16 replies to this topic

[forever freedom]

http://www.guardian....ma-nuclear-test

North Korea today risked further international isolation after it claimed to have successfully tested a nuclear weapon as powerful as the atomic bomb that destroyed Hiroshima.

The test comes less than two months after the North enraged the US and its allies by test firing a long-range ballistic missile.

The KNCA news agency, the regime's official mouthpiece, said: "We have successfully conducted another nuclear test on 25 May as part of the republic's measures to strengthen its nuclear deterrent."

Officials in South Korea said they had detected a tremor consistent with those caused by an underground nuclear explosion. The country's Yonhap news agency reported that the North had test-fired three short-range missiles from a base on the east coast immediately after the nuclear test.

The underground atomic explosion, at 9.54am local time (0154 BST), created an earthquake measuring magnitude 4.5 in Kilju county in the country's north-east, reports said.

President Barack Obama called the test a matter of grave concern to all countries. "North Korea is directly and recklessly challenging the international community," he said in a statement. "North Korea's behaviour increases tensions and undermines stability in north-east Asia."

He added that North Korea's behaviour would serve only to deepen the country's isolation.

"It will not find international acceptance unless it abandons its pursuit of weapons of mass destruction and their means of delivery," he said.

The UN secretary general, Ban Ki-moon, said he was "deeply worried" by the development.

The UN security council will hold an emergency meeting in New York later today to discuss its response to the latest escalation in the crisis. Obama and other leaders did not offer details on the council's possible response.

China, North Korea's key ally, said it was "resolutely opposed" to the test, urging its neighbour to avoid actions that would sharpen tensions and return to six-party arms-for-disarmament talks.

Japan, which considers itself high on the North's potential hit list, said it would seek a new resolution condemning the test.

Russian defence experts estimated the explosion's yield at between 10 and 20 kilotons, many times more than the 1 kiloton measured in its first nuclear test in 2006 and about as powerful as the bombs the US used against Hiroshima and Nagasaki at the end of the second world war. One kiloton is equal to the force produced by 1,000 tonnes of TNT.

The force of the blast made the ground tremble in the Chinese border city of Yanji, 130 miles away.

The North Korean news agency said the test had been "safely conducted on a new higher level in terms of its explosive power and technology of its control. The test will contribute to defending the sovereignty of the country and the nation and socialism and ensuring peace and security on the Korean peninsula and the region."

Gordon Brown described the test as "erroneous, misguided and a danger to the world". The prime minister added: "This act will undermine prospects for peace on the Korean peninsula and will do nothing for North Korea's security."

South Korea condemned the test, North Korea's second since it exploded its first nuclear device in October 2006 in defiance of international opinion. That test prompted the UN to pass a resolution banning Pyongyang from activities related to its ballistic missile programme.

The South Korean president, Lee Myung-bak, convened a session of the country's security council after seismologists reported earthquakes in the Kilju region, site of the North's first nuclear test.

In Tokyo, Japan's chief cabinet secretary, Takeo Kawamura, said the test was "a clear violation of the UN security council resolution and cannot be tolerated".

North Korea had warned of a second nuclear test after the UN condemned its test-launch of a ballistic missile on 5 April and agreed to tighten sanctions put in place in 2006.

Pyongyang insisted it had put a peaceful communications satellite in orbit, but experts said the technology and methods were identical to those used to launch a long-range Taepodong-2 missile.

After the UN refused to apologise for condemning the launch, North Korea expelled international inspectors, threatened to restart its Yongbyon nuclear reactor – which it had agreed to start dismantling in 2007 – and walked away from six-party nuclear talks.

Today's test will add to fears that the North is moving closer to possessing the ability to mount a nuclear warhead on long-range missiles that are capable, in theory, of reaching Hawaii and Alaska.

"This test, if confirmed, could indicate North Korea's decision to work at securing actual nuclear capabilities," Koh Yu-hwan, a professor at Dongkuk University in Seoul, told Reuters.

"North Korea had been expecting the new US administration to mark a shift from the previous administration's stance, but is realising that there are no changes. It may have decided that a second test was necessary. [It] seems to be reacting to the US and South Korean administrations' policies."

