NK Admitts to Having Nukes

I have no problem admitting when I've been owned ..this is not one of those :E



alright alright, you got me tron!
 
CptStern said:
I have no problem admitting when I've been owned ..this is not one of those :E



alright alright, you got me tron!
Click to expand...
See it wasn't that hard now was it?

GhostFox it's your turn to admit you was owned by me.
 
kirovman said:
When are the nuclear tests? I'm trying to book my tickets to go watch...
Click to expand...


Can you say Tsunami??


I think you missed it. :cheers:
 
Can you say Tsunami??
I think you missed it.
Click to expand...

Don't joke about that. Some Islamic groups are claiming that is was an Israeli nuclear device deliberately detonated to create the tsunami. Of course a prominent cleric also released a report stating that the Israeli's detonated their device 60,000 kilometers away. Apparently they don't teach the circumference of the Earth over there.
 
But really NK the US they both have there flaws, i dont trust any of them. Sadly i distrust the US more then NK mainly because In Australia were here little about NK. The thing I find distrusting about the USA is they have the highest gun murders in the world, When thinking about this and knowing that lockheed builds 1 titan missile a month for the states. I say why give a short temped country the ablity to destroy large amounts of land and people. The USA has the ability to do good, but they force themselfs and there form of freedom on to other countries like rapists. Like i said they can do good but they way they go about it is wrong in my eyes
 
The thing I find distrusting about the USA is they have the highest gun murders in the world
Click to expand...

You do realize that you just made that up, don't you?
 
GhostFox said:
Don't joke about that. Some Islamic groups are claiming that is was an Israeli nuclear device deliberately detonated to create the tsunami. Of course a prominent cleric also released a report stating that the Israeli's detonated their device 60,000 kilometers away. Apparently they don't teach the circumference of the Earth over there.
Click to expand...

pppsssshhh!


Who said I was jokin?

So, I'm a bit of a conspriacy theorist, so here's the latest.

HL2 brought some awareness of a certain city very close to N.K. that has rumours of the same sort of thing as what takes place in HL2 happening (the dictatorship and all that, people rise up and kill him), as well as a certain coastal town that has a bunch of sunken submerines, awaiting disposal of thier reactors. Funny enough it's name is Shkotovo17 as well,(or something like that, you can search on city17 herer at the forums or homelan security to find it).
Anyway, digging into the history of what has happened there, apparantly more than 3 contracts have been made for disposal of the reactors, the last happening not too long ago, with the company not making any changes, and hints of something large at the city going on, with airs of Area51, if you get my drift. There is even an article about from a journalist on vacation from the computer industry in Taipei, wanting to explore, he ends up @ Shkotovo, and has car troubles. he is unable to enter town becasue of the border gates at the edge of town, and is told by locals in another town that noone goes there...and if they do, they never seem to come back.....

this thread has alot of info...

but anyway, there is still 20 or so subs with dual reactors, and nuclear waste that can be centrifuged into weapons grade material....just sitting htere. decommisioned nuclear subs that were part of the now none-exsistant USSR naval fleet. WHo's looking after those subs? Just why is it that Korea, and it's close proximity to the event, never got hit? not even much in the way of rainstorms...(I have a few freinds who teach english in taipei...the pictures or horrendous that they brought back.)

BANG!!! :eek: Tsunami comes out of nowhere. Nevermind all the sensors in the area because of the pacific rim, and volcanic activity currently being studied, as well as the effects of water-displacement monitoring going on in the area becaseu of current structes that are on man-made islands(dubai and japan spring to mind), but the supposed epi-center being just a few kilometers out of a sensored area...


Noone has talked about what casued the earthquake to begin with. Tectonic plates shifting, volcanic ativity, whatever the issue was, you usually see the naysayers saying part of civilization is giong to disappear somewhere else soon(uh, san franscisco?)....where are those people? WHere are the environmentalists, screaming that something must be done? not many people think about the size of the wave that hit, or the early shocks and after-shocks that normally happen when there is an earthquake....how come the wave in the region aren't any higher than normal now, as they should be? just one slip, and that's it?

:eek:
I chose to not join the :borg: ... i have eyes and ears of my own, and can make my own judgements on what i think is truth, even if it's not right. Once people were ridiculed for the saying the earth is round...
 
GhostFox said:
You do realize that you just made that up, don't you?
Click to expand...


