, a military brass probably about as corrupt as the civilian leadership and likely more skilled in sucking up to Putin's circle than combat -- they probably have few officers left with combat experience from Afghanistan and almost no combat troops or pilots with front line experience unless you want to count Chechnya or their "invasion" of Georgia, which is kind of like saying you're an expert hunter because you shot a dog in fenced yard.

    So they are at a major tactical disadvantage from a hardware and people perspective. Now, they could use the brute-force method, but I doubt they even have the wherewithal to mount an invasion of PRK despite actually having a small shared border and their air force likely doesn't have what it takes to mount a strategic bombing campaign.

    And none of this includes the risks they might take facing off with China, with whom they share a long border and a history of hostility and a growing trade deficit along their border.

    The Russians would likely "win" a war with PRK but it would be a significant effort for them, would probably end up with Vladivostok getting leveled, which would be a huge economic problem.

    1. Re:The LAST thing the Russians want.. by mrchaotica · · Score: 1

      Now, they could use the brute-force method

      Isn't that their strategy of choice, historically speaking, anyway?

      --

      "[Regarding the 'cloud,'] ownership was what made America different than Russia." -- Woz

    2. Re:The LAST thing the Russians want.. by mikael_j · · Score: 2

      Even Russia's old gear is more modern than the vast majority of North Korea's gear. North Korea's best fighter is the MiG-29, of which they have 40, it's a downgraded export model at that. The Russians by comparison have more than 200 MiG-29 fighters, many of which have been or are being upgraded with modern hardware. In total the Russians have almost 700 fighters and interceptors, all of which are superior to anything the North Koreans have. On top of this they have close to 150 bombers (mostly Tu-22M bombers but a healthy complement of strategic bombers as well (Tu-95 and Tu-160)).

      If North Korea did strike Russia I suspect the Russians would quickly establish air superiority and use their bomber fleet to flatten any North Korean attempts at advancing or defending. Not to mention that while Russia has no problem finding fuel for its aircraft, tanks and other vehicles the North Koreans have a lot of their much-feared artillery placed in the southern parts of the country, with Russian air superiority and barely any fuel I doubt they'd be able to execute any major troop movements.

      On top of this are geographical considerations, the land border between North Korea and Russia is something like 20 km long and in order to move troops trough it you pretty much have to have air superiority, in my opinion it would be nearly impossible for North Korea to mount any kind of advance through the narrow corridor north to Vladivostok. In fact, I think it is likely that the Russians would be able to push the North Koreans back beyond the border pretty quickly once they establish air superiority, they can effectively hinder nearly all troop movements by the North Koreans and just use air power to minimize resistance since the North Koreans have nothing worth mentioning to counter the Russians with (unless we're counting their aging MiG-21, F-5, F-6 and F-7 fighters which make up 400+ of their 500 or so fighters, not to mention that a very large portion of their air force is grounded due to poor maintenance (for some plane types I believe it's more than 50% of the planes which are estimated to be completely useless, not that an F-5 with nothing but a cannon is very useful anyway these days)).

      --
      Greylisting is to SMTP as NAT is to IPv4
    3. Re:The LAST thing the Russians want.. by swb · · Score: 1

      You seem well informed!

      I question, though, how usable Russia's air force would be. I'm sure they have a couple of bomber wings and a fighter wing that are operational, but I'd be surprised if they could fly even half their fighter and interceptor fleet on less than 24 hours notice. I'd question all aspects of their readiness, from pilots, ground crew, ATC, equipment state of repair, etc.

      Even if they could operate a usable air fleet, they would have to fly all their missions out of Vladivostok which PRK could make difficult by taking out landing strips and runways (Kamikaze-style if necessary) and I would imagine that even PRK's brain trust has thought about what might be necessary to significantly degrade Vladivostok as a base of operations.

      If Russia can't fly out of Vladivostok they are in trouble in maintaining air superiority -- they would never get overflight rights from China and they don't have the in-air refueling capability to fly out of places further West in Siberia, even if they could manage to get ground facilities in cold war era, run-down airbases up and running. Chavarobsk to Pyongyang is 2000 km and it only gets worse from there.

      Without air superiority, the Russians options get a lot worse from there. Even though the PRK is largely a paper tiger, I would imagine the Red Army would be in for a slugfest trying to take on the PRK on their home turf.