Analysts believe the North Korean leader, Kim Jong-il, hopes to use the test to shore up support from the military amid mounting speculation that he is about to name one of his three sons as his successor.

Kim, 67, appears to be re-establishing his grip on power since reportedly suffering a stroke last August. Today's test is a direct challenge to attempts by Obama to engage the North and stem the spread of nuclear weapons.

Despite promising a fresh start to bilateral relations, Obama, who denounced last month's missile launch as "a provocation," has so far failed to persuade North Korean to enter into negotiations.

Kim Myong-chol, executive director of the Centre for Korean-American Peace in Tokyo, who is close to Pyongyang, said the test was a reminder that North Korea "is going it alone as a nuclear power".

"North Korea doesn't need any talks with America. America is tricky and undesirable," he said. "It does not implement its own agreements.

"We are not going to worry about sanctions. If they sanction us, we will become more powerful. Sanctions never help America; they are counter-productive … We don't care about America and what they say."

Is this something to worry about?

I think that these current challenges by the North Korean and Iranian governments are other disastrous effects of the US' recent invasions of Afghanistan and Iraq. How proud are Bush's voters now?

Edited by forever freedom, 25 May 2009 - 07:30 PM.

[rwac]

I think that these current challenges by the North Korean and Iranian governments are other disastrous effects of the US' recent invasions of Afghanistan and Iraq. Obama's display of weakness. How proud are Bush Obama's voters now?

[Cyberbrain]

I think that these current challenges by the North Korean and Iranian governments are other disastrous effects of the US' recent invasions of Afghanistan and Iraq. Obama's display of weakness. How proud are Bush Obama's voters now?

North Korea and Iran have been a problem for the US for decades, of which both Republicans and Democrats have been trying to solve. How is it that Obama, who has only been in office for a few months, created a disastrous effect?

[Cyberbrain]

I think that these current challenges by the North Korean and Iranian governments are other disastrous effects of the US' recent invasions of Afghanistan and Iraq. How proud are Bush's voters now?

I agree that Bush really screwed our relationship with these two countries, but I wouldn't say that the invasions of Afghanistan and Iraq are to blame. The invasion Afghanistan and Iraq, didn't have any profound effect on North Korea. As for Iran, it was a blessing for them to have the Taliban and Saddam Hussein out of power (both of which were large enemies to Iran). But it was the continued occupation of these two countries that now has Iran more hostile to us. When the Taliban and Saddam fell, Iran congratulated us and offered to help in any way, but instead Bush placed more sanctions on Iran and labeled it as part of the "Axis of Evil".

Edited by Cyberbrain, 25 May 2009 - 08:27 PM.

[VictorBjoerk]

These leaders in North Korea are perfectly aware that doing this will cause fear in the western world and that's why they do it,There is no other reason.

However one may ask, is this really something to worry about?

If North Korea would attack another country why shouldn't USA,NATO,UN etc be able to eliminate the government of North Korea easily?

Why is there no focus on China, a country that commits an enormous amount of crimes against humanity.

Why doesn't imminst have any members from China? You know the answer, this forum would never be allowed there.

[rwac]

North Korea and Iran have been a problem for the US for decades, of which both Republicans and Democrats have been trying to solve. How is it that Obama, who has only been in office for a few months, created a disastrous effect?

I was kidding. I believe both Bush and Obama have been mishandled the situation.
It's annoying when people blame Bush (BDS ?) for everything.
I can just as well turn it around and blame Obama instead.

Oh wait: Here's this guy making the exact same argument.

President Obama cannot blame the problem-states of the world--Iran, Pakistan, Myanmar and North Korea--if they have come to the conclusion that they can take liberties with the present administration in Washington without having to fear any adverse consequences.

http://www.forbes.co...clear-test.html

Edited by rwac, 25 May 2009 - 11:25 PM.

[forever freedom]

North Korea and Iran have been a problem for the US for decades, of which both Republicans and Democrats have been trying to solve. How is it that Obama, who has only been in office for a few months, created a disastrous effect?

I was kidding. I believe both Bush and Obama have been mishandled the situation.
It's annoying when people blame Bush (BDS ?) for everything.
I can just as well turn it around and blame Obama instead.