This was my fault i should of stated 1st world country. If you compair the USA to Iran or Iraq then yes those 3rd world countries would have high rates of death. But do except that the USA has very high population rate, compaired to Australia. The gun murder rate in USA by guns is very high, maybe its because of your constitutional right to have arms, plus it might be in your nature and because of your history.

Did you know this

Approximate number of American lives lost during the 14 year Vietnam War (1961 - 1975) was 58,000.

Total number of American lives lost over a 14 year period from gun violence (1985 - 1998) was 491,088.

Since 1980 more men, women, and children have been killed by gunfire in the United States (more than 650,000) than US servicemen and women killed during battle in all of the wars dating from the Revolutionary War to the present.


Plus
I like to say this...
Unlike the USA, Australia did not need civil war to unite its states to form united country. The USA does remind me of the show "The million doller man" mainly this quote "We can rebulid him, We have the technology"


This may seem Anti-American (what do i mean "seem") but really I have no strong dislike for americans, I only disargee on what your nation has done, and I feel stupid that my country (Australia) is helping.
 
Here is a did you know for you.

Did you know that the Aus. violent crime rate is well over twice that of the US per capita, and continues to rise steeply while the US rate continues to fall?

Not that the US doesn't have crime problems. Everywhere does. But people focus so much on the US because of the media they don't realize that the violent crime rate is very low in the US (Canada for example has 2.03 times the rate per capita), and the US has obviously implemented ideas that have been very sucessful in reducing crime rates. I hope other countries pay close attention, because crime rates are rising around the world.
 
GhostFox said:
I don't know where you get your ideas from. Many people will at the least consider NA all the same place, and I have run into people who think that Canada is actually just a US state. The countries are so similar that people from the US/Canada can't tell them apart. Why would you expect Europeans to be able to?
Click to expand...

If it´s a joke, then it´s a silly one. :p



GhostFox said:
It does not matter. It is fundementally wrong for the govt. to have it's hands involved in media outlets. I don't support it anywhere in the world. Whether or not it is abused is immaterial.
Click to expand...

I´ve seen more critical broadcasts on German governmental issues on the public broadcast stations than on the commercial ones.
 
Map & Graph: Crime: Total crimes (Top 50 Countries)

Total crimes:

1. United States 23,677,800 (1999)
2. Germany 6,264,723 (2000)
3. United Kingdom 5,170,831 (2000)
4. France 3,771,849 (2000)
5. South Africa 3,422,743 (2000)
6. Russia 2,952,367 (2000)
7. Canada 2,476,520 (2000)
8. Japan 2,443,470 (2000)
9. Italy 2,205,782 (2000)
10. India 1,764,629 (1999)



Map & Graph: Crime: Total crimes (per capita) (Top 50 Countries)

Total crimes (per capita):

1. Dominica 112.79 per 1000 people
2. New Zealand 108.12 per 1000 people
3. Finland 102.15 per 1000 people
4. Denmark 93.64 per 1000 people
5. Chile 90.00 per 1000 people
6. United Kingdom 86.04 per 1000 people
7. Montserrat 83.49 per 1000 people
8. United States 81.55 per 1000 people
9. Netherlands 80.84 per 1000 people
10. South Africa 80.02 per 1000 people

GhostFox, do you see Australia anythere under Top 50? :p
If you have up-to-date information, then please present it.

Mytris, Iran and Iraq aren´t even under Top 50, neither regarding total crimes, nor total crimes per capita. :p
 
Why the hell are people talking about crime rates in a thread that should be about north korean nukes?
You should all know that there is a very short tether in here when it comes to getting off topic.
Get on topic.
People who fail to comply will be warned.


Thanks in advance.
-Bliink :)
 
I really don´t sympathise to NK. Just as today I´ve seen a "reportage" from NK, Germans have opened there a cultural centre. Why do I call it "reportage"? Because they haven´t been allowed to go where they wanted and to see what they wanted.

There is still a very strong personality cult of the dead Kim II-sung: NK officially refers to him as the "Great Leader" and he is enshrined in the constitution as the country's "eternal President".

But I don´t think they are likely to attack someone nuking first.
 
seinfeldrules said:
With the psycho they have as a leader, I wouldnt doubt it. The man is truly insane.
Click to expand...

