North Korea Says It Has Conducted Nuclear Test 1623
ScentCone writes "North Korea says that it has conducted its first nuclear weapons test and 'brought happiness to its people.' Japan and China earlier issued an unusual joint statement saying that such a test would be 'unacceptable.' As of 11:10PM EST, the USGS says that it has not detected any unusual seismic activity on the Korean peninsula in the last 48 hours." From the article: "The North said last week it would conduct a test, sparking regional concern and frantic diplomatic efforts aimed at dissuading Pyongyang from such a move. North Korea has long claimed to have nuclear weapons, but had never before performed a known test to prove its arsenal. The nuclear test was conducted at 10:36 a.m. (0136 GMT) in Hwaderi near Kilju city, Yonhap reported, citing defense officials." Update: 10/09 05:50 GMT by J : The U.S. Geological Survey reports a 4.2 magnitude quake; South Korean news is reporting a 3.58 magnitude event; the White House apparently confirms a nuclear test.
Confirmed (Score:5, Informative)
Sizemography (Score:5, Informative)
Update: Seismic info now confirms activity (Score:5, Informative)
Looks like it will be a busy day in diplo-land, and a noisy day in pundit-land.
Re:Verification? (Score:2, Informative)
USGS Reports North Korean Nuke Test as 4.2 Quake (Score:3, Informative)
Look at the seismic data. no spinning this one. (Score:5, Informative)
And a global map indicating it here [usgs.gov].
No denying that one.
Re:Actually, USGS did detect seismic activity (Score:2, Informative)
If you go to the Maps tab it gives you this Google Maps link (tinyURLized): http://tinyurl.com/ghvuy [tinyurl.com]
Take a look about 4-5 miles north of the estimated epicenter, there's a large complex of buildings there. Wonder what those are?
Re:Verification? (Score:3, Informative)
Check link, then post - I always get that out of order.
map (Score:5, Informative)
Google/Yahoo Maps GPS Location of USGS event (Score:2, Informative)
Re:So what's the yeild amount? (Score:5, Informative)
Re:Google/Yahoo Maps GPS Location of USGS event (Score:1, Informative)
Re:Atleast they're telling us... (Score:1, Informative)
tactical/sub-tactical range. 1-5kT roughly (Score:5, Informative)
On a slightly more serious note... (Score:3, Informative)
No unusual seismic activity (Score:3, Informative)
Re:Another missed opportunity (Score:3, Informative)
"I TOLD YOU SO!"
Better have a look at this [wikipedia.org] (scroll down to the part about the Korean War) before making that statement. If he were alive today, no doubt MacArthur would be horrified to see what his miscalculation of the Chinese response created: North Korea in its current form.
Re:Take em now (Score:3, Informative)
You realize North Korea is a country and not a person, right? Assuming you are referring to Kim Jong-Il (or Ahmadinejad, or Chavez, or Hussein, or whomever you think it is most important to be scared of today) have you considered that maybe it requires just a little bit of sanity to remain in control of an entire country? There are other people who would like the job, after all. (Note: I'm not saying that any of these people are necessarily very smart, just that they all certainly prefer being in power to being dead.)
The most likely reasons for North Korea's developing of these weapons are self-defense and, more importantly, a negotiation chip to use towards stopping sanctions. All indications are that this is what's happening. (One sample analysis, written recently, is here [msn.com].)
Confirmation of NKs nuclear capabilities reduces our diplomatic power over them slightly, since it makes the threat of a direct military attack by us on them slightly less credible. This is unfortunate, but not a reason to panic, and not a reason to initiate an attack which would certainly: (a) result in many innocent deaths, and (b) damage our relationships with countries that could affect the well-being of Americans. (Make no mistake, not even Great Britain would support us on this one).
This impending disaster could have been prevented just like WWII could have. Instead a billion will probably die.
The Bay of Pigs nuclear disaster could have been prevented it too, if only we'd have had the sense not to attack until it was absolutely necessary...oh wait, we did, and it was. Be thankful.
Re:Sizemography (Score:5, Informative)
As an aside, that type of satellite was the type that originally detected gamma ray bursts from billions of years ago and they were almost a total mystery until the last decade.
Your numbers don't seem quite right. (Score:4, Informative)
If the North Koreans detonated a 10-30 kiloton device, several times 1013 neutrinos from it should have passed through Kamiokande.
Assuming it was a nuke, the chemical explosive component should be neglectable. According to Wikipedia [wikipedia.org], 1 kiloton-TNT is 4.184 TJ. According to a quick search (matching what I recall from NE301 a decade back), average fission energy yield is around 200 MeV per [nuclearweaponarchive.org]. This gives about 4E24 fissions [google.com]. Assuming you get on the order of 1 antineutrino per, at a radius of 1000 km and assuming even sterradial distribution, gives on the order of 300 billion antineutrinos [google.com] per fission.