    4. Re:The LAST thing the Russians want.. by mikael_j · · Score: 1

      Well, the Russian Air Force definitely doesn't have the same readiness that the US Air Force has but AFAIK they should still be able to keep several Il-78 tankers in the air which should be plenty to give their strategic bombers protection (officially they have something like 15 - 20 tankers and even considering the poor shape that parts of the Russian military is in at least half of those should be operational). As for the strategic bombers themselves, both the Tu-95 and the Tu-160 have an operational range in excess of 10,000 km without refueling. I suspect they'd still hurry up and ferry aircraft eastward (if they haven't already started doing so just in case, one of the reasons the conflict in Georgia in 2008 went the way it did was because the Russians had a considerable number of troops ready not far from the border).

      Then there's the matter of ground-based AA sites, most of North Korea's AA is around Pyongyang, the DMZ and the area just north of the DMZ, what they've got in the north of the country is little more than a token force and the combat readiness of a their equipment seems to be a lot worse than it is for Russia. There's also the fuel and ammunition issue that I mentioned, waging a long-range air war would definitely be costly for the Russians but they could do it, the North Koreans on the other would quickly run out of fuel with small chances of getting more. Combine this with the fact that a large part of the North Korean fleet is made up of planes so old they are just barely capable of carrying air-to-air missiles and I just find it hard to believe they'd stand much of a chance of doing serious damage before Russia strikes back. Admittedly North Korea does have a few S-300-derived SAM launchers but Russia has close to a thousand S-300 launchers as well as a few S-400-equipped battalions, including one stationed near Vladivostok.

      I don't doubt that in terms of lost aircraft and soldiers a war with North Korea could easily be more costly for Russia than for the US but I suspect if it did happen the Russians could still do a lot of damage quickly. There's also the political side of things, if it did happen Russia would probably like to occupy a decent-sized chunk of North Korea before the international community intervenes in any way to avoid having a US ally right on their doorstep (I doubt the international community would side with North Korea but from Russia's perspective it'd be better to at least already have their own "peacekeepers" controlling North Hamgyong rather than UN/US forces within spitting distance of the current border).

      Of course, I'm just speculating but I just don't see North Korea standing a chance against any of their neighbors in a all-out conventional conflict, were it not for the ROK being a US ally that would probably be their best shot, Russia and China are both capable of hitting them way too hard if North Korea tries anything though I doubt either one really wants to get involved in a war with North Korea precisely because it would be the kind of war that's less about precision strikes and more about taking out large amount of troops, equipment and infrastructure. To be honest I think the risk of a war on the Korean peninsula turning into another Iraq or Vietnam is slim, they have no strong allies like Vietnam and culturally and politically the situation in Iraq was completely different (North Korea's neighbors are a lot more stable than the Iraq and any power vacuum in a conquered North Korea could be dealt with more like Germany post-WWII, a de-juchefication similar to the sometimes overly pragmatic de-nazification of Germany would probably be the way to go).

      --
      Greylisting is to SMTP as NAT is to IPv4
  66. Headline I'd like to see... by SternisheFan · · Score: 4, Funny

    In what experts are calling "the ultimate cry for attention", North Korea leader Kim Jung-Un blew himself up with his own nucleur weapons today. In an ironic twist, the missiles homed in on the largest Korean target available. Upon hearing this news Mrs. Un, who had been ordered to love Kim Jung with all of her heart, celebrated by feeding her people.

  67. Re:Wasnt /. supposed to be news site about compute by localman57 · · Score: 2

    And probably release a shitload of Higgs Bosons in the process. Or something.

  68. Re:Wasnt /. supposed to be news site about compute by s.petry · · Score: 0

    You must be really really close to the border and willing to jump in front of the impact zone. The NK Missile program is, well, rather prehistoric. In addition to a large amount of them having failing warheads that won't explode on impact, they are not very accurate.

    The fear is really, if DPRK fires first they will let off a whole lot of artillery fire which would hit something and sting a bit. After they fired, air power would level their tanks and artillery making it a one sided war.

    --

    -The wise argue that there are few absolutes, the fool argues that there are no probabilities.

  69. Re:Money by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    "Let" them move in? I don't think either of them are terribly eager to play international janitor...

  70. Fairly simple by AdmV0rl0n · · Score: 1

    This needs to be handled with a great deal of delicacy.

    I believe I'd tend to put half the subs there, and open all the nuke doors, and lets the news coverage speak for itself. Other words are not needed.

