*Breaking News* N. Korea Claims Successful Nuclear Test

[CyclonePackFan]

From http://www.cnn.com

SEOUL, South Korea (CNN) -- North Korea on Monday claimed it has performed a successful nuclear test, according to that country's official Korean Central News Agency (KCNA).

South Korean government officials also said North Korea performed its first nuclear test, the South's Yonhap news agency reported.

The apparent nuclear test was conducted at 10:36 a.m. (0136 GMT) in Hwaderi near Kilju city, Yonhap reported, citing defense officials.

"The field of scientific research in the DPRK (North Korea's official name) successfully conducted an underground nuclear test under secure conditions on October 9 ... at a stirring time when all the people of the country are making a great leap forward in the building of a great prosperous powerful socialist nation," KCNA reported.

Late Sunday in Washington, the U.S. military told CNN it believed the report to be true, but was working to fully confirm it.

Senior U.S. officials said they also believed the test took place.

"The nuclear test was conducted with indigenous wisdom and technology 100 percent. It marks a historic event as it greatly encouraged and pleased the KPA (Korean People's Army) and people that have wished to have powerful self-reliant defense capability," KCNA reported.

"It will contribute to defending the peace and stability on the Korean Peninsula and in the area around it."

The U.S. Geological Survey's Rafael Abreau said the earthquake-measuring agency has not recorded any seismic activity from North Korea.

However, South Korean intelligence officials said a seismic wave of magnitude-3.58 had been detected in North Hamkyung province, according to Yonhap.

Japanese Prime Minister Shinzo Abe said Monday information still needed to analyzed to determine whether North Korea truly conducted a nuclear test, The Associated Press reports.

High-level South Korean officials were meeting Monday after intelligence of the suspected test was received.

"President Roh Moo-hyun called in an emergency meeting of related ministers on Monday to discuss the North Korean nuclear issue," said Yonhap, quoting Foreign Ministry spokesman Choo Kyu-ho.

"The meeting comes as there has been a grave change in the situation involving the North's nuclear activity."

According to KCNA, there was no radioactive leakage from the site.

On Friday, the U.N. Security Council warned North Korea against performing a nuclear test, citing unspecified action if it should do so.

It also called on North Korea to return immediately to the six-party talks with China, Japan, South Korea, Russia and the United States.

Citing American belligerence and pressure, North Korea said Tuesday that a nuclear test was in the works. A date and time for the test was not given.

The report of the test came as Japan's new Prime Minister Shinzo Abe arrived in Seoul for meetings with President Roh Moo-hyun to address the nuclear issue as well as address strains in relations between the two countries over territorial and historical disputes.

North Korea accused rival South Korea on Monday of committing a serious provocation by firing warning shots during a weekend incident in which the South says soldiers from the communist North crossed over their border.

The border shooting came Saturday. South Korean soldiers rattled off about 40 warning shots after a group of five North Korean troops crossed into the southern side of the no-man's-land separating the divided Korean peninsula, South Korea said.

No one was hurt in the incident.

On Monday, members of the U.N. Security Council are expected to select South Korean Foreign Minister Ban Ki-moon to succeed Kofi Annan as secretary-general of the world body.

In a straw poll last Monday, all but one of the 15 council members supported that choice, according to Chinese Ambassador Wang Guangya.

John Bolton, U.S. ambassador to the United Nations, refused to discuss the outcome of the vote, but said: "I think it was sufficiently clear that all members of the council agreed to move to a formal vote on Monday night," he said. The announcement would be made Tuesday, he said.

CNN's Jamie McIntyre, Barbara Starr, Sohn Jie-ae and Elise Labott contributed to this report

[Brando19]

Uh oh :cry:

[Partial]

Uh oh :cry:

quoted for truth

[Freak Out]

"The nuclear test was conducted with indigenous wisdom and technology 100 percent."

Come on Kim....give the Pakistani who helped you so much some credit here.

[Tarlam!]

If it's good enough for Britain, India, Israel, Pakistan, France, Russia, Ukraine, Georgia, and USA, I guess it's good enough for North Korea.

Iran is next, then who?

Until the entire world is prepared to dismantle nuclear weapons, why, exactly, should countries forfeit their right to strive for military equaility? I know I will win no friends with this opinion, but this is one of the sparsely populated areas where I would deem American politicians to be hypocritical in their foreign policy.

America has offered to protect Iran if they were to stop their nuclear weapons program. Iran has said "Are you serious?"

I don't want to offend anybody. But that stance is simply too late in coming.

As far as States accepted by the U.N. are concerned, at least one can expect negotiation before the next Bomb gets dropped over a populated area.

My biggest concern for my children and theirs are the "dirty bombs" out there.

I know this is a controversial post. I am anything but a liberal. But, it is a historical fact that only Americans have used Nukes in war and that fact disqualifies America from being the world's conscience in the debate.

[red]

good job george

[Kiwon]

If it's good enough for Britain, India, Israel, Pakistan, France, Russia, Ukraine, Georgia, and USA, I guess it's good enough for North Korea.

I know this is a controversial post. I am anything but a liberal. But, it is a historical fact that only Americans have used Nukes in war and that fact disqualifies America from being the world's conscience in the debate.