Anyone who wants to find the detector capture efficiency [google.com] and make a guess at its cross-sectional area is welcome to refine the numbers further. I have some sleep to not-get.
USGS has detected it (Score:1, Informative)
Earthquake Details
Magnitude 4.2 (Light)
# Date-Time Monday, October 9, 2006 at 01:35:27 (UTC)
= Coordinated Universal Time
# Monday, October 9, 2006 at 10:35:27 AM
= local time at epicenter
Time of Earthquake in other Time Zones
Location 41.311N, 129.114E
Depth 0 km (~0 mile) set by location program
Region NORTH KOREA
Distances 70 km (45 miles) N of Kimchaek, North Korea
90 km (55 miles) SW of Chongjin, North Korea
180 km (110 miles) S of Yanji, Jilin, China
385 km (240 miles) NE of PYONGYANG, North Korea
Location Uncertainty horizontal +/- 14.9 km (9.3 miles); depth fixed by location program
Parameters Nst= 9, Nph= 9, Dmin=369.4 km, Rmss=1.13 sec, Gp= 97,
M-type=body magnitude (Mb), Version=6
Source USGS NEIC (WDCS-D)
Event ID ustqab
Most Important Data: Depth 0km (Score:5, Informative)
-Ian
Re:If this is true (Score:5, Informative)
Re:If this is true (Score:2, Informative)
I hate to break it to you, it is no longer 1917.
Re:If this is true (Score:5, Informative)
That being said, what you are trying to say is it would be wrong for Bush to pull strings to keep his loved ones out of harms way, which if he does have anyone in the military (I smell an entire family tree of ivy league pussies... W's dad must feel greatly dissapointed) I have no doubt we would have done that.
As to your last part, I'm tired of that damned argument. These kids willingly joined the army, yes to pay for college, but they were told repeatedly and voluntarily swore an oath (no fucking fine print) that when the U.S. goes to war, they will probably have to ship off and if that is the case, there is nothing they can do about it. I feel little sympathy for these kids, I mean it sucks over there but you did sign up with the military, what did you expect? Why didn't you go for the National Guard, hmm? Your chances of being deployed over seas to hostile combat zone are dramatically reduced in that organization.
Re:Ask Rummy. (Score:5, Informative)
So what NK then did was start refining uranium to weapons-grade in centrifuges. In 2003, the U.S. officially asked them if they were doing this, and they announced they were. So the U.S. cancelled the shipment of the light-water reactors, because North Korea was building nukes anyway. That's right, the ABB reactors never made it to the DPRK.
Then, North Korea responded to this by breaching the seals on the plutonium-producing reactors, and started refining the plutonium.
So, to take your gun analogy and make it actually reflect the facts, let's assume a lunatic already has a fully-automatic AK-47, which they say they need to shoot crows that are eating their crops. The police come by, nod and smile, and convinces the lunatic to lock up the AK-47, and in exchange the police will give him a SuperSoaker to drive off the crows. The lunatic then starts making pipe bombs. A few days later, the former CEO of SuperSoaker has joined the police, and he comes by and asks the nut if he's making pipe bombs. The nut say yes, so the new officer tells him to stop it or he won't be given the SuperSoaker. In response, the nut unlocks his AK-47 and shoots off a few rounds.
You then come along, and accuse the owner/police officer of being responsible for the gunfire because he was CEO of the SuperSoaker manufacturer.
I guess when you have moral integrity, the only important facts are the ones that don't get in the way of your indignation.
Re:If this is true (Score:1, Informative)
Trying to prove you destroyed something ten years ago isn't that easy. Nevertheless, Saddam did satisfy the inspectors that he had done so. Bush chose to stick his fingers in his ears and say "La La La 9-11 Al Qaeda WMD!" and sent in the troops anyway.
Re:If this is true (Score:5, Informative)
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/uk/2877349.stm [bbc.co.uk]
Yep, confirmed patriot kill, right at the top of the list. Way to go.
