Mushroom Cloud Reported Over North Korea 2001
cbrocious writes "Yahoo! News is reporting a mushroom cloud over North Korea that occured on Thursday in Yanggang province near the border with China. 'The explosion in Kim Hyong Jik county blasted a crater big enough to be noticed by a satellite, the source said.'"
Well....From the TFA- (Score:5, Insightful)
What was it then? Car crash? Natural gas explosion? Hmm..."no immediate indication." Bah!
I'm actually kind of surprised it took this long to hit the wires though....I mean, shouldn't we have picked it up and there been at least, a news report? Or some sort of acknowledgement of the situation by those in power........
I bet most of the Pacific Rim's probably up in arms over this-Especially the Chinese, TFA states it hit somewhere close to the China-North Korean border..... You'd think with something like that, either the Chinese would strike or raise hell along the diplomatic channels.....
Reminds me of those WWII era Civil Defense movies I saw once in a history class...You
know, the one with the turtle...
"Ok kids, what do we do when the bomb hits?"
"DUCK! AND COVER!"
-thewldisntenuff
Re: Well....From the TFA- (Score:5, Insightful)
However, the reported 2+ mile diameter of the cloud is troubling. Surely radiation detectors will sort it out within a day or two.
Re: Well....From the TFA- (Score:5, Interesting)
Online seismometers (Score:5, Informative)
Re:Online seismometers (Score:5, Informative)
Look at the data marked 3 days ago and compare it to the others. There is a spike.
http://www.physics.hmc.edu/research/geo/seismo.
Re:Online seismometers (Score:5, Informative)
A direct link [hmc.edu] to the image
No, the time is wrong (Score:5, Informative)
Re:No, the time is wrong (Score:5, Informative)
Re:No, the time is wrong (Score:5, Informative)
Re:The seismometer is in California (Score:5, Informative)
Vibrations through the earth travel at many kilometers per second, depending on density.
There'd be a delay (thats how you can triangulate earthquakes and such) but not in the order of 9 hours.
Re:Online seismometers (Score:5, Interesting)
If anybody is interested there is a way [llnl.gov] to determine if the seismic activity is from an explosion or from an earthquake, or nuclear blast.
Comment removed (Score:5, Informative)
Or you need to do some more reading. (Score:5, Informative)
I suggest as a minimum reading a bool called the Curve of Binding Energy... I'm pretty sure its got a chapter talking about Ted Taylor's efforts to build micro-yield devices.
Either way, your comment is completely wrong. Its far more complicated to created small yield devices, but not even remotely impossible. Its extremely unlikely that North Korea did that, though. While creating a nuclear detonation is simple given enough raw fissionable material (US and Russia both had no failed tests with primitive technology until we started pushing the envelope for smaller and smaller explosions), creating micro-yield explosions is, and the details is one of the closest kept nuclear secrets in the US.
since the 1950's (Score:5, Informative)
We've had smaller nukes than that since the late 1950's. Our AIM-26A and AIR-2A air to air missiles typically had 1.5 nuclear warheads. Some of these had the even smaller 0.25 KT warheads [astronautix.com].
More Info:
http://www.milnet.com/aamtab.htm [milnet.com]
http://www.wpafb.af.mil/museum/arm/arm16.htm [af.mil]
http://www.hill.af.mil/museum/photos/coldwar/genie .htm [af.mil]
Re:Impossible (Score:5, Interesting)
With sophisticated facilities, extensive work done in neutron reflectors and fission enhancing substances (Tritium for example), it would be possible to construct such a weapon.
Think of it this way, the Manhattan project wasn't interested in a target yeild, they just wanted to make the concept work. All three of their first generation nukes tipped the scales around 15-20 kt. For all intents and purposes, it's fair to assume that 15-20 kt is the default size of your average nuke unless you engineer it differently. If N. Korea is trying to build the "lets see if this works" nuke, it's likely going to fall into that range.
Re:Impossible (Score:5, Informative)
Re: Well....From the TFA- (Score:5, Interesting)
Not likely. If it was a real nuke, our sats would have picked up the gamma burst and we would have picked up the distinctive seismic signature. Those in power know as of right now whether or not it was a nuke, the question is - what will they tell us?
Re: Well....From the TFA- (Score:5, Interesting)
The truth. There is more than one government in the world, and they can't seem to agree on any single thing. How could they keep a secret among themselves?
Besides that, there are plenty of civilian radiation detectors out there. A guy I know who worked at the Forsmark nuclear plant in Sweden told me that back in 1986, they found out about the Chernobyl accident way before anyone in the Swedish government. (And quite some time before the Soviet authorities admitted anything had happened)
Although they did have a few worried hours trying to figure out where the radiation was coming from, before they realized that it actually had come from outside the plant. The isotope composition told them pretty quickly that it was a reactor failure, and not a bomb. Calculating backwards from the prevailing winds then gave them a pretty good guess of which reactor it was.
Re: Well....From the TFA- (Score:5, Interesting)
I've actually worked there, and I remember that day. Now I really wish I hadn't spent a good part of that day outside in the rain. For years afterward there was a bit of a "hotspot" just north of Stockholm where that rainstorm had washed a bunch of stuff out of the cloud and onto the ground.
As for the possibility of civilians detecting a nuclear test - that depends on a lot of variables such as how the wind blows. Given the geography of the location, the cloud might go out over open ocean or over China, in which case you won't hear anything from civilians. Or it could blow over Japan, in which case some university scientists might notice something.
Certainly the U.S. knows if it was a nuke thanks to our satellite systems; but the current regime may not wish to publicise such a failure of their anti-proliferation policy just before an election.