    Its hard to shell the SK Capital if your army has been turned to glass.

    --
    We`re all equal .. Just some of us are less equal than others.
  71. Consult physician by PPH · · Score: 1

    If it remains erect for more then 4 hours.

    Knowing Kim Jong Un, it'll be over in seconds.

    --
    Have gnu, will travel.
  72. Please launch by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    I've decided this whole modernity thing is bullshit. Shut it down. Shut it down, FOREVER.

  73. Raised Upright by Alopex · · Score: 1

    If it remains upright for more than 4 hours, we'd better call Kim Jong Un's doctor. Hopefully he didn't disconnect -all- of the phone lines to the U.S./allies.

  74. In words: ONE missile. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Duh... Big Deal! USA has hundreds of rockets aimed at N.K. and here we hear hubbub about "one" friggin' rocket....

    1. Re:In words: ONE missile. by voodoo+cheesecake · · Score: 1

      That's one 'friggin' rocket controlled by a whack job.

      By the way, I read all over the news that NK can't hit the US - while Alaska is within striking distance. Still goes to show that Alaska isn't considered a part of the US. NK could strike the Aleutians before an interceptor could intervene.

  75. Meanwhile in USA ... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    I guess the NK gesticulations are seen as a godsend by the White House : everybody seems to forget about the financial crisis and the sacrifices that come ahead.

  76. You mean by Sycraft-fu · · Score: 1, Funny

    A Kim Jong Hard-Un? :D

    Not my joke Robbaz does a bit on it on his Youtube page: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=l1AD2LWAc9Q

  77. stuxnet by shentino · · Score: 1

    I woinder if someone can lob a pack of malware at NK's missile silos and shut them down not unlike the israeli stuxnet attack on iran's centrifuges.

    It does seem to be a bloodless way of defusing things.

    1. Re:stuxnet by Anomalyst · · Score: 1

      How much malware for a 4004 processor is in existance?

      --
      There is no right to feel safe thru security vaudeville at the expense of everyone's freedom, privacy and tax money.
  78. Surgical strike by Freddybear · · Score: 1

    One drone, one Hellfire missile -> no more Nork missile on launch pad.
    Deny everything. Drone? What drone? Oh, that crazy Kim he sees drones everywhere. Crummy Nork missile just blew up on the pad, right.
    Nudge nudge wink wink saynomore.

  79. And now it's down . . . by Jaywalk · · Score: 1

    According to CNN they lowered the missile again not much later. What can I say? Some folks just can't keep it up.

    Seriously, though. The missiles they're tinkering with are using a less volitile fuel that doesn't have to be used right after fueling, so they could be messing around with this thing for days before the oxidizer they're using ruins their new toy.

    See? There's a nerdy side to every news story.

    --
    ===== Murphy's Law is recursive. =====
  80. Lost in translation by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Moments before raising the missile into firing position, Kim Jong-un was overheard stating, "You want flee erections in Nolth Kolea, Amelican pig dogs? Flee this erection!"

  81. Where are hardened New Yorkers? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    We need them. Somebody needs to stand outside Kim's palace and yell, "Jump! Jump! Jump!" so that he will make his suicidal move.

  82. Flag that says Boom by cgfsd · · Score: 1

    Anyone else expecting the launch to end with the rocket tip opening up with a giant clown flag that says "Kaboom!!!!!!!!!!!!" With multiple exclamation marks because they wanted a really big boom.

  83. An explaination by Cro+Magnon · · Score: 1

    This is NK's way of giving us the finger.

    --
    Slow down, cowboy! It has been 4 hours since you last posted. You must wait another few hours.
  84. Think They'll Fight In Heels? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    I got a kick out of this image:

    http://countdowntoeternityblog.files.wordpress.com/2013/04/article-2307290-193b977d000005dc-735_634x388.jpg

  85. Look at a map! by Dareth · · Score: 1

    Look at a map!
    South Korea would make a lovely island with an amazing view of the new seafront. It would even glow at night. Very romantic.

    --

    I only look human.
    My mother is a halfling and my dad is an ogre, so that makes me an Ogreling
    1. Re:Look at a map! by Dutchmaan · · Score: 1

      When I was a kid watching MASH, I always thought "why do they have that funny looking map of Florida on the wall!?