Inchon (Score:3, Informative)
The Inchon landing was a gamble. It was a two phased operation that relied upon the speedy capture of the fortified island of Wolmi-do followed by a pause to wait for the tide to rise before the rest of the operation could continue which was not a good idea since there was no way to know if the island garrison would fall quickly and because the pause would give the forces ashore time to react. The Americans were lucky in several ways, firstly they only had to face some 3000 N-Korean troops who happened to have a commander of low quality, the garrison on Wolmi-do was under strength and didn't die where it stood to buy time for their comrades ashore and the local N-Korean commander didn't make any significant use of the forewarning and the time he had to react from the time the attack on Wolmi-do started and until tide rose and the rest of the American attack went ahead. An American present at the time commented that if the garrison on Wolmi-do had resisted more than it did to buy time and if the troops ashore had fought with the same determination as the German and Japanese troops he had encountered during WWII (and which the N-Koreans were fully capable of) the American forces at Inchon would have been slaughtered. Basically Inchon could *very* easily have become a compete FUBAR like operation 'Market Garden' did during WWII. It was a great success because fortune happened favor MacArthur that day but Inchon is hardly the best available study in how to plan and execute an amphibious landing, the allies set much better examples of that during WWII.
Re:If this is true (Score:3, Informative)
From Wikipedia [wikipedia.org]
On May 19, 2006, the National Post of Canada published two pieces, one by Taheri, claiming that the Iranian parliament passed a law that "envisages separate dress codes for religious minorities, Christians, Jews and Zoroastrians, who will have to adopt distinct colour schemes to make them identifiable in public." Iranian sources say Taheri had taken an Iranian Parliament discussion on a dress code law to have Muslims wear garments that showed you were a Muslim, and reported the event as a law being passed requiring Jews to wear badges as under the Nazis. Current Iranian law does require Jews to identify themselves as such if they sell food, but Iran claims badges for Jews was not actually under discussion nor in the law. Taheri states that his report is correct and that the dress code law has been passed by the Islamic Majlis and will now be submitted to the Council of Guardians. He does not claim badges for Jews are in the law, but does say that special markers for followers of Judaism, Christianity and Zoroastrianism are under discussion as a means to implement the law.
The National Post retracted the story several hours after it was posted online. The newspaper blamed Taheri for the falsehood in the article, [4] [5] and published a full apology on May 24.
Please to not be accepting propaganda as truth.
Re:Bush just entered an elite club (Score:4, Informative)
The guy leading the UN Inspection Team stepped down from office because of this scandal.
The UN Team found no evidence whatsoever of WMDs in Iraq.
Next time ask yourself where you get you information from, hopefully not Fox-News.
Re:So what's the yeild amount? (Score:1, Informative)
WMDs in the middle ages (Score:4, Informative)
It is a well known fact that during the middle ages and before then, during an attack on a city, the sieging army would catapult into cities corpses with the plague, or dead animals, in attempts to spread disease/plague that would decimate populations.
http://www.cbc.ca/news/background/bioweapons/biow
http://academic.evergreen.edu/g/grossmaz/xiongmn.
http://www.usmedicine.com/column.cfm?columnID=109
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bubonic_plague [wikipedia.org]
Re:If this is true (Score:5, Informative)
And I'm tired of ignoramuses saying that.
Joint Resolution to Authorize the Use of United States Armed Forces Against Iraq [whitehouse.gov]Re:If this is true (Score:3, Informative)
You guys need to coordinate your efforts more. Bush joined the Air National Guard. In the words of whereiseljefe, above, "Why didn't you go for the National Guard, hmm? Your chances of being deployed over seas to hostile combat zone are dramatically reduced in that organization."
While there are those who think they can make a difference going to Iraq, there are plenty more who would be long gone if not for stop-loss orders.
Pakistan (Score:3, Informative)
Crossposting?? (Score:1, Informative)
Re:It must be Clinton's Fault (TM) right? (Score:2, Informative)
That picture of Albright and Kim Jong Il toasting each other is a fake?
Re:If this is true (Score:4, Informative)
"May you live in interesting times and attract the Emperor's attention."
Makes much more sense like that.
Josh
The ugly secert about nuclear weapons. (Score:3, Informative)
Your point about Japan building nukes left out some details.
Japan has around 32 tons of plutonium on hand. They use it in their reactors. That is enough for four thousand weapons.
The only thing that keeps Japan from being a major nuclear power is they don't want to be a nuclear power.
China is the real worry right now. They can not be happy that their puppet is running amoke.
What worries me is if they UN tries to blockade North Korea. The Navy is the one US service that isn't being really taxed by the war in Iraq. If Russia and China close their boarders then it could be pretty air tight.
Re:If this is true (Score:3, Informative)
From your comments, it appears that you are not from the U.S., correct? If that is the case, perhaps you're just not getting the full picture. There are other choices for kids besides joining the military.
Regards
Re:If this is true (Score:3, Informative)
Re:The sad thing is (Score:3, Informative)
No, the sad thing is that you believe that. Kerry voted for the Iraq war, go look it up. His position was that he would have gone to war too, he just would have done it better.