In any case, I would have thought that the North Koreans would make an announcement if they had actually had a successful test. Why wouldn't they? I know they certainly trumpeted up their attempts at a space launch.
Re: Well....From the TFA- (Score:5, Insightful)
Well according to CNN [cnn.com] those in power have told us what it is, and I quote: Ya...right...forest fire...
And they wonder why everyone thinks that the government is involved in so many conspiracies. A forest fire is going to create a mushroom cloud and a crater [yahoo.com]? A forest fire is going to create a seismic event [slashdot.org]? I so can't stand the lies anymore. I can't wait until November 2nd, and I can get rid of them!
Re: Well....From the TFA- (Score:5, Funny)
Or... The cloud could be the result of everyone eating too much kimchee during the festivities.
Hey, it's just as plausible as a forest fire!
Re: Well....From the TFA- (Score:5, Informative)
Do we have any choice but to play ball? (Score:5, Funny)
Would you like to play a game?
>list games
Ball
Global Thermonuclear War
>play Global Thermonuclear War
How about a nice game of Ball?
>No, I would like to play Global Thermonuclear War.
Very well...
Seriously though, of course we have a choice. We didn't cave in to the USSR, I don't expect us to give a cowtow to N. Korea. Seriously, expect a carrier battle group in the Sea of Japan ASAP if there isn't one there already. Expect half of the U.S. Navy including a dozen submarines loaded with 60 ICBM's each sitting off the coast of North Korea very soon. Oh, we'll be playing "ball" all right.
Re:Do we have any choice but to play ball? (Score:5, Insightful)
Re:Do we have any choice but to play ball? (Score:5, Insightful)
They don't have the technology to hit a ship, much less a battleship in the open sea. All they can do is blackmail us by threatening Japan and South Korea.
We can keep waiting for them to build longer range missiles capable of hitting North America too (while we and others supply them with food and fuel) or tell South Korea and Japan to deploy a lot of Patriot missiles, pray to various deities and kick the crap out of North Korea.
Very good analogy -- while you "talk very nicely", you better have the snipers deployed around... The nuclear armed submarines suggested by the grandparent article are the "snipers"...
Re: Do we have any choice but to play ball? (Score:5, Insightful)
As you say, it seems to have been forgotten, especially by the US, but the real meaning of 'terrorist' is someone who uses violence to achieve a political end; who favours intimidating methods of coercing a government or community.
By that definition, a man walking into a restaurant with an Uzi and shooting everyone inside for no good reason is not a terrorist. A man walking into a restaurant with an Uzi and threatening to shoot everyone inside unless he's given a million pounds is not a terrorist. A man walking into a restaurant with an Uzi and threatening to shoot everyone inside unless the US pulls all its troops out of Iraq is a terrorist.
Of course, 'political' need not be concerned with international military policy; it could be anything from demanding better wages for employees of BigEvilCorp, to protesting about planning regulations in LittleTown. But it usually takes some basic level of lucidity and intent, so the 'lone madman' probably doesn't count.
Re: Well....From the TFA- (Score:5, Interesting)
Which means that the "ho-hum" we're publicly seeing might simply be Washington's response. "Oh, that was supposed to be your bomb? It was kinda hard to tell. See, we thought you guys were working on nuclear weapons over there, and... well, shucks, we've seen bigger conventional explosions."
Re: Well....From the TFA- (Score:5, Insightful)
Re: Well....From the TFA- (Score:5, Funny)
dude, apparently you didn't get the memo. it isn't mass murder, it's a "pre-emptive strike on an emerging threat."
Re: MORONS, your bus is leaving (Score:5, Insightful)
Simply put: pre-emption is a euphamism for aggression.
First of all you're right about them selling nuclear material, but blowing them up isn't the right answer. What is? I don't know for sure, I'm not an expert, but economic incentives and disincentives would be a good start. When GWB came into office all he offered was the stick. Remember that? No carrot. He doesn't deal with evil. (Well, until reality intruded and he had to). In addition to that inspections would seem to be viable.
They seemed to be working in Iraq, unless of course you've got some other agenda.
As for Reagan, I don't by the Fox Wisdom stating that Reagon spending this country to death brought down the soviet union. It's not that simple. It seems to me that it was a combination of corruption and social pressure and inept government that brought down the soviet union. There's probably a lesson there for us as well.
But lets translate the behavior you propose into everyday life:Let's say your walking down a street and see some thug looking at you in a menacing way. Let's even say you notice he's packing. Do you pull out a gun and shoot him before he does anything? You probably don't because it's illegal, antisocial and brings you to the same level of the person you're afraid of.
A better quesstion for you and all the warmongers in this country is do you wish you could? Is it your greatest fantasy to just blow everything up, to kill it all and stand above the mess?
My direct message to GWB: Fear and hatred are not viable foreign policies. The number of people who wish to kill americans will only increase if we continue to behave like scared bullies.
But the rest of the worlds opinion is not the most important reason to change our foreign policy. The most important reason is because it is wrong, immoral and counterproductive. But then again I don't expect the foreign policy of GWB to be much different than his domestic policy or anything else in his life.
Most fundamentally the problem with pre-emptive action is that you simply don't know what can happen. And killing thousands of other people, both your own citizenry and those of another countries, is too expensive of a price to pay.
Re: Well....From the TFA- (Score:5, Insightful)
Jesus, how old are you? Maybe you'd better read up a little bit on a little thing called the Korean War [google.com].
The NK's are not going to commit suicide by taking on the U.S.
