North Korea

[JohnA]

Never forget that N. Corea really is China in disguise.

 

They know what they're doing, the Chinese are not rookies. Masters of timing, they've been in the game for millenia, hell even the ancient Greeks knew very little of them because they were killing all strangers. They had invented several things (black powder included) and managed to keep them secret for centuries.

 

If they were to influence negotiations with the West (of which they've got lots at the moment), do you think they'd do it openly? Of course not!

 

Think Sun Tzu, think diversion

[Chiefgroover]

Maybe the president of N.Korea will take a heart attack, and the necular plans will get scrapped? Just have to wait and see wont we?

[Thorin]

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/world/asia-pacific/6032525.stm

 

I'm just off to practise "duck and cover"

[imi]

Is this something we should be worried about?

Could this be bigger than we think?

Why are the Americans so up-tight about it?

And correct me if I am wrong, but does the whole civilised world not know what a nuclear missile can do?

So why test yet another one?

Questions, questions eh......

 

Perhaps they want to be in a position to defend themselves? Since it is OK for others for have this capability so why not them?

[chilli]

Isn't it true that a H-bomb has never actually been used on developed land?

 

The Japan A-bombs of the 2nd world war were around 20 kilotonnes IIRC, and modern H-bombs are anywhere up to 50 megatonnes and above!!!!!!! 2,500 times more powerful!!!!!!!

 

Or do I not know what I'm on about again?

 

you are right! The only bombs ever used for real were the two on Japan, and they were fission only low yield bombs.

 

Basically the two on Japan had an approximate yield of 20kt, although studies afterwards estimate the actual yield was probably less, around the 10-15kt area.

 

What we call thermonuclear h-bombs are basically fission induced fusion (hydrogen) bombs. The fission part could be seen as the trigger or starter for the much more violent fussion part.

 

The largest I've ever heard of was a 100mt h-bomb, approx 10,000 times more powerful than those used on Japan! Scary.

 

Typically these days warheads arn't just made as powerful as possible, warhead engineering designs bombs to be more effective, this might mean making it contain say 3 smaller nuclear bombs rather than one massive one = more effective.

 

The testing thing is a bit hypocritical, the USA have done soooo much testing (mainly back in the 50s) that it is untrue.

 

N.Korea is developing its own now and basically wants to test them like the USA did many years ago.

 

Whether we can trust them to use them for peacekeeping defence is another issue altogether

[AJI]

I think that any leader with half a brain cell realises that to fire a nuclear bomb to another coutry means that they get one back with a happy return card on it.

 

I can see in the future as the world's population increases and increases with the main leaders doing nothing to control it (don't know how they would due to all the ethical/religious or practical arguments), then the demand for land / fuel / food etc. etc. is going to go through the roof.... and if you're not a nuclear power then you will have no control in any of the world summits.

 

The G8 summits were originally for the nuclear power states and if nothing else, to have nuclear weapons, means you have more of a 'say' in the world.

 

But I think until N. Korea show with proof that they have intentions of taking over the world (as I am sure this is what the US are trying to make out), then nuclear technology is going circulate the world as an unfortunate eventuallity.

[chilli]

then nuclear technology is going circulate the world as an unfortunate eventuallity.

 

that much is certain, the best the US et al could acheive is a minor set back to natural progress but in the grand scheme of things you can't stop it. Is the minor set back worth causing real politcal upset right now over, justified by what might happen in the future? Who decides who is allowed weapons and who is not, doesn't that make us the bad guys. It's a tricky area

[RedM]

Hopefully all of this will cause the cost of fuel to rise again.

[dangerous brain]

Testing is also a way of showing the world that you have a bloody big bomb and it definitely works. Its a sort of "come and have a go if you think you are hard enough" statement. When you can prove you have Nukes it sort of gets you onto the big boys table at international level. You have no choice but to take any government wielding nuclear threats seriously so you have to invite them to the bigger boys meetings.

[michael]

North Korean state media said the underground test had brought "happiness to our people".

 

 

Maybe more countries should consider it?

[RedM]

North Korean state media said the underground test had brought "happiness to our people".

Maybe more countries should consider it?

 

Time to set one off in this office methinks.

[chilli]

I think the single biggest worry in all this, longer term, is an East Asian arms race... the whole region may feel destabilised by this move.

 

I'd imagine at the least there will now be major sanctions against N.Korea and their people will suffer greatly because of it.

[martin_a]

The issue with building a nuke isn't the technology. Most countries have scientists capable of doing it the method has been around for 60 years, the problem is getting the fuel and parts to do it - similar to Iran and their power station which could have its spent fuel processed for a nuclear weapon.

 

The trouble with North Korea is - unlike Iraq say, that they have or have also been developing intercontinental ballistic missiles, essentially weapons that could be fired against any country in the world not just something that will get over the border to South Korea.

 

It isn't just the US putting pressure on them. This is a unstable regime run by a group of complete power hungry nutters. It isn't a US issue (comments on ham fisted approach etc accepted) it is a world issue and quite rightly the world needs to come out to condemn this move.