  86. Re:Money by rubycodez · · Score: 1

    that's what we should done in Iraq, let them busy themselves rebuilding. instead we continued to destroy things to make contractors rich. one things for sure, stupid idea to think "we'll impose democracy at gunpoint". that same mentality is why afghanistan such a failure, now we're negotiating with Taliban groups.

  87. Radioactive wasteland? by SmallFurryCreature · · Score: 1

    What, like Hiroshima and Nagasaki?

    Look them up on google maps. Mad Max is a lie. The desolation, destruction and utter lack of humanity is just ordinary everyday Australia.

    And you wouldn't need to nuke all of NK, just the capitol, kill the leadership and it is over. Koreans aren't muslims fanatics (Iraq/Afghanistan) or fighting the Xth foreign invader (Vietnam) they are closer to Germany and then the population in the concentration camps.

    --

    MMO Quests are like orgasms:

    You may solo them, I prefer them in a group.

  88. Is it pointy? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    My friendly neighbourhood Dictator says, they cannot lauch... not just yet. I heard that this rocket is too round on the top. It needs to be pointy! Round is not scary. Pointy is scary. This will put the smile on the faces of the enemy. They will think it is huge robot dildo flying towards them :)

  89. Why am I reminded of... by WWWWolf · · Score: 1

    Why am I reminded of Star Wreck 4½? Can't remember the exact quote, but...

    "Alert the enemies, that we're about to warm up the twinkler banks... soon."

    "Alert the enemies, that we're about to warm up the twinkler banks... now."

    (Several hours later)

    "All right, if you want it. So be it. We will not make any more warnings. All light balls and twinkler banks... feuer."

    (The ensuing fight consists mostly of dodging maneuvers of "turn right very slowly" variety)

  90. CN by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    * citation needed

  91. Shitty wall! oh no?? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Ohhhh wow, R'okay, maybe North-a Korea fire missile in wrong-a direction and brow up best-a friend China? Den dey knock-a-down shitty wall!!!
    DAMN U NORTH KOREA!!

  92. CIA friends by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    thanks cia friends :) you are luring the public to attack another nation based on bullshit :) thanks for the 9-11 inside job too! thanks for all of the shit you put this great nation through to enrich yourselves and your corporate masters :)

    but most of all, thank slashdot, who can't see this is another psy-op inside job to get more money out of you dumb motherfuckers. yeah!! everyon call for preemptive stike! you slashdotters are so smart :)

  93. America leaves = the Koreas reunify by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    For decades the dribbling betas of the West were told by the propaganda mass media outlets that reunification between East and West Germany was unthinkable, and even if it did happen, it would take 30+ years from a 'go' date. When the Russians withdrew, it happened virtually overnight.

    The USA plays the role in Korea the USSR did in East Germany, and for the same reason. The USSR did not want Germany (at that time) to become the dominant power-house in mid-Europe (and even so, West Germany came close to that position). The USA has promised Japan to prevent its former slave colony, Korea, from becoming the OTHER economic powerhouse of the Far East. America has forces in the South to prevent a CAPITALIST reunification of North and South.

    The owners of Slashdot, like the rest of the mainstream media, continue to pump their vile propaganda down your throats. Are you really so pathetic that you will continue to believe this nonsense?

  94. Hopefully by amanaplanacanalpanam · · Score: 1
    We can work things out with descending to destruction.

    How about...a nice game of chess?

  95. We are better at demonizing than understanding by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    For all of our 'enemies', the US has been far better at Propaganda demonizing them than at understanding them and working against their weaknesses.

    We have a huge and hugely expensive military. So we keep playing our strong card, and keep losing the resulting wars.

    Insanity.

    Al Qaeda, Iraq, Iran, China, NK, ... all have serious weaknesses that it would be easy to exploing. Iran is burdened by Mullahs that a lot of the voters would be glad to be rid of, there are a lot of things that would undermine the Mullahs, support the voters. Instead, we continuously increase sanctions and other pressures, providing the Mullah's an excuse for the lousy economy.

    Etc. No imagination.

    And all this assumes that there is a definable 'national interest' that actually helps us in the 99%, which is false. And that our gov can actually accomplish something besides repression, which is increasingly false.

  96. Re:Wasnt /. supposed to be news site about compute by Hognoxious · · Score: 1

    Unless someone panics and pops open a small can of instant sunshine. Then someone else, who doesn't want to look like a wuss, chucks a few catering size ones in random directions.