Tarlam!, I respect your opinion. That said, I have to respectfully disagree.

The moral equivalency argument simply doesn't fly. Yes, America did use nuclear weapons in warfare back in 1945. But what statement does it make that it has had this technology and not used it for 60 years? The US has every right "to be the world's conscience" because while it could have used nuclear weapons to dominate others instead it used its power to liberate billions of people from tyranny and genocide.

What would Hitler have done with nuclear weapons if he had had the chance? What about imperialistic Japan that invaded China, Korea, and the Philippines? North Korea's economy is built off of the enslavement of about 15% of its population. They can build nuclear weapons and export missiles but can't provide farmers with tractors or rice planters. The work is done by hand.

Iran denies the Holocaust and produces maps without Israel on them. What would they do with a nuclear weapon (nicknamed "The Islamic Bomb")? Do you really want to find out? Have you forgotten the reaction to the Dutch cartoons?

I believe you when you say that you are not a liberal. You’re smarter than that. But there is a vocal minority in America that isn’t. They are self-loathing and take a “Blame America” approach for every evil in the world. What a clueless bunch they are! The freedoms that they enjoy in the US would get them shot elsewhere (Russian journalist killed this weekend, for example).

America has its freedoms due to its strength. Nuclear weapons are an unfortunate reality because it puts the ability to practically destroy the world into the hands of men. However, based upon the last 60 years, I rather have that power in American hands rather than Kim, Jong-il (whose people have to worship as a god) or Mahmud Ahmadinejad (who believes that the mythical 12th Imam will return after Armageddon and that Islam will dominate the world). I suspect that deep down you do as well.

That said, I close my post like I began it. I respect your opinion.

[woodbuck27]

Tarlam! and Kiwon with their posts:

Have set up a valuable debate/discussion that we may benefit from here at PACKERRATS.

How many topics, are more serious to discuss, in concern for OUR future generations welfare than... " the Proliferation of Nuclear Weapons " ?

The careless man/woman declares, " but really... what can I do?"...

Don't these, and many other questions beg to be answered in terms of your stance on World Peace and Security now and in the immediate and long term future?

a) Is it arrogance on behalf of Great Nations like America, Great Britain, Russia, Pakistan, Israel etc. to have Nuclear capability and determine that right be restricted by/to a determined by already being capable, inner circle?

b) Do these Great Nations operate under the guise of "the U.N. Security Council", to determine which country's may or may not promote and adopt an internal policy of protecting itself from other Nuclear Powers with it's own Nuclear capability?

c) What exactly does the UN Security Counsil mean to you in terms of lasting world Peace and Security?

d) Which countries should and shouldn't have Nuclear Capability? Why do you feel so?


Weighing in with the tensions in "the Orient", between countries such as..
N. and S. Korea, N.Korea and Japan etc. and after reading the following:

** "The nuclear test was conducted with indigenous wisdom and technology 100 percent. It marks a historic event as it greatly encouraged and pleased the KPA (Korean People's Army) and people that have wished to have powerful self-reliant defense capability," KCNA reported.

and

**"North Korea accused rival South Korea on Monday of committing a serious provocation by firing warning shots during a weekend incident in which the South says soldiers from the communist North crossed over their border.

The border shooting came Saturday. South Korean soldiers rattled off about 40 warning shots after a group of five North Korean troops crossed into the southern side of the no-man's-land separating the divided Korean peninsula, South Korea said.

No one was hurt in the incident".

and

** "The report of the test came as Japan's new Prime Minister Shinzo Abe arrived in Seoul for meetings with President Roh Moo-hyun to address the nuclear issue as well as address strains in relations between the two countries over territorial and historical disputes."

e) Upon reading this **. Did it bother you or were you indifferent to how it speaks to you?

There are so many questions we may ask and debate/discuss.

[PaCkFan_n_MD]

(nicknamed "The Islamic Bomb")?

Please know what your talking about before you start to type. When has Islamic nation ever used an atomic bomb? Therefore why would you label a whole faith with a bomb? Are you another 13 year old poster on this board?

And Tarlem, I agree 100% with you post (As usual). I think you and me think very similar when it comes to international affiars.

[Kiwon]

(nicknamed "The Islamic Bomb")?

Please know what your talking about before you start to type. When has Islamic nation ever used an atomic bomb? Therefore why would you label a whole faith with a bomb? Are you another 13 year old poster on this board?

And Tarlem, I agree 100% with you post (As usual). I think you and me think very similar when it comes to international affiars.

"Islamic Bomb" is a term miltants have used on their websites as they envision Iran having a nuclear weapon.

Does my writing sound like a 13 year old? Now, on the other hand, your bad grammar ("I think you and me think..) does sound rather childish.