There was no anti-war candidate in the last election who had a hope in hell of winning. That's why Kerry lost--he didn't appeal to the left because he kept speaking in favor of the war on terror, and he didn't appeal to the right because he was smeared by Fox News et al as some kind of anti-war nut.
Why Saddam denied access to UNSCOM (Score:3, Informative)
Saddam denied access to weapons inspectors who he claimed were CIA spies rather than legimitate UN weapons inspectors.
And you know what? He was right [fair.org]. They were CIA spies. Of course, the US media weren't keen to remind people of that minor detail.
Re:If this is true (Score:3, Informative)
I am with Alex. I had two friends, both female and both National Guard, deployed with their respective companies as supply staff. One was killed when her convoy was ambushed and the other had her truck peppered with landmine shrappnel more than once and was by luck alone unharmed. I may not support Bush's approach to this war but I have nothing but respect for the troops over there. I would be with them myself were it not for a serious knee injury I suffered in Basic Training.
As to the congressional offspring in the military, there are at least 7 members of congress with children on active duty and I would wager more in the reserves and guard.
Re:If this is true (Score:3, Informative)
"No, I didn't."
-- President Bush, Feb. 8, responding to a question on NBC's "Meet the Press" about whether he volunteered to go to Vietnam
Re:If this is true (Score:3, Informative)
Some groups who voted overwhelingly for Bush:
* Gun owners (63%)
* People with $200k+ incomes (63%)
* Evangelicals (78%)
* More-than-weekly churchgoers (64%)
* Married-with-children (59%)
The military clocks in at 57%, which I wouldn't call "overwhelming", but I'd call "decisive". It may not seem all that big, but in politics 60% is called a "landslide".
It kinda sucks that a 40% minority could be considered to have a negligible opinion. (That's exactly what the President means when he calls for a "simple up or down vote" on a judicial candidate; he knows that he can get 51% but not the 60% required to end a filibuster.) We may see in January if the Democrats would be any more polite when they have 51%, but I'm betting the answer is "no".
Re:It is true -- get used to it (Score:2, Informative)
The real failure of Saddam was nepotism. If he'd just kept his damn sons in line, or even better entirely out of the government, there would have been a lot less insanity going on in Iraq.
If you look at the history of how the governments of Iraq and the US interacted with each other, it is quite clearly the US that behaved in completely irrational and nonsensical ways. Saddam wasn't crazy when he thought the US would back him in Kuwait, the US merely had flipped its bipolar mind again and decided to defend Kuwait.
I lie. The US behaved in exactly whatever way whatever administration thought would be the best for the long term goals of the US, or at least the long term goals of their wallets. However, what these goals were and how to reach them changed almost randomly, whereas Saddam's goals didn't, except he gave up on some of them because they were clearly unreachable.
Saddam being a lunatic was always just PR, and was basically the only way to square the fact our 'friend' became our 'enemy' without changing at all. If anything, his interaction with the US had a moderating influence on him, where he at least paid lip service to human rights.
The leaders of Iran aren't lunatics, either, for future reference.
Kim Jong Il, OTOH, quite possibly, is a lunatic. He, however, isn't who we have to worry about in N. Korea. We have to worry about the military, who are not lunatics.
Your universe is better (Score:3, Informative)
In *this* universe, Hans Blix headed up the UN inspections, and came to the conclusion that although Saddam Hussein was stonewalling, he had no WMD program whatsoever. Also, most of the other nations that *weren't* bullied by the US into joining a farcical "coalition of the willing" state they did not believe Iraq had WMDs, or the ability to pursue a WMD program. Then it turned out that *all* the evidence presented by our universe's President Bush turned out to be fabricated, or mis-represented.
In the fabricated area, the most notable was the "Yellow Cake Documents," a set of documents purporting to prove Iraq was attempting to obtain uranium ore from Nigeria. These were proven to be forged documents by the investigations of Joseph Wilson. Even after these documents were proven to be false, President Bush continued to use them as hard evidence.
In the "misrepresented" department, we had the "high strength aluminum tubes," which were claimed to be for suitable only for uranium enrichment. Nuclear scientists pretty much universally agreed these tubes were suitable for no such thing. The conclusion was that these tubes were most likely for medium-range conventional missiles, which Iraq was legally allowed to have.
You are from a better place than ours, my friend-- a place where the government can be trusted, and what is said is the truth, rather than lies and misinformation.