He'd probably go with the old cold war tactics the USSR developed if he decided to nuke things: nuclear strike on South Korea & assorted targets, followed by a mechanized push into the Seoul.
A disciplined army with a nuclear arsenal could take most of south korea in a day or two.

However, he might decide to hit Japan, which is essentially defenceless, or Taiwan, with which he has some kind of grudge.
 
bliink said:
He'd probably go with the old cold war tactics the USSR developed if he decided to nuke things: nuclear strike on South Korea & assorted targets, followed by a mechanized push into the Seoul.
A disciplined army with a nuclear arsenal could take most of south korea in a day or two.

However, he might decide to hit Japan, which is essentially defenceless, or Taiwan, with which he has some kind of grudge.
Click to expand...

Yep.. I doubt he could resist nuking Seoul if he was going to actually use them... If he had enough beyond that his next target would be Japan. Taiwan? I dunno... Maybe. But if he has the range to reach Alaska he'd hit there before Taiwan IMO.

I'm still predicting he doesn't have detonators to do it though.
 
Sgt_Shellback said:
Yep.. I doubt he could resist nuking Seoul if he was going to actually use them... If he had enough beyond that his next target would be Japan. Taiwan? I dunno... Maybe. But if he has the range to reach Alaska he'd hit there before Taiwan IMO.
Click to expand...

Attacking alaska would only be useful for the symbolic value of hitting US soil, which Kim Il is most likely a sucker for.. but, of far more symbolic value to him is Seoul, Maybe even Hong Kong, considering its a major economic hub, but thats a bit risky, since its in China.

Sgt_Shellback said:
I'm still predicting he doesn't have detonators to do it though.
Click to expand...

Pakistan has them going cheap I hear...
 
No way.. He wouldn't attack China.... He still believes they will come to his rescue again... I don't think he's grasped that China is not the friend they once were.

The reason I think the detonators would be trouble is that timing issues are a big problem even for the most high tech companies making electronics... Right now I can't buy an ocsillator from Japan, California, or Canada that is stable beyond room temperature.

It would be tough.
 
Nofuture, I sent you the proof in a PM so as not to upset Bliink. If you'd like to discuss these new revelations you can start a different thread. :)
 
I think he might hit Japan even before SK. If he has 2 nukes, why waste them on SK when you can more easily devestate it with artilliary fire? Now Japan he can't touch without a nuke.
 
GhostFox said:
I think he might hit Japan even before SK. If he has 2 nukes, why waste them on SK when you can more easily devestate it with artilliary fire? Now Japan he can't touch without a nuke.
Click to expand...

I think its likely that once you have one nuke.. its not that hard to get more.
Economies of scale 'n such
 
I think its likely that once you have one nuke.. its not that hard to get more.
Click to expand...

They have a very limited amount of material on hand to process. Getting more is very difficult and expensive process, as is building the end product. I don't think NK will ever have any sizeable number of nukes unless sanctions are lifted and the are left alone for 100 years.

I think in some ways it makes NK more dangerous. I get the feeling they are more likely to use 2 then to use any if they had 1,000. Knowing that these might be the only ones they ever have might give them the urge to use them before they lose them.
 
He'd probably go with the old cold war tactics the USSR developed if he decided to nuke things: nuclear strike on South Korea & assorted targets, followed by a mechanized push into the Seoul.
A disciplined army with a nuclear arsenal could take most of south korea in a day or two.

However, he might decide to hit Japan, which is essentially defenceless, or Taiwan, with which he has some kind of grudge.
Click to expand...

I agree 100%.

I doubt he would nuke Seoul for a few reasons.

A: It would be a large symbolic victory to be able to raise NK flag in the middle of Seoul.

B: They already have enough artillery pointed at Seoul to do enough damage without needing a nuke. Seoul is really within spitting distance from NK.
 
They already have enough artillery pointed at Seoul to do enough damage without needing a nuke. Seoul is really within spitting distance from NK.
Click to expand...

My reason exactly. Seoul would be a waste of a nuke.
 
Although the fact that N. Korea has gone public with its nuclear weapons program is disturbing, I wouldn't worry too much about a strike on the continental U.S. or even Hawaii or Alaska. To reach the latter two they would have to successfully implement the TD-1 missile program, of which their only test of this type of missile resulted in failure.

I believe the range of the missile they currently rely on is about 1300 km. And as far as I know they have only flight tested this missile a couple times (maybe just once), so who knows if it wouldn't just blow up at launch.

