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.'"

118 of 636 comments (clear)

  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 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.
    4. 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.
    5. 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.
    6. 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...
    7. 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...
    8. 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.

    9. 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."
    10. 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.

    11. 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!

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

      iPhone 5RAE*

      * radio-active edition

    13. 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
    14. 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".'
    15. 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
    16. 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.
    17. 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.

    18. 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.

    19. 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."
    20. 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.
    21. 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.

    22. 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.

    23. 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
    24. 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.

    25. 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
    26. 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
    27. Re:And... it's gone by Entropius · · Score: 2

      Are you saying they have trouble erecting their dongs?

      (Sorry, couldn't resist.)

    28. 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
    29. 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

    30. 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
    31. 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
    32. 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.

    33. 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.
    34. 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
    35. Re:And... it's gone by OakDragon · · Score: 2, Funny

      Jong Un, is that you?

    36. 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
    37. 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.
    38. 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.
    39. 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
    40. 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
    41. 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

    42. 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.

    43. 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.

    44. 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.

    45. 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.

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

      You're right! China could become polluted!

    47. 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.

    48. 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!
    49. 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.
    50. 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.

    51. 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
    52. 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.

    53. 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
    54. 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
    55. 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."
    56. 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.

    57. 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.

    58. 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.

    59. 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
    60. 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.

    61. 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.

    62. 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.

    63. 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.
    64. 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
    65. 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.
    66. 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...

    67. 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 -
    68. 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.

    69. 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.
    70. 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.

    71. 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.

    72. 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.

  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 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.

    3. Re:boner by Alain+Williams · · Score: 2

      Maybe juvenile, but I think quite accurate.

  3. 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.

  4. 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.
  5. 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
  6. 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 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."

  7. 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
  8. 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
  9. 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.

  10. 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.

  11. 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 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.

    2. 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?

    3. 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
  12. Re:Wasnt /. supposed to be news site about compute by fustakrakich · · Score: 2

    Gentlemen! Please...!

    --
    “He’s not deformed, he’s just drunk!”
  13. 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.

  14. 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.

  15. 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.

  16. 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.
  17. North Korea... by ZankerH · · Score: 5, Funny

    What a bunch of seoulless, warmongering scum.

  18. 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.

  19. 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.
  20. 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.

  21. Re:Wasnt /. supposed to be news site about compute by ichthus · · Score: 2

    More likely Windows CE.

    --
    sig: sauer
  22. 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.
  23. 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 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!
  24. 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.
  25. Re:Just like in the movies by ichthus · · Score: 2

    James Bond, nothin'. It's time for Psy to kick some ass. :)

    --
    sig: sauer
  26. 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 CaptainLard · · Score: 2

      One nitpick: doesn't a regime need to be stable before it can be destabilized?

  27. 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.

  28. 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.

  29. Kim Jong-un by Camembert · · Score: 2

    I must say that I much preferred Kim Jong-un when he was doing Gangnam Style.

  30. 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.

  31. 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.

  32. 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
  33. 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.

  34. 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!