    --
    Confucius say, "Find worm in apple - bad. Find half a worm - worse."
  97. Overthinking this by Animats · · Score: 2

    There's always the possibility that the missile crew, being under orders to be ready to launch, was just doing a routine systems checkout.

    During the Cuban missile crisis, US experts thought that the USSR was "sending a message". The missile sites in Cuba were easy to spot because they were laid out exactly the same way as in the USSR. Decades later, on the 40th anniversary of the crisis, there was a get-together of some of the major players from all sides. Someone asked about the layout of the sites. The Russian officer who'd been responsible for the layout said "No, we just did it that way because that was what it said to do in the field manual." Everyone in the room with military experience nodded in agreement.

  98. Correction: by Darth+Hubris · · Score: 1

    CNN would like to apologize for the mistranslation. The article should have read "North Korean penis raised to firing position". As a further addendum to this story a North Korean Communist staffer was heard to say "So sorry, Un; we can try again later". The staffer was killed and later imprisoned.

    --
    The party's over ... the drink ... and the luck ... ran out
  99. Re:Money by Hognoxious · · Score: 1

    roman_mir's back.

    --
    Confucius say, "Find worm in apple - bad. Find half a worm - worse."
  100. What we really need. by TimO_Florida · · Score: 1

    Sounds like a perfect reason for an orbital laser platform....

  101. EMP detonation by Danathar · · Score: 1

    I've only seen very little coverage of this, but it would not be very hard for NK to launch a modified nuke to detonate high in the atmosphere causing an EMP pulse to take out the electronics of most of the south, and a good part of Japan and China.

    Now you might be thinking that this would be bad for NK as well, but you think about it, it would level the playing field in the short term considerably. Yes, the U.S. could still fly bombers from across the ocean and maybe to sorties from carriers (if they aren't affected by the EMP blast).

    In the meantime a couple of million NK troops with basic gear could flood across the border while U.S. and South Korean forces would be left to their basic non-electronic gear.

    1. Re:EMP detonation by nblender · · Score: 1

      It may surprise you to know that the various military contractors of the world have figured out how to get around the whole "EMP" thing... Sure, an EMP still has a very brief effect, but sensitive equipment is not ruined; it simply restarts. Google "Nuclear Event Detector". Here's one: "Maxwell HSN1000"

  102. IP V6 by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Sounds like a need for IP V6 virtual hosting.

  103. Mail weed to Kim Jong Un by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    This reminds me, last night it occurred to me that he might have a whole different attitude if he and his generals had a session.

    I got to thinking, you can get recreational weed in Washington State, and since it's coastal there's no need to transship across states where it's illegal. Just FedEx some weed to those guys.

    Logistical nightmare!

    First, FedEx doesn't ship there. I bet UPS doesn't either. I got as far as finding out that "humanitarian" US Postal shipments are allowed; but drugs might be problematic. Also, I couldn't find an actual address for Kim Jong Un or "Dear Leader's Palace" or anything like that.

    If anybody could pull it off though, I think it would actually top Steve Job's famous call to the Vatican.

  104. Erection by glenebob · · Score: 2

    Kim Jong Un: No, you idiots, I said we need to have a missile ERECTION! ERECTION! We should vote on what to do with them!

  105. It's all right folks.... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    just NK giving the finger to the US. :)

  106. Now this is what a general.... by vikingpower · · Score: 1

    ...gets an erection from.

    --
    Religous speak to God. Insane are spoken to by God. When all shut up, one can finally hear Shostakovich in peace
  107. Re:Wasnt /. supposed to be news site about compute by burisch_research · · Score: 1

    Heavy, man ... that's heavy ...

    --
    char*f="char*f=%c%s%c;main(){printf(f,34,f,34);}";main(){printf(f,34,f,34);}
  108. Samsung by ravnous · · Score: 1

    Won't somebody PLEASE think of the smartphones?!?!

    --
    When does this happen in the movie?
  109. They fire it, we turn the country into pure tar by jayesel · · Score: 1

    It's simply time to overthrow the place. America is excellent at destabilizing govts. Whatever happens afterward can be South Korea's concern. They fire that missle, we should strike them viciously and reduce the entire country to nothing.

  110. Gets what, now? by Ungrounded+Lightning · · Score: 1

    Remember the Squeaky Axis of Evil gets the Grease.

    Or greased.