I'd hate to have listened to you on Dec. 6th, 1941. Or Sept. 10, 2001 for that matter.
I'm not agreeing with the guy who says we go in and nuke them first. But the alternative to that is not to deny that this is a real problem. This is a real problem. The North Koreans do act irrationally at times (especially with Kim Jong Il at the helm), they're very desperate, and there's at least a possibility they'll use their new nuke capability as a deterrent to our power, which will allow them to once again invade the south. They've been saying they want reunification ever since we pushed them back out in the 1950's. What they really want is the south's wealth. This is how wars start.
Technically, the Korean War is not over. This is why we have 37,000 (I guess now 25,000?) troops sitting in between the two countries - because they're two countries at war and we are under a UN mandate to keep them apart. At least until such time that they agree to formally end the war, or peacefully reunite. The North could do these things at any time. They choose not to, while still saying they want reunification. What do you think that means? It means they want reunification on their terms, with their system of government, and their leaders... and the only way they'll ever get that is through another invasion.
The South is in denial about this just like you are. But I don't know how many Pearl Harbors or World Trade Centers or Mauretanias or Archduke Ferdinands or whatever you want to come up with - I don't know how many of those you need before you realize that some countries in this world, and some people in power in very high places, are very dangerous and they will hit you and hit you hard when you least expect it. (Yes, I include George Bush in this statement - I'm not voting for him come November, and I didn't vote for him last time either. I'm no hypocrite, just being realistic here.)
So what should we do? Who the hell knows. It's fine for me to say that, but the problem is our government seems to be saying the same thing. We need some sort of strategy and we clearly have none now. Somehow, someway, we have to get these nukes out of NK's hands. Maybe eventually that does mean military action of some kind. Not yet, but it really depends on them. But this is a country with a bad history, with a tyrranical leader and in a current state of war with their nearest neighbor, which happens to be a US ally. Their nukes can already reach Alaska and soon will be able to reach California. We need to deal with this and not pretend the problem does not exist.
Re: Well....From the TFA- (Score:5, Insightful)
That requires at least two things. Firstly, countries have to feel safe from external aggression. I don't have complete answers for this, but it will probably require a massive strengthening of the UN or some equivalent international body. Secondly, the most aggressive nations on Earth will have to get rid of (most) of their nuclear weapons. That includes the US.
Whatever the solutions to avoiding nuclear proliferation, Bush's policies aren't part of them. Labelling a group of countries "evil" and then invading one of them is not the way to reassure N.Korea that they have no need to fear attack. It would also help if Americans could get over their hatred of all things communist. The US trades extensively with China, yet imposes sanctions on Cuba. If the White House could learn to respect the sovereignty of other nations, it might not need to waste such massive amounts of money on defence and security.
Re: Well....From the TFA- (Score:5, Informative)
Checking of facts? (Score:5, Funny)
> I suggest you better check you facts before you post.
Yes, quite.
Re: Well....From the TFA- (Score:5, Funny)
That's right. If I remember correctly Hitler was a big proponent of allowing israel into the EU as well.
Re: Well....From the TFA- (Score:5, Insightful)
"The Ravenous Bugblatter Beast of Traal makes a good meal for visiting tourists"
instead of
"The Ravenous Bugblatter Beast of Traal makes a good meal of visiting tourists"
Re: Well....From the TFA- (Score:5, Insightful)
According to the BBC [bbc.co.uk]:
I think he is undoubtedly correct. As Robin Cook (a former British foreign secretary) said in his resignation speech [bbc.co.uk] immediately prior to the invasion of Iraq:
If you really believe that the US will be able to march into S.E. asia and win a war, I suggest you have another look at your history books. If you think nuking another country into oblivion will make you safe, you have clearly learned nothing from 9/11 about the vincibility of even the strongest nations.
Re: Well....From the TFA- (Score:5, Insightful)
Dresden, I could see. Maybe even Nagasaki. But Hiroshima? What's the apology going to say? "We're sorry that your country went on a total rampage across half the surface of the planet for fifteen years. We're sorry that your ancestors were so totally fucking crazy that the only way to get them to admit they'd lost was to kill millions of people in a blockade, kill millions of people in an invasion, or kill hundreds of thousands of people in a shocking demonstration that could not be denied. We're sorry that, in the end, we chose the fastest option with the least loss of life."
CNN: "North Korea cloud 'not nuke blast'" (Score:5, Informative)
http://edition.cnn.com/2004/WORLD/asiapcf/09/11/n
Re: Well....From the TFA- (Score:5, Interesting)
One interesting ordinance is the fule-air explosive devices. Take two gases that are explosive when combined and ignigted and put them in two big tanks at a great presure then release it all at once and a split second later when the expaning mix covers a football field, but is still at very high (80+ atmospheres iirc) detonate them.
When first developed generals and such warned that thier use might be mistaken for an neuclear weapons.
If you've seen the movie outbreak the bomb they were going to drop to stop that plauge was a FAE munition.
The tell tale in this case of course would be the gamma radation signature as well as other factors, by itself a mushroom cloud just means a very big bang.
Mycroft
Mycroft
Re: Well....From the TFA- (Score:5, Funny)
North Korean official: We've tested a nuke near the China border.
US official: No you haven't.
NK: Yes we have, and we have the seismographs and radiation signatures to prove it.
US: 'Tis but a scratch. It was probably an earthquake.
NK: There's a big stinking radioactive hole in the ground!
US: We've seen worse.
NK: You liar!
[NK tests a second time over the Sea of Japan -- blast seen from Pusan, South Korea and Fukuoka, Japan]
NK: There -- everyone has seen it. Victory is ours.