 

m.

[dangerous brain]

The only country that could have any effective influence on the north korean government will probably be China. I'm sure if China stepped in this would be all sorted out. The fact that they haven't so far is a can of worms in itself.

[chilli]

The issue with building a nuke isn't the technology.

 

I'm not sure anyone thinks it is, if a nation has a desire to enter the nuclear weapons arena then it needs to ensure it has the right infrastructure to support what it wants to do. i.e. it might need one or more nuclear power stations and a reprocessing facility.

 

the point of testing is firstly to make a statement to the world, and secondly to prove that the theory works in the design of the particular real bomb

 

I read somewhere that the 1st nukes tested by the Russians after ww2 were exact copies of one of the bombs dropped on Japan (Fat boy I think it was).

 

In this case technology was aquired/advanced by spying/espionage - this just serves to accelerate the path - it can be developed from the ground up independantly - but it would need testing to prove effectiveness and fine tune the designs. Testsing of simple fission devices is the first step to mastering the technology behind h-bombs (fission-fussion-fission).

[JohnA]

Nowadays, what does technology have to do with possession of nukes?

 

Transfer of funds - yes!

 

...and what do intercontinental missiles have to do with anything?

Smuggling is an established business, a nuke can be in the target country already, waiting for the signal to go off.

 

Actually I find it surprising that it hasn't happened already - given the number of nuclear warheads that are supposed to be all around us. The soviets themselves admitted that many got lost in the upheaval. Surely they have found new homes, right?

[Kn1ght]

It isn't just the US putting pressure on them. This is a unstable regime run by a group of complete power hungry nutters. It isn't a US issue (comments on ham fisted approach etc accepted) it is a world issue and quite rightly the world needs to come out to condemn this move.

 

I'm sure South Korea and Japan are even more worried than the US about this.

 

For all the bad things that can be said about the US at least its government is stable and unlikely to give nukes to the highest bidder. As to more countries having nuke to level the playing field do we really want to go back to the M.A.D. situation of the 60’s to 80’s.

 

just my 2p

 

peace

[Pete]

The only country that could have any effective influence on the north korean government will probably be China. I'm sure if China stepped in this would be all sorted out. The fact that they haven't so far is a can of worms in itself.

China as their neighbour had to be very careful how they tread, and besides are busy with its own plans to take over the word economically with manufacturing etc.

[AJI]

 

For all the bad things that can be said about the US at least its government is stable and unlikely to give nukes to the highest bidder.

 

peace

 

would you bet your life on that ? (j/k)

[Sheefa]

Let us not forget that the USA has been selling arms and new-age weapons to countries all over the world that it also deems are a potential threat. Am I right in thinking the USA sold assault weapons to Vietnam only months before the conflict began.

 

There's no real point in discussing this as it all comes down to the attached thread below.

 

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/talking_point/772984.stm

 

We build weapons, so they build weapons, so we build a defence system which neutralises their capabilities, so they find a way to get around our defences etc etc etc blah blah blah. One of the post mentions a 'World Wide Defence System'. If this was implemented, what the hell is the point in having nukes in the first place? It's a logistical nightmare.

 

It's not a case of who. It's a case of when. And that moment will arise when a certain Nation decides to 'test' anothers defence capabilities.

[JohnA]

It's not just America, Britain and France do the same thing.

Even Germany has a piece of this lucrative pie.

 

Where do you think Saddam got his chemical weapons from?

And where was his 'supergun' designed and built in the first place?

[Sheefa]

Agreed JohnA and I'm certainly not just having a rant at America!

 

Everyone is in the dodgy mix it seems and the only way out would surely be to scrap nukes altogether or fire them at one-another in a final showdown. Unfortunately, I believe our generation (18 - 40) will witness the latter.

[JohnA]

Ah, but they don't want to scrap them altogether.

Simply to stop the rest from getting their hands on them.

That's why it's not called 'nuclear disarmament'. Oh no, it's called 'nuclear non-proliferation'.

Very convenient indeed.

 

Now who is going to take seriously this ridiculous concept?

 

And what are they going to do? nuke them because they've now got nukes? There is a lapse of logic here.

[Jspec Germany]

So many interesting views.

 

What's important is that the total number of nuclear weapons in the world is decreasing.

 

Yes, S. Korea and Japan are more concerned.

 

The N. Korean people are the ones who are really going to suffer? Haven't they been the ones suffering all along because of a reckless leader who cares only about the military and pushing around its neighbors.

 

I think all nukes are bad and they should all be destroyed. There's a reason a nuke hasn't been used since Nagasaki. Nobody wants to see them used ever again. That has been the doctrine in the US military anyway. Strictly conventional. True, super low yield weapons have been talked about.

 

I don't know guys. What I do know is that I don't like the media spin. Hopefully, the UN acts and it all gets resolved peacefully.

[Darren-K]

nuclear weapons are scary but to be honest i cant blame n.korea for wanting them "just in case"

i mean after all we were once total enemies with Russia - now were best of friends plus the Russian girls are total babes !!