Re:Ain't no fortunate one (Score:2, Informative)
Here is the list compiled from various public sources. Of the 535 members of the house and senate, a total of two percent, meaning twelve members, have, or have had, children in Iraq or Afghanistan, and most appear to be Republicans. All but two seem to be officers. Three seem to have volunteered for multiple tours. One was killed in action in Iraq. And only one seems to be currently still serving. (again from what I was able to establish using public sources). There appear to be NO children from the White House senior officials serving (or have served) in either Iraq or Afghanistan.
Joseph Biden, D-DE, Son is Officer in Natl Guard not very likely to go to Iraq
Marilyn Musgrave, R-CO, Son is Enlisted in the Navy serving in the Mediterranean
Duncan Hunter, R-CA, Son is Officer in the Marines, served two tours including a few months in Iraq and is now home
Christopher Bond, R-MO, Son is Officer in the Marines who served in Iraq for a few months and is now home
Becky Lourey, D-MN, Son was Officer in the Army served two tours and was killed in Iraq May 2005
Tim Johnson, D-SD, Son is Enlisted in the Army served four wars in both Iraq and Afghanistan and is now home
Todd Akin, R-MO, Son is Officer in Marines serving as a Combat Engineer in Iraq and is now home
Ike Skelton, D-MO, two sons both Officers in army and navy deployment unknown (not specified)
Joe Wilson, R-SC, three sons in military, all officers, on in Natl Guard served in Iraq and is now home
John Kline, R-MN, son is Officer in Army serving in Iraq
Charles Taylor, R-NC, son is Officer in Army served in Iraq and is now home
Jim Bunning, R-KY, son is Officer in Air Force served in Afghanistan and is now home
Feel free to mod this 'tard up or down as you see fit-- but those are the facts, the best as I can determine them. I think based on the numbers I can safely assert that our nation's leaders have put this country on a war footing but are not going out on a limb with their own children.
Re:If this is true (Score:4, Informative)
Here is the translation of Article 9 found at Wikipedia [wikipedia.org].
That it allows Japan to have self defence forces is a rather forced interpretation.
I'm not sure if F-15s and Mitsubishi F-2s cannot fly sorties to North Korea from Japanese bases, not that I see point in doing that. It does not seem F-15J/DJ [att.net]s were in any way modified to reduce their range, either. IIRC, the range of the F-15 became an issue in the parliament when its introduction was discussed. Also, now JASDF has tankers [boeing.com].
Type 64 (not 66) rifle may have been PIA to maintain, but current infantry weapon is Type 89. I don't think it's not much inferior to any modern assault rifle. And I highly doubt small differences in personal weapons are strategically that significant.
It's not like HMMVs did not have major problems not having armours. Japan also brought light armoured vehicles [wikipedia.org] to Iraq.
Overall, the parent post reads very much like a typical sentiment of a Japanese person living in Japan. The problem I see is that they are not exposed to international media and do not know how much self-perception is different from perception from outside. Most of the Japanese see China and South Korea as some sort of bullies who always mention and exaggerate what the Japanese did during the WWII. This must come as a great shock for the Chinese and South Koreans who are genuinely scared of the Japanese behaviour in the first half of the 20th century. Just like they see Japan as the victim during the WWII (another big surprise for those who are not Japanese), they still feel that they are isolated and have no friend.
There is also a sensationalism with regard to North Korea. There are some factions of nationalists in Japan who capitalize on the actions of North Korea. They tend to overhype the danger of North Korea. I find this very dangerous.
North Korea always seemed to be seeking for attention. They don't seem to like the fact that the US is paying more attention to Iran, or a south Korean becoming the general secretary of the UN. As long as they get attention, they seem happy. I also figure that anybody, including South Korea,
WRONG! Nukes CAN be traced. (Score:0, Informative)
Re:If this is true (Score:3, Informative)
The problem with NK is that they have more than enough conventional weapons to turn Seoul and Tokyo into smoking piles of rubble before we can react, which would not only harm our biggest allies in the region, but also cripple the US economy since we get so much of our industrial inputs from Japan and South Korea nowadays.
Furthermore, the proximity of China, Russia, and South Korea makes nuking NK 'til it glows a somewhat less palatable option geopolitically.
Mod parent -1 wrong please (Score:2, Informative)
Why does factually wrong get marked as interesting?
Three other posters have pointed out that parent is wrong.
http://www.commondreams.org/headlines04/0319-04.h
http://www.nytimes.com/2006/02/02/politics/02nuke
Too late now. The article is stale and in the future it will only be read at +4 and the parent will seem accurate to those who don't know any better...
no need to waste an ICBM (Score:3, Informative)
To bomb Iraq/Afganistan, we sometimes fly an around-the-world trip from the base in the US. The flight is about 46 hours, with one stop for a crew change at an island in the Indian Ocean.
I think we can reach North Korea.