US: Hah!
NK: Look you stupid bastard! We've tested twice now, and your own radiation-monitoring satellites confirmed it!
US: No they haven't.
NK: Look!
US: It's just a flesh wound. Could just as easily have been a forest fire.
NK: In the Sea of Japan?!?
US: Chicken....
Re:Well....From the TFA- (Score:5, Interesting)
Yeah, I saw that one in school too. Then we all went into the cloak room, got our coats, then marched into the school basement to practice ducking and protecting ourselves by holding our coats over our heads.
You weren't paying enough attention in class though, it wasn't a WWII era movie. It was. .
A Korean Conflict era movie.
KFG
Re:Well....From the TFA- (Score:5, Insightful)
No the ball is in our court now, and as they have nukes... well I'm not too sure what the move is. It just goes to show other nations (Iran), that stepping things up is probably the way to go if you don't want to be the next Iraq.
Re:Well....From the TFA- (Score:5, Informative)
Re:Well....From the TFA- (Score:5, Insightful)
Did anyone actually think that diplomacy would work? You cannot negotiate with psychopathic dictators. They don't keep their end of the bargain. Diplomacy will not work to make North Korea or Iran abandon their nuclear programs. Only a "regime change" will. It's almost comical to watch the 'International community' try to deal with Iran's nuclear program, though it will be a little less so when a western city gets vaporized by terrorists. The UN is still having meetings to decide if they should have meetings to ask then Iranians to stop. What a joke!
Re:Well....From the TFA- (Score:5, Insightful)
The logic behind the US's preemptive strike strategy boggles the mind. All we have done is solidify the opinion that the only way to deal with the US on anything close to a even standing is to develop nuclear weapons - real weapons and not "nuclear weapon related programs" - or you are fair game for some major bullying from the US government.
Now that the world has seen how we handled Iraq and North Korea in parallel - one a real threat, one a fake threat - it is obvious that being as strong as North Korea is preferrable to being like Iraq (all bark, no bite.)
Looks like more interesting times are headed our way...
Re:Well....From the TFA- (Score:5, Interesting)
The logic is fairly obvious, actually. Governments create crises to remain in power, increase their power, and to quell protest against the amassing of that power. Crises are an excellent way to oppress your own citizenry while justifying your actions to the more gullible members of your nation.
There is no profit in a solved problem. Unsolved problems are the method by which politicians remain in power, along with those who support them. The worse the problem, the more one can profit on the fear and uncertainty of the citizenry.
If you want to create a problem, openly targeting three hostile nations as "the axis of evil" is a great way to do so. If they don't act quickly enough to fulfill their role as 'the enemy', invade and conquer one of them. That'll get the other two moving at double-time to present a credible threat, if only to prevent the invasion and conquest of their own countries. And by doing so, they become exactly what they've been labeled: dangerous enemies!
The logic is beautifully Machiavellian.
Max
Re:Well....From the TFA- (Score:5, Insightful)
Geeks here like to think that by mirroring the american hatred of the rest of the world, they can be part of the intellectually superior and socially sophisticated crowd (and hopefully get laid at the same time).
That's right. And all the "hippies" protesting the Vietnam War in the 70's were just at the rallies to get laid and smoke pot. Ignore the tear gas, the intimidation, the bullets, and the fire hoses.
People died protesting the Vietnam War. It's likely that people will die protesting this one. Yes, some of the protest was fashionable - there was a culture war going on at the same time. But to say "oh, they're protesting because it's trendy" is to ignore the real arguments and issues at hand, and the very real determination they have to protest an illegal action.
Installing a successful liberal democracy in the heart of the middle east...
First: it's extremely difficult to "install" a democracy. It has been done, but only in countries in which millions died before being defeated.
Really? The only way? As opposed to, say, finding a solution to the Palestinian crisis, which has been the touchstone of religious fundamentalism and terrorism in the region for the last 60 years?
They think the only reason the terrorists attack is because of grievances, not because they want to take over the world
Please show me how 9/11 was an attempt to "take over the world."
Bottom line: terrorism doesn't allow you to defeat nations. The goal of terror is to drive nations crazy with grief, fear, and anger, and nudge them in the direction you wish. It's not about defeating the enemy - it's about influencing policy. You need an army and modern weapons to take over a nation - not nineteen guys and boxcutters.
Yes, there are dreamers on the fringe that talk of a "Muslim world" and a "new Muslim empire". That kind of rhetoric even works with some people. The reality is cells working in the dark.
Those who doubt the Iraq mission are no different from those who doubted America's efforts to rebuilt post WW2 Europe and Japan. Back then they said it couldn't be done, was a waste of money and that the people would not be able to handle US-style democracy.
It's very different. No-one in the Allied countries believed that Japan and Germany should be left to their own devices after being defeated. Both nations had functional demoracies before being taken over by extremists pre WWII. In addition, their culture was one of obidience to central authority - imposing a system of governance was not difficult. There was a slow, dawning realisation of shame amoung the citizenry - a realisation that they had been, at best, misled. Both nations had largely homogeneous cultures. Finally hundreds of thousands of civillians had to be killed.
The situation in Iraq could not be more different. Iraq has never experienced democracy. It is riven by tribal, relgious, and cultural differences. Authority is at the behest of the tribal leader, the "strong man", or the iman - all of whom have different goals. Amoung the general populace (as opposed to English speaking, Internet connected bloggers) there is a tremendous feeling that Iraq did not deserve to be invaded and occupied - and the reasons for invasion have little to do with lofty ideals of "democracy". The war, to them, is about control of the region, politically and economically, by the US.