    Or Greece

    (Of course, with the current state of their economy, what Squeaky Axis of Evil would want them?)

    --
    Bantam Dominique roosters crow a four-note song. Once you've heard it as "Happy BIRTHday" you can't NOT hear it that way
  111. YAY! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    YAY!

    The boy King finally got it up.

  112. Good point. by durdur · · Score: 1

    By and large, the U.S. doesn't believe what they say. But the public threats and provocations may help convince the North Koreans (who mostly get their news from official sources, or not at all) that the regime is powerful and active, and its enemies are dangerous.

  113. It's like sex.. by nanospook · · Score: 1

    At the end, she's going.. "will you cum already? I'm late for work!'

    --
    Have you fscked your local propeller head today?
  114. Government by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Purple penis pumpernickel.

  115. Re:And... it's gone - Health care by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Tip: If you want to have cheap affordable healthcare in the USA... I hope someone is listening...
    Regulate common procedures/pricing.
    Cap bed/nightly costs
    Cap emergency room 'wait' fees. etc.
    For example, Canadian traveling abroad is covered by Canadian Health insurance, but only to what WOULD be covered in Canada. No more than $535/Night for a hospital bed, and so forth. (There is a list url?)

    Simply addup the actual hours/costs for a procedure in 'reality' (not including hidden administrative costs so common in hospitals), and set that as the maximum.. When common operations/procedures fall to 1/10th the currently charged 'price', hospitals will be forced to become more efficient and Insurance rates SHOULD drop accordingly. Hell Regulate profits in Insurance companies also.
    This also has the advantage of leaving new/experimental procedures wide open, and those wealthy enough can still purchase a longer life, while subsidizing common care for all.

    ObamaCare is like the worst possible idea anyone could think of... (Unless your goal is to MAKE MONEY, FOLLOW THE MONEY) Force everyone to get insurance, allow the rampent pricing which is only encouraged so that added costs make increased premiums customers will be FORCED to pay.

  116. lol license by goldenfish · · Score: 1

    May be contain license with their computer lol

    --
    Love my money
  117. Re:Wasnt /. supposed to be news site about compute by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Why is it always the poster that spells the joke out for everyone who gets the mod points? It was funny without your explanation, thanks very much indeed.

    Ah, Americans. Humour is to be a 2x4-to-the-cranium or it's just too subtle

    .

  118. Re:Wasnt /. supposed to be news site about compute by Sardaukar86 · · Score: 1

    Or am I mistaken?

    Obvious Troll is obvious. There's always one of you pricks ready to wail "this isn't news for nerds!" and it has long since become a tiresome, unimaginative and uninteresting troll.

    As of this post, 250+ comments says this is news for nerds. Complaint, meet reality.

    --
    ..Mullah or Pope, Preacher or Poet, who was it wrote: "Give any one species too much rope and they'll fuck it up"?
  119. not exactly by OrangeTide · · Score: 1

    No, I didn't want to write a big long response to every point since this is not a formal debate. I thought it would be more cooperative to first let other people discuss the other issues with the post.

    So far no posts really responded to you, so I guess nobody gave a shit.

    --
    “Common sense is not so common.” — Voltaire
  120. That's not Florida silly! by Dareth · · Score: 1

    That's not Florida silly! That is XANTH

    --

    I only look human.
    My mother is a halfling and my dad is an ogre, so that makes me an Ogreling
  121. No war by NewYork · · Score: 1

    NK has no oil.

  122. secretive government by DarthVain · · Score: 1

    not all that secretive if one can find out in short order about a single missile being raised into firing position...

  123. North Korean Safety plan by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    I doubt that Kim Jong Un would let Dennis Rodman get blown up in a nuclear blast. So I guess whatever city he is in is safe.

    Then we can sequentially send each Harlem Globetrotter over there to buddy up with Kim Jong Un. Once that's done, we'll strategically position a Harlem Globetrotter in each major city in countries that N Korea is hostile towards.

    There's no way they'll strike!

  124. Well said; watch out, insincere mourners by GPS+Pilot · · Score: 1

    For example, sending comrades to forced labor camps (where 40% die of malnutrition) if they participated in organized gatherings to mourn the death of Kim Jong Il, but "didn't cry and didn't seem genuine." http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2012/01/13/north-korea-punish-mourners-insincere-kim-jong-il_n_1204377.html

    --
    That that is is that that that that is not is not.
  125. Bombing civilians... by GPS+Pilot · · Score: 1

    Bombing civilians and calling it cost of doing business?