Oh wait: Here's this guy making the exact same argument.

President Obama cannot blame the problem-states of the world--Iran, Pakistan, Myanmar and North Korea--if they have come to the conclusion that they can take liberties with the present administration in Washington without having to fear any adverse consequences.

http://www.forbes.co...clear-test.html

Yes you do have a point here.

[niner]

North Korea and Iran have been a problem for the US for decades, of which both Republicans and Democrats have been trying to solve. How is it that Obama, who has only been in office for a few months, created a disastrous effect?

I was kidding. I believe both Bush and Obama have been mishandled the situation.
It's annoying when people blame Bush (BDS ?) for everything.
I can just as well turn it around and blame Obama instead.

Oh wait: Here's this guy making the exact same argument.

President Obama cannot blame the problem-states of the world--Iran, Pakistan, Myanmar and North Korea--if they have come to the conclusion that they can take liberties with the present administration in Washington without having to fear any adverse consequences.

http://www.forbes.co...clear-test.html

Yes you do have a point here.

How so? Forbes often lacks more than a tenuous grip on reality, and this case is typical. What in the world makes them think that the problem states of the world can "take liberties with the present administration" "without having to fear adverse consequences."?? Are they just making this stuff up? Do they think Pakistan can just nuke Kansas City for the hell of it? Take our lunch money? Conservatives are such cowards it boggles the mind. Merely having a larger military than the rest of the world combined is not sufficient; they want the president to swagger and make enormous strategic blunders as well. So, yeah, you can turn it around and blame Obama if you want. You can turn it around and blame Ryan Seacrest too. Equally valid.

[PWAIN]

The UN Security council has "Condemned" the actions of North Korea. Err yup, I'm sure that ole Kim is just tremblimg in his boots at yet another bluster fulled condemnation. They couldn't give a rats.....

Lets face it, with such a weak response form the rest of the world, this is an open invitation to NK to do as it pleases. Iran is a me too...... In 5 - 10 years, both these countries will be fully established nuclear powers. Japan and South Korea will move to set up their own nuclear defence and so will the states around Iran (not just Israel). When that happens, the US is going to lose it's 'influence' around the world.

In the future, we will have to explain to our children why we let these dictatorships go nuclear.

[Boondock]

There's at least a possibility that North Korea's recent belligerence comes as a result of S. Korea's recent hawkish policies, and the US's bungling of negotiations over the nuclear issue. Quite a good article is here.

To add a bit more to the debate, it's absolutely critical that we treat North Korea seriously. The regime is likely, one way or another, to collapse in the next 20 or so years. When it does, what happens? N Korea could end up being a fault-line in a conflict between China, since China will perceive a unified Korea (which would de facto involve the south absorbing the north) as an American client on its borders.

Edited by Boondock, 14 June 2009 - 04:05 PM.

[TheFountain]

I think that these current challenges by the North Korean and Iranian governments are other disastrous effects of the US' recent invasions of Afghanistan and Iraq. How proud are Bush's voters now?

I agree that Bush really screwed our relationship with these two countries, but I wouldn't say that the invasions of Afghanistan and Iraq are to blame. The invasion Afghanistan and Iraq, didn't have any profound effect on North Korea. As for Iran, it was a blessing for them to have the Taliban and Saddam Hussein out of power (both of which were large enemies to Iran). But it was the continued occupation of these two countries that now has Iran more hostile to us. When the Taliban and Saddam fell, Iran congratulated us and offered to help in any way, but instead Bush placed more sanctions on Iran and labeled it as part of the "Axis of Evil".

Actually, maybe it is more simple than that. How many civilian deaths across the middle-east has the united states been directly responsible for over the past 50 years? That is the number one reason why they want to kill americans. Every foreign policy move in that region is a breeding emphasis for terrorists. Some statistics have the Iraqi civilian death count at over 600,000. Now turn the 'them' into 'us' and ask yourself how it would feel to you if the situation were reversed.

As far as the north koreans developing nuclear weapons. The united states has them. The UK has them, russia has them, several other countries has them. Who are we to tell them what to do and what to have? I know NK is not perfect, but no nation is. And just to emphasize this, the ONLY country to ever use nuclear weapons against another is the united states. We hardly have the moral high ground to dictate.