No other country has sacrificed so much and given so much for complete strangers and yet you only see protestors in NYC protesting Bush's 15 billion dollar AIDs policy but you never see them protesting Europe's 0 dollar AIDs policy.
Garbage. The EU has an annual budget of 800 million euros towards HIV/AIDS in the developing world. In addition, it pledged 120 million euros towards a Global Health Fund to combat AIDS this year. This
Re:Well....From the TFA- (Score:5, Funny)
See? I *knew* that reading all 1800 pages of Tom Clancy's The Sum of All Fears would come in handy...
I know, it was only 800 pages. It just *felt* like 18000... That book would have been much better as a 400 page book.
Re:Well....From the TFA- (Score:5, Informative)
NK broke the reactor seals under Bush.
NK lauched long range missiles under Bush.
Rumors of NK's nuclear program growing in the past three years were under Bush of course.
Saddam disarmed under Bush I and Clinton. Saddam's own son-in-law told Newsweek they had no WMD anymore [commondreams.org] and the UN agreed that the "threat" Bush played up was a seriously distorting the facts. After the invasion, guess who was right?
Yeah, there is proliferation going on for two main reasons:
The Bush admin is focused on the middle east region and only cares about WMD as pro-war propaganda.
Other nations realized the lessons of the Iraq war weren't "with us or against us" it was "countries who really have WMD survive and don't get invaded." Works for Israel, it will work for everyone else.
They keep this up . . . (Score:4, Funny)
~~~
Re:Not likely (Score:5, Insightful)
However, if this is a first weapons test, then they probably don't have very well developed nuclear weapons yet, and some governments might take a "its now or never" approach.
Re:Not likely (Score:5, Insightful)
Yeah, it'd only be 150 million people dead if those two countries are leveled; just your average day. Not a doomsday scenario at all...
Re:Not likely (Score:5, Insightful)
I think you underestimate the situation. Remember 9/11? Remember the US economy taking a royal crap over the loss of one building and a few thousand worker bees?
What do you think would happen if Japan, one of the world's most powerful economic engines, were destroyed or knocked out of play for a while?
"Suck" doesn't even begin to cover it. This isn't 1945. There are more ways to destroy a country than to blow stuff up. If Japan goes, I think you'll see lots of awfully bad stuff happen in the US and elsewhere.
All Your Base Are Belong To Us (Score:4, Funny)
It's a good thing... (Score:4, Funny)
Re:It's a good thing... (Score:5, Insightful)
That's about two Canadian Armed Forces' worth of troops, but only a fraction of our total force strength.
And here's a big, big question for everyone who's going to bleat "Well why'd we send those troops to Iraq instead of North Korea?":
The city of Seoul is home to eleven million people. The city of Seoul is also within artillery range of North Korea. Artillery is cheap and ubiquitous, and as North Korea's army is arrayed along Soviet lines, they have scads of it. Until it fires, it's damned hard to spot camoflaged artillery from the air, and even if you could spot all of it, the sheer number of artillery pieces they have is quite staggering.
If you have a plan for military intervention in North Korea that doesn't lead to the virtual annihilation of Seoul within hours of the start of the war, please, we're all ears.
Troop numbers... (Score:5, Insightful)
17,900: Number of US troops sent to Afghanistan, to hunt down Osama Bin Laden and Al Qaeda, the people responsible for September 11th and other terrorist attacks against the US. [globalsecurity.org]
That give you an indication of what the Bush adminstrations priorities have been?
Re:Troop numbers... (Score:5, Insightful)
The country is sliding back into the condition it was in before we invaded. Warlords control huge peices of territory, the Taliban are resurgent. It'll be another breeding ground for extremists and summer camp for terrorists they way things are going now.
Besides, you math is off. 17,900 is appearantly to few people for a manhunt in Afghanistan, given that Bin Ladin has evaded capture.
134,000 troops isn't enough to overthrow invade an established country, overtrow its government and occupy a resisting population. It wasn't enough to round up loyalists on our way to overthrowing the government, and it wasn't enough to properly secure arms depots, which is part of the reason it isn't enough to occupy a resisting population -- The average # of American soldiers killed per day is climbing, and has been since the transfer of power at the end of june; at the same time the US is rushing to turn security responsibility for more and more territory over to Iraqi forces. In other words, people are dying faster defending less territory.
Re:It's a good thing... (Score:5, Interesting)
I know this is probably too late to get modded up, but I spent a year in Osan, Make no mistake, we weren't there to to protect South Korean. In fact, after arriving at Osan, we were briefed that we were, literally, nothing more than speed bumps, preventing the North's troops from advancing too quickly through the South. We were there to hold off the North's attack until reinforcements could arrive from Japan.
To get an idea how large their army was, they gave us a rough estimate that we would be outnumbered 100 to 1. Needless to say, during exercises, we would be laden down with about 15 pounds of ammo; Not because we didn't need it, but because it made us aware of what we were up against.
Re:It's a good thing... (Score:5, Informative)
http://www.globalsecurity.org/military/ops/opla
"The DPRK will seek force ratios of 3-5 to 1 in armor, 6-8 to 1 in artillery, and 4-6 to 1 in infantry forces to mount an attack. In attempting to breach a well-prepared defensive position, the DPRK may be expected to seek even larger ratios. This undoubtedly would be the case in attempting to break through DMZ defenses.