I am much more concerned at the moment with a strike against S. Korea or possibly Japan. I know Kim Jong is a little crazy, but exactly how crazy he is is a debatable issue. I seriously doubt he would do anything unless he felt there was a major military operation coming his way, but who knows.

And as for the comment someone made on N. Korea's army, they are the most well-fed group of the entire population. Any food that N. Korea gets is given to the armed forces first (And high ranking members of the Communist party of course). The general populace is given what's left, which isn't a whole lot.
 
seinfeldrules said:
I agree 100%.

I doubt he would nuke Seoul for a few reasons.

A: It would be a large symbolic victory to be able to raise NK flag in the middle of Seoul.

B: They already have enough artillery pointed at Seoul to do enough damage without needing a nuke. Seoul is really within spitting distance from NK.
Click to expand...

You're over-rating arty... Think back to Stalingrad and Berlin... Lots of artilliary can't take a city...

And I think are over-rating what a nuke-does... To think that if you use it... The place is enclocsed in a invisible force field that is inpenetrable is wrong.

Back in the 50's American troops practised going into a blast zone. Long term health aside an army can fight and occupy a city after a blast. The blast makes it easy.

Kim is set on one Korea first... He see's his biggest hurtle in the US... Japan is a long time enemy (Mostly deserved).... Taiwan is supported by the US so they get the 3rd priority.

The Korea scenerio, more than anything, is why the military has been developing small nukes and bunker buster nukes. IMO.

Kim has the deepest, strongest bunkers in the world... Filled with Beach Boy records and blonde dyed hair NK woman if the tabloids are right.

If he is the madman we all agree that he is. Then none of us can predict what he'll do. The Boyscouts know how to handle a situation like this. Always be prepared.
 
Lots of artilliary can't take a city
Click to expand...

Have you seen this artilliary? It is insane. It could probably level the entire city if given enough time. I think I read a report once that said 50,000 SK would die in the first hour of artilliary bombardment of Seoul. Hiroshima only killed 40k (discounting the latter deaths due to radiation. I mean the blast. And yes nukes are bigger now. It is just for a mental comparison. Stop nitpicking :p )
 
If he is the madman we all agree that he is.
Click to expand...

Did you miss all the people on here arguing that he was a normal guy? You will somehow find lots of people who don't think he's nuts.
 
Sgt_Shellback said:
And I think are over-rating what a nuke-does...
Click to expand...

and don't forget, NK isn't armed with thermonuclear weapons. Just the "vanilla" kind AFAIK
 
Well doesn't matter...a nuke is a nuke.

Doesn't matter if he uses 1 or 20.

Now in my mind if we was to ever go to war with NK we would ether..

A.) Send in the navy seals/spec ops to disable the nukes before they could launch.

B.) Bomb the launch sites with smart bombs/dumb bombs whatever...
 
Tron, you would not send SEAL's. Most likely they couldn't carry enough explosives to disable the silo's, nevermind make it there safely.

Airstrikes using tactical bunker-busters would be the most sure thing. Whether the US will go that far is another issue.
 
GhostFox said:
Tron, you would not send SEAL's. Most likely they couldn't carry enough explosives to disable the silo's, nevermind make it there safely.

Airstrikes using tactical bunker-busters would be the most sure thing. Whether the US will go that far is another issue.
Click to expand...
Well I didn't just say seals...I also added spec ops. :|

Also you wouldn't need so much explosives...you ain't destroying the silo...you're destroying the nuke itself.

Like say it's boosters?Also they could if they planned right...don't doubt our special forces that much.

They can pull off some crazy shit.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

bbson john
Hi everyone. I am new to this forum!
Replies
11
Views
6K
Tollbooth Willie
Tollbooth Willie
B
From Warren Spector to Arkane Studios: Half-Life 2's cancelled Ravenholm episode
Replies
2
Views
10K
Clan Wolf 2
Clan Wolf 2
MFL
Fascinating look at the ongoing psychological evolution of flat hieirarchies.
Replies
2
Views
2K
Tollbooth Willie
Tollbooth Willie
B
Barking Dog Studios' work for Valve
Replies
0
Views
11K
Barnz
B
B
Community Interviews: Final Exchange development team
Replies
0
Views
5K
Barnz
B
Back
Top