[TheFountain]

The UN Security council has "Condemned" the actions of North Korea. Err yup, I'm sure that ole Kim is just tremblimg in his boots at yet another bluster fulled condemnation. They couldn't give a rats.....

Lets face it, with such a weak response form the rest of the world, this is an open invitation to NK to do as it pleases. Iran is a me too...... In 5 - 10 years, both these countries will be fully established nuclear powers. Japan and South Korea will move to set up their own nuclear defence and so will the states around Iran (not just Israel). When that happens, the US is going to lose it's 'influence' around the world.

In the future, we will have to explain to our children why we let these dictatorships go nuclear.

Try to put yourself in their shoes. After witnessing the invasion of Iraq by the united states, perhaps they are developing these weapons as a deterrent to the U.S invading their country. Why is it that the united states, the UK, and other nations have a sovereign right to develop these weapons but North korea should not? No nation has the moral highground, least of all the united states, after its invasion and continued occupation of Iraq and the sheer volume of destruction and Iraqi civilian death caused by the invasion. How dare we dictate morale to other nations!

[Ben]

I don't think it's anything to worry about.

The major fear that Kim Jong-Il has is that he'll be overthrown by the US as they did Hussein., another despot dictator who criminally lapped up luxury while his country starved.

His perogative is stay in power and to hang on to the material trappings that it provides him with as much as possible. He knows too well that if he were to ever launch a nucular missle off North Korean soil he would be giving all his very, very, very powerful enemies, with modern armies and troops with high morale levels and full bellies, the excuse they so sorely want.

Basically he has nothing else to bargain with. He's trapped. If he makes any consessions now he risks appearing as weak to his generals and other powerful people in the country, and thus faces a risk at home.

So he will continue to bluster and to threaten and to basically be a complete thorn in America's side but wont actually ever make good on a single one of his threats.

[Reno]

I don't think it's anything to worry about.

The major fear that Kim Jong-Il has is that he'll be overthrown by the US as they did Hussein., another despot dictator who criminally lapped up luxury while his country starved.

His perogative is stay in power and to hang on to the material trappings that it provides him with as much as possible. He knows too well that if he were to ever launch a nucular missle off North Korean soil he would be giving all his very, very, very powerful enemies, with modern armies and troops with high morale levels and full bellies, the excuse they so sorely want.

Basically he has nothing else to bargain with. He's trapped. If he makes any consessions now he risks appearing as weak to his generals and other powerful people in the country, and thus faces a risk at home.

So he will continue to bluster and to threaten and to basically be a complete thorn in America's side but wont actually ever make good on a single one of his threats.

I agree. He's a weak dictator with no other options left. It's like putting a nazi regime in a box and letting it starve itself out. There is only one problem with this plan. The people end up suffering for generations while the rest of the world just watches. If the US and the rest of the major powers were as righteous as we like to think we are, we would go in and install modern democratic governments. After 50 years we wouldn't have the problems with these little dictators we do today. Bush may have been a blundering idiot, but if the democracies he installed in the middle east survive, he will be remembered as a success.

[niner]

If the US and the rest of the major powers were as righteous as we like to think we are, we would go in and install modern democratic governments.

Haven't we demonstrated that this is impossible?

Bush may have been a blundering idiot, but if the democracies he installed in the middle east survive, he will be remembered as a success.

I think it's going to take more than mere survival of the present governments of Iraq and Afghanistan. At the moment aren't people calling Karzai "the mayor of Kabul"? Seems like it will need more work. Bush incurred a three trillion dollar debt and caused untold death, dismemberment, and suffering with his war of choice. He presided over and was significantly responsible for wrecking the world's economy. He eavesdropped on his citizens and promoted torture. For him to be considered a "success" by someone other than a wingnut true believer, those governments are going to really need to rock... At best I think he will be considered successful in one or a handful of ways, (e.g., Africa policy) but an utter disaster in most regards.

[Boondock]

I don't think it's anything to worry about.

The major fear that Kim Jong-Il has is that he'll be overthrown by the US as they did Hussein., another despot dictator who criminally lapped up luxury while his country starved.