Combined-arms operations constitute the foundation of tactical battle in DPRK doctrine. Utilization of the forward conventional corps, reinforced by the mechanized and armor corps, to fight from the DMZ to Pusan is called the Strike Force concept. This concept embodies how the DPRK is expected to fight, especially south of Seoul or in defense of the DPRK."
"Without moving any of its more than 12,000 artillery pieces, "Pyongyang could sustain up to 500,000 rounds per hour against Combined Forces Command defenses and Seoul for several hours" Gen. Thomas A. Schwartz said in testimony in March 2001 before the Senate Armed Services Committee. Schwartz heads the United Nations and ROK-US Combined Forces Commands and US Forces Korea.
Towards the end of the Korean War fighting in 1953, the Chinese were able to fire approximately 100,000 rounds per day against US forces, and the number of rounds per day was increasing. A 100,000 round day would be a light day in a new war.
In 1993 and 1994, when the North Korean nuclear question emerged as an international issue, the North deployed large numbers of improved 170mm self-propelled guns and 240mm multiple rocket launchers to forward positions close to the DMZ. This was apparently meant to threaten South Korea's security while calling for nuclear negotiations with the US."
"A major air campaign against northern forces would be required before the counteroffensive could begin. A US Marine Expeditionary Force (in division strength) and the 82nd Air Assault Division, along with ROK divisions, would launch an overland offensive north toward Wonsan from the east coast. Soon thereafter, a combined US-ROK force would likely stage an amphibious landing near Wonsan, and advance to Pyongyang. Subsequently, a combined US-ROK force would execute a major counteroffensive from north of Seoul aimed at seizing Pyongyang. This would be achieved either by linking up with the force at Wonsan, or meeting it at Pyongyang."
Misleading (Score:5, Informative)
Re:Misleading (Score:4, Insightful)
It would be highly embarassing to the current administration to have to N. Korea's insane nuclear ambitions (which is a back burner issue for them) dominate the news during the 9/11 observance.
Behind one these curtains is an weird, probably psychotic dictator with weapons of mass destruction? Can you guess which one?
Wrong again George.
-dameron
Behind the curtain (Score:5, Funny)
A: Behind our curtain!
Re:Misleading (Score:5, Insightful)
What do you DO about North Korea?
You can invade Iraq and dismantle their government with relatively few casualties.
But if you even START to THINK about invading North Korea, Seoul gets hit by 50,000 missiles before our troops can even step across the border. Sure, North Korea would fall in a matter of days, but not until after they'd done tons of damage.
The ONLY way to deal with North Korea is diplomacy. Any other dealing will reduce Seoul to rubble in a matter of minutes. THAT is why nobody has done anything about that particular psychotic dictator, except met with him diplomatically.
Re:Misleading (Score:5, Insightful)
and i'm sure he'll become more sane, have less weapons, and become less desperate as time goes on.
L.A.Times article = He's insane (Score:5, Informative)
He's either whacked or really, really different - I vote for the former.
Re:Misleading (Score:5, Insightful)
Re:Misleading (Score:5, Interesting)
The PRK is covered with military installations. This JInterest states that we should use "strategic nuclear weapons against the PRK to destroy every military installation." Yes, because nuking a country of 22 million people is the right thing to do.
You think WWII was bad? I agree, it was. But if you start a nuclear war in this day and age things will be much, much worse.
"Never underestimate the instinct of most tyrants for self-preservation." Which is why North Korea would never use a nuclear weapon unless attacked to begin with. They would be utterly and completely wiped out. There wouldn't be half a dozen North Koreans left alive.
I still can't believe a post basicly promoting the genocide of a population of 22 million people has been modded up!
What is wrong with you people. I watched the movie the gray zone the other night and I was amazed at what people would go along with in those circumstances. I thought how did that happen.
But all JInterest had to do was say OMG there is a big scary guy over there and he's bad and might hurt us and people are willing to go nuke a country. WHAT THE FUCK!
Burn my Karma, I don't care. This needed to be said. Fucking Sheeple.
Re:Misleading (Score:5, Insightful)
I guess you don't live in South Korea? (Score:5, Interesting)
As the poster above suggested, any move by the US would be met with decimation of the South Korean capital.
The North Koreans have enough artillery and incendiary weapons to make Seoul look like post WWII Dresden. Neither the US nor the South Koreans have enough weapons to destroy all those artillery positions before they've done their work. Yes, the US would eventually win. But it would take at least 1 to 3 months to fight North Korea to a standstill. Perhaps longer, as most of our forces are committed elsewhere.
You may be able to accept a few hundred thousand South Korean civilian casualties and the reduction of their capital to rubble. But it shouldn't come as a surprise that the South Koreans are not so anxious to risk that possibility. And that's just the conventional weapon threat. If the North managed to lob a single nuclear device towards the south, the casualties could run to millions.
I suggest you do your tough talking when it's the lives of your family on the line. In this case, the South Korean's have every right to drive the direction of these negotiations. It's their families only 50 miles away from the DMZ, not yours or mine.
Re:Are you sure? (Score:5, Insightful)
As a counter-weight to the continual cries of "diplomacy is useless!", consider the Cold War. The USA and the USSR didn't fight each other; all of their contact was (essentially) diplomacy. Yet the situation remained (relatively) peaceful, and eventually the danger went away.
During the so-called "Cold War" millions died in places like Korea, Vietnam, Afghanistan, Angola, Guatemala, Nicauragua, Cuba, etc. over the course of decades as the "Superpowers" engaged in bloody and terrible warfare by proxy. You clearly need to re-read your history of the period.
Re:Misleading (Score:5, Funny)
This was reported by CBS... (Score:4, Funny)
Looks like Bush finally found... (Score:5, Insightful)
How long can we ignore this crazy bastard, Kim Jong-il I mean? Are we gonna have to wait until he strikes oil?