    Apparently you've never sat through a class on the Law of Armed Conflict. Intentionally targeting civilians is forbidden. When a military target is bombed and civilians casualties are accidentally incurred, military professionals call it "collateral damage" (your screed is the first place I've heard it called "cost of doing business"). Many resources are expended in order to minimize collateral damage: teams of lawyers have to approve every target, then very expensive smart bombs are dispatched.

    The "Greatest Generation" didn't do any of that -- to the contrary, residential neighborhoods in Dresden and Tokyo were intentionally targeted with incendiary bombs, and civilian casualties were the goal. Does that make the current generation "Greater than the Greatest"?

    US may not be quite as beligerant as NK

    Are you saying that NK's teams of lawyers may not be quite as concerned about sparing civilians as the US teams; or that NK's smart bombs may not be quite as good as US smart bombs about using low yields to take out military targets while sparing nearby civilian structures?

    Or maybe you and the folks who modded you up are just speaking out of the anti-American chips on your shoulders.

    --
    That that is is that that that that is not is not.
  126. They can't win, but we'll still lose. by GPS+Pilot · · Score: 1

    There is basically no scenario in which North Korea can start a war and "win".

    Nobody is worried about a scenario in which NK wins. Everybody is worried about a scenario in which both sides lose (lots of lives). There are are plenty of plausible scenarios like that.

    --
    That that is is that that that that is not is not.
  127. in search of punch line, please by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Well, you know, once you've seen one Asian with his missile raised to firing position.....

  128. So the US has the most experience here? by OrangeTide · · Score: 1

    Over 60 years ago... When was they last time the US has openly threatened another nation with nuclear warfare?
    Our policies are dynamic and evolving, not and are not as static and entrenched as you are trying to imply. Let us hope the US foreign policy isn't identical to the same policy we used during a massive desperate war on two fronts.

    --
    “Common sense is not so common.” — Voltaire
    1. Re:So the US has the most experience here? by Luckyo · · Score: 1

      Right now? The main way of controlling North Korea's threat of levelling Seoul is currently tactical nuclear strikes against known artillery positions. Nothing else is even remotely fast enough.

      That's why NATO training is about flying strategic nuclear bombers among other things. And that is what got North Korea to go nuts this time.

    2. Re:So the US has the most experience here? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      High tech weapons with conventional warheads are more precise and more tactical than nuclear weapons. And if you want, they can ride the same rockets. but you can also put conventional payloads on variety of delivery systems. Basically I'm saying with conventional weapons you have more options than you would if you chose to go the nuclear route.

      FYI - using nuclear weapons would violate several of the treaties we have signed. And also violates the current agreements we have with NATO and the UN. So I'm going to call bullshit on your "NATO training is about flying strategic nuclear bombers"

    3. Re:So the US has the most experience here? by Luckyo · · Score: 1

      But they cannot inflict significant DAMAGE needed to disable enough artillery before it levels Soul. Which is the problem.

      Also, you can call bullshit all you want. Fact is, NATO maintains a significant nuclear deterrent worldwide. Most of it is US, with some being in the hands of UK and France. And another fact is that the current NK trouble started after drills where B-52s were flown near the border, and escalated after B-2 were flown there.

  129. Comment removed by account_deleted · · Score: 1

    Comment removed based on user account deletion

  130. Imagine whatever you want I guess by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    missile with 10 ton yields are the current technology. Multiple strikes are possible. All of which can disable atterillery and bunkers.

    If you can build a bunker that will stop a MOAB, then you can also build one that will stop any of the nuclear warheads the US currently has. The construction of such bunkers would be nearly identical, just thicker and deeper for a nuke bunker.

    1. Re:Imagine whatever you want I guess by Luckyo · · Score: 1

      This is indeed correct for bunkers. However the problem is not bunkers. It's artillery in firing positions in the open.

      Conventional explosives are far weaker then nuclear weapons at striking against open positions due to much smaller shockwave caused. They can sometimes match a general purpose tactical nuclear weapon when it comes to bunker busting due to using a specially shaped penetrator warhead. It again cannot match a nuke designed for penetration.

      Essentially nuclear weapons are significantly better then conventional weapons at causing destruction through explosive expansion simply due to laws of physics.