His perogative is stay in power and to hang on to the material trappings that it provides him with as much as possible. He knows too well that if he were to ever launch a nucular missle off North Korean soil he would be giving all his very, very, very powerful enemies, with modern armies and troops with high morale levels and full bellies, the excuse they so sorely want.

Basically he has nothing else to bargain with. He's trapped. If he makes any consessions now he risks appearing as weak to his generals and other powerful people in the country, and thus faces a risk at home.

So he will continue to bluster and to threaten and to basically be a complete thorn in America's side but wont actually ever make good on a single one of his threats.

True enough, but the greater problem is what happens after Kim Jong-Il finally pops his clogs. He's not going to live forever, and is already looking extremely gaunt. His eldest son appears to be axed from succession already, and his second son, I think, is lined up to be the new big chief. I'm sure there are a number of other factions vying for power, and it could be a less than smooth transition.

In the longer-term, North Korea is going to collapse. Nobody's denying that fact. It's not economically viable whatsoever, and exists as it does now (i.e. barely) on the back of Chinese subsidies. If it collapses, and they have nuclear weapons, what then? That's the risk, as it is with Pakistan.

[Rational Madman]

I don't think it's anything to worry about.

The major fear that Kim Jong-Il has is that he'll be overthrown by the US as they did Hussein., another despot dictator who criminally lapped up luxury while his country starved.

His perogative is stay in power and to hang on to the material trappings that it provides him with as much as possible. He knows too well that if he were to ever launch a nucular missle off North Korean soil he would be giving all his very, very, very powerful enemies, with modern armies and troops with high morale levels and full bellies, the excuse they so sorely want.

Basically he has nothing else to bargain with. He's trapped. If he makes any consessions now he risks appearing as weak to his generals and other powerful people in the country, and thus faces a risk at home.

So he will continue to bluster and to threaten and to basically be a complete thorn in America's side but wont actually ever make good on a single one of his threats.

True enough, but the greater problem is what happens after Kim Jong-Il finally pops his clogs. He's not going to live forever, and is already looking extremely gaunt. His eldest son appears to be axed from succession already, and his second son, I think, is lined up to be the new big chief. I'm sure there are a number of other factions vying for power, and it could be a less than smooth transition.

In the longer-term, North Korea is going to collapse. Nobody's denying that fact. It's not economically viable whatsoever, and exists as it does now (i.e. barely) on the back of Chinese subsidies. If it collapses, and they have nuclear weapons, what then? That's the risk, as it is with Pakistan.

In the event of a regime collapse, China is said to have a contingency plan for a government seizure, which would likely involve high-ranking assets within the country. But if this plan were to fail, I would expect this attempt at seizure would be followed by an aggressive--but ultimately brief---military campaign---which is also rumored to be planned. The United States and South Korea have also gamed out, and developed plans for this scenario, but considering the potential conflicts, it would certainly be interesting to see how a regime collapse---or ticking bomb scenario---would unfold. If a military conflict would commence, the North Koreans would be hard pressed to deploy their nuclear weapons, since a penetration of air defenses would be extremely difficult, and because in all likelihood, they've not progressed to the stage of preparing a ballistic missile delivery system for their warheads---which for a country like North Korea, is much more difficult than it sounds. Additionally, I find it hard to believe that preparations for a strike would go unnoticed, and that a preemptive response wouldn't be launched with little hesitation. Whatever happens to North Korea, its survival will be prolonged as long as possible (which I suspect the Chinese would stretch to the limit), and if by chance the regime collapses, its fall will be highly cushioned by the Chinese, the United States, Japan, and South Korea. So I'm not completely sold on the notion that a disorderly or chaotic outcome is a given.

For now, Kim has divided critical responsibilities between his sister, his brother-in-law, his mistress, and his youngest son---whom I'm not completely convinced is being prepared to immediately succeed him. But somewhat worrisome for Kim, there is some evidence to suggest that an unnamed hardliner within the military ordered the sinking of the Cheonan, so it's possible that North Korea faces another prospect of an internal coup---the last one being 16 years ago. Which would explain the administrative changes, and the mass arrests that have been reportedly occurring with disturbing frequency for the last two years.

Edited by Rol82, 28 October 2010 - 10:21 PM.