-dameron
Re:Looks like Bush finally found... (Score:5, Funny)
I'm glad you cleared that up. I thought you were talking about Bush.
Re:China is the differnce here (Score:5, Interesting)
And don't, for a second, think that the US or the PRC really want to do that... ever.
This ain't the cold war. Our economies are so intertwined that a war between us would result in huge economic depressions, job losses, people going hungry, cats and dogs living together, etc.
Put it this way, if you lived during the cold war, you'd never pick up a piece of merchandise you bought from the store and see "Made in USSR" on the bottom. "Made in China" is farily common, last I checked....
those wacky north koreans (Score:4, Funny)
i r korea kekekeke (Score:5, Funny)
Am I the only one.... (Score:4, Funny)
The Time Frame (Score:5, Insightful)
Anyone else think it quite remarkable that we live in an age where information travels at incredible speeds all over the world... but it took two days for the (at least mainstream) media to report this? Think about it. There are still places in the world where something equivalent to a small nuke can go off -- mushroom cloud and all -- and we don't NOTICE it right away.
It's kind of humbling.
don't be so innocent (Score:5, Interesting)
Let's not jump to conclusions... (Score:5, Funny)
Yeah, right... (Score:5, Interesting)
The U.S. official said the cloud could be the result of a forest fire.
Damn, we must look stupid to gov't officials.
Cheers,
Erick
Craters and forest fires (Score:5, Insightful)
Forest fires cause lots of damage, but generally they don't make huge craters visible from space.
Well I would note (Score:5, Insightful)
So, what really happened? Well, I dunno, but neither do you. If you assume that it was a nuclear blast, you are taking that on faith. There is little in the way of second hand confirmation and you sure as hell have NO first hand information.
So while I'm not saying that CNN isn't wrong, please let's lay off the bashing until there is more information.
NYT: Atomic Activity in North Korea Raises Concern (Score:5, Informative)
Atomic Activity in North Korea Raises Concerns
By DAVID E. SANGER and WILLIAM J. BROAD
September 12, 2004
http://tinyurl.com/5kb3d [tinyurl.com]
WASHINGTON, Sept. 11 - President Bush and his top advisers have received intelligence reports in recent days describing a confusing series of actions by North Korea that some experts believe could indicate the country is preparing to conduct its first test explosion of a nuclear weapon, according to senior officials with access to the intelligence.
While the indications were viewed as serious enough to warrant a warning to the White House, American intelligence agencies appear divided about the significance of the new North Korean actions, much as they were about the evidence concerning Iraq's alleged weapons stockpiles.
Some analysts in agencies that were the most cautious about the Iraq findings have cautioned that they do not believe the activity detected in North Korea in the past three weeks is necessarily the harbinger of a test. A senior scientist who assesses nuclear intelligence says the new evidence "is not conclusive," but is potentially worrisome.
If successful, a test would end a debate that stretches back more than a decade over whether North Korea has a rudimentary arsenal, as it has boasted in recent years. Some analysts also fear that a test could change the balance of power in Asia, perhaps leading to a new nuclear arms race there.
In interviews on Friday and Saturday, senior officials were reluctant to provide many details of the new activities they have detected, but some of the information appears to have come from satellite intelligence.
One official with access to the intelligence called it "a series of indicators of increased activity that we believe would be associated with a test," saying that the "likelihood" of a North Korean test had risen significantly in just the past four weeks. It was that changed assessment that led to the decision to give an update to President Bush, the officials said.
The activities included the movement of materials around several suspected test sites, including one near a location where intelligence agencies reported last year that conventional explosives were being tested that could compress a plutonium core and set off a nuclear blast. But officials have not seen the classic indicators of preparations at a test site, in which cables are laid to measure an explosion in a deep test pit.
"I'm not sure you would see that in a country that has tunnels everywhere," said one senior official who has reviewed the data. Officials said if North Korea proceeded with a test, it would probably be with a plutonium bomb, perhaps one fabricated from the 8,000 spent nuclear fuel rods that the North has boasted in the past few months have been reprocessed into bomb fuel.
A senior intelligence official noted Saturday that even if "they are doing something, it doesn't mean they will" conduct a test, noting that preparations that the North knew could be detected by the United States might be a scare tactic or negotiating tactic by the North Korean government.
Several officials speculated that the test, if it occurred, could be intended to influence the presidential election, though a senior military official said while "an election surprise" could be the motive, "I'm not sure what that would buy them."
While the intelligence community's experience in Iraq colors how it assesses threats in places like North Korea, the comparisons are inexact. Inspectors have seen and measured the raw material that the North could turn into bomb fuel; the only question is whether they have done so in the 20 months since arms inspectors were ousted. While Iraq denied it has weapons, the North boasts about them - perhaps too loudly, suggesting they may have less than they say.
On the other hand, the divisions within the administration over how to deal with North Korea mirrors some of the old debate about Iraq. Hard-l
Little Known Fact (Score:5, Informative)
http://ares.redsword.com/GPS/old/sum_sat.htm
Forest fire? Don't think so. (Score:5, Interesting)
This CNN story [cnn.com] claims that a US official suggests that the mushroom cloud might be caused by a forest fire. A little bit of physics knowledge [layman/common-sense] makes this suggestion laughable: a mushroom cloud is caused by a large amount of superheated gasses, concentrated and hot enough to rise miles into the atmosphere before dissipating enough to break the cap. Unless they have had a multi-year drought and a forest dense enough to flash to many thousand degrees C in a very short period of time, there's no possible way the mushroom cloud was created that way.
Now, it's entirely possible that it is not a mushroom cloud, as it sounds like all the indications of its presence so far are satellite shots. AFAIK very few, if any, satellites can shoot pictures at a sufficiently low angle to actually get enough outline to confirm a mushroom cloud. Basic physics again: too low and angle, you get a massively distored image because there's a) more air in the way, and b) angle of incidence causes wild refraction.
If anyone can elaborate on (or correct) these two issues, please comment. I'd be glad to be proven wrong in some way, as a verified nuclear N.Korea is not a good thing. However, what we know so far is not promising.
Re:Forest fire? Don't think so. - WRONG (Score:5, Informative)
pictures speak a 1000 words
ex 1 [usra.edu]
ex 2 [fotosearch.com]
you can find 100's of recountings of forest fires that have mushroom clouds
Other possibilities (Score:5, Informative)
Also, forest fires occur there with some regularity (more than 130 at once this summer), and can produce large white mushroom shaped clouds under the right atmospheric conditions.
Let's not jump to conclusions. Oh wait, this is Slashdot....
Possibly volcanic? (Score:5, Interesting)
If I remember correctly, Mt. St. Helens wasn't expected to erupt either, except by geophysicists, and in comparison was a relatively unprecedented event (being that the only volconoes to erupt in a US territory within recent history were in Hawaii).
Re:Possibly volcanic? (Score:5, Interesting)
Look up seismology during the demolition of the Seattle Dome, for example, there's a massive amount of data collected from dozens of miles away. Same goes for the WTC attacks. The WTC amounted to approximately a 1 kiloton blast when the towers fell.
Now on the other hand, there's S. Korea, China, and Japan, all have extensive seismic networks in operation. They should have shown *something* by now.
Oh Christ, grow up, people!!! (Score:5, Insightful)
Possibility number 1: A nuclear explosion. If it was a nuclear explosion, remember that it happened close North Koreas's north eastern border with China. If that is the case, remember that the prevailing winds will blow the fallout either north or west, in which case the fallout will cross over into China, and you can bet your sweet apple pie that China will not take lightly to radioactive fallout from a neighbouring country, or the winds blow the fallout east in which case both Japan and Russia (Yes, George, Russia is just across the way over there) will raise living hell, or the winds blow the fallout south in which case South Korea gets to crap their collective pants. Either way, the international media will find out really fast about it.
2. It was an accident such as the one a few months ago, when a train laden with chemicals went up into the air. Given that NK is poor as hell and workplace safety not a major concern, this is the most likely cause. If this is the case, it is possible that it will take a long while until the media discover it.
3. It was a military accident at a missile site, where one exploding missile set off the rest, a la Chinese firecrackers. If this is the case, the NK's will probably try to keep it as secret as possible as it would be hugely embarrassing to the fuckers who routinely make huge boasts about their military and have this obsession with saving face.
NK != Iraq (Score:5, Informative)
The U.S. with U.N. backing (the Soviet Union's UN ambassador had walked out - thus avoiding a veto) fought a war with the North Koreans in the 1950's. The war ended with an armistice in 1953 - not a peace treaty. North Korea has a 1.1 million man army out of a population of 22 million. They spend about 23% of their GDP on the military. The South Korean capital - Seoul is within easy artillery range of the North Korean border, and the North Koreans are believed to have a lot of hidden artillery in bunkers on the border. In the event of war, a lot of civilians in South Korea would die quickly. Finally, North Korea's leader Kim Jong-il is a wacko. While his people starve, he imports large quantities of large items for himself (he favors Hennessy cognac). He's had Japanese citizens kidnapped to teach the Japanese language to North Koreans spies . He's a movie nut (owns 20,000 films) and kidnapped a South Korean movie director to make films about himself.
China is North Korea's largest trade partner and patron. However, with China's economic boom - China now trades far more with South Korea, Japan, and the U.S. Nevertheless, China is still wary of Japan - remembering the horrors inflicted on China by the Japaneses during WWII. Since the war, Japan has become an economic rather than military power, and it's pacifistic constitution (written by the US) ensures that it will not again become a threat to it's neighbors.
A nuclear North Korea threatens the balance in the region. It is not in the interest of China for South Korea to develop it's own nukes. It is not in the interest of anyone for the Japanese to develop nukes to counter the threat of nuclear armed missiles from North Korea. China's real nightmare - is if the region starts a nuclear arms race and Taiwan goes nuclear.
So, the choices are as follows:
1) Cut a deal similar to the 1994 Carter deal that the North Koreans violated (fool me once
2) Attack North Korea and risk immediate massive civilian casualties in South Korea.
3) Drag China into the negotiations with North Korea and convince them to "curb your dog".
4) Close our eyes, put our fingers in our ears and shout "La La La La La
Personally, I think the only viable answer is number three - and that's what we're doing.
Kimchee Explosion (Score:5, Funny)
Thank God they didn't do that on the Moon or it we would have lost it.
Re:Its a nuke. (Score:5, Interesting)
like the way all bad experiences are always "harrowing".
Re:Its a nuke. (Score:5, Informative)
A mushroom cloud could be from a nuke. It could also be from the explosion of a liquefied natural gas storage facility, or a MOAB, or cargo train filled with ANFO. It's not a tell-tale of anything other than a big explosion.
BBC Link (Score:5, Insightful)
Re:Ooops - No Seismic Activity Last Hour, Day, Wee (Score:5, Funny)
Wars are Gods way of teaching Americans geography.