[Joemailman]

What we are seeing here is the logical outcome from a failed foreign policy.In 2002, Bush referred to Iraq, Iran, and North Korea as the "axis of evil." We then invaded Iraq, while refusing to engage in direct talks with the other two. Does it really surprise anyone that Iran and North Korea would accelerate their nuclear weapons programs after seeing what we did to Iraq? So we now have one country of the axis with nuclear weapons, one that is pursuing them, and one on the brink of civil war. Obviously, we wouild like to see a change in regime in North Korea, but how do you make that happen? China probably doesn't want it, because they don't want a communist regime on their doorstep going under, for a variety of reasons. As we have seen in Iraq, getting rid of a brutal regime does not automatically lead to peace and security. I wish I had a solution to offer, but the situation is so bad that it is hard to come up with good options. The North Korean government is so dysfunctional that it is hard to impose sanctions on the government without creating a huge humanitarian crisis in North Korea. Perhaps China can talk some sense into the North Koreans, but it is hard to be optimistic.

[Harlan Huckleby]

The countries of the world that get respect and power are those that have nuclear weapons. The five nations named as permament members of the security council when the UN was formed were the ones who had nuclear weapons.

Why shouldn't India and PAckistan have sought nuclear weapons?
Why wouldn't Iran want and get nuclear weapons?

I'm pessimistic that N.Korea can be persuaded to avoid nuclear weapons, it is too much in their interests to pursue them. At least it will take very generous carrots and serious (non-military) sticks to dissuade them.

[Fosco33]

I'm not impressed by N Korea. Some are calling for praise of their scientists - for what - mocking nearly archaic technology developed some 60 years ago by the US. That would be like praising someone for copying a DVD or making a lightbulb. :crazy:

Our intelligence has indicated it was less than a kiloton weapon and couldn't be validated as nuclear. I.e., this could be a cloak and dagger technique by N Korea.

Their payload delivery tests have been less than stellar (long range missiles).

Sure, with time and money, they could develop a nuke and a working missile system. I have to believe that with all our intelligence devices, the US and world would stop them.

They've been able to do what lots of countries have done before - build and test a nuke. By most accounts, that's 6 weapons. The US alone has over 7,000 weapons with varying delivery systems and specialties.

North Korea is playing this game with all the right moves. They'll come to the diplomacy table and play the puppet UN while being able to provide other countries or groups of people with nuclear material. They want to be considered a serious country and use nukes to get a seat at the world power table.

I say the US keep an eye on NK but stick to Iraq and Afghanistan before messing with N Korea or Iran. If either of them prepare to strike, take them out. China, S Korea and Japan can deal immediately with N Korea with UN support.

You have to speak softly and carry a big stick - but also be prepared to hit someone with it if needed.

[Tyrone Bigguns]

If it's good enough for Britain, India, Israel, Pakistan, France, Russia, Ukraine, Georgia, and USA, I guess it's good enough for North Korea.

I know this is a controversial post. I am anything but a liberal. But, it is a historical fact that only Americans have used Nukes in war and that fact disqualifies America from being the world's conscience in the debate.

Tarlam!, I respect your opinion. That said, I have to respectfully disagree.

The moral equivalency argument simply doesn't fly. Yes, America did use nuclear weapons in warfare back in 1945. But what statement does it make that it has had this technology and not used it for 60 years? The US has every right "to be the world's conscience" because while it could have used nuclear weapons to dominate others instead it used its power to liberate billions of people from tyranny and genocide.

What would Hitler have done with nuclear weapons if he had had the chance? What about imperialistic Japan that invaded China, Korea, and the Philippines? North Korea's economy is built off of the enslavement of about 15% of its population. They can build nuclear weapons and export missiles but can't provide farmers with tractors or rice planters. The work is done by hand.

Iran denies the Holocaust and produces maps without Israel on them. What would they do with a nuclear weapon (nicknamed "The Islamic Bomb")? Do you really want to find out? Have you forgotten the reaction to the Dutch cartoons?

I believe you when you say that you are not a liberal. You’re smarter than that. But there is a vocal minority in America that isn’t. They are self-loathing and take a “Blame America” approach for every evil in the world. What a clueless bunch they are! The freedoms that they enjoy in the US would get them shot elsewhere (Russian journalist killed this weekend, for example).

America has its freedoms due to its strength. Nuclear weapons are an unfortunate reality because it puts the ability to practically destroy the world into the hands of men. However, based upon the last 60 years, I rather have that power in American hands rather than Kim, Jong-il (whose people have to worship as a god) or Mahmud Ahmadinejad (who believes that the mythical 12th Imam will return after Armageddon and that Islam will dominate the world). I suspect that deep down you do as well.

That said, I close my post like I began it. I respect your opinion.

Yeah. I totally agree. Not like in our Country where our president believes some dead guy arose from the dead and will return. Pretty sane belief. Or that the Rapture is coming. LOL

[Kiwon]

TB, I rather live in a country where most of my leaders follow Christianity rather than other religions, philosophies, or cults. Modern history proves this point again and again.

You're free to believe that "some dead guy" as you put it referring to Jesus, didn't exist or that he died and wasn't resurrected or that he will not return to make this world a better place. You have that freedom in America. You don't have that same freedom in many countries around the world.

I am not ashamed to say that I believe that Jesus lived, He died and was resurrected, and will come again one day. I believe that He was 100% man and 100% God in the flesh. He's my Savior and Lord and I am not ashamed to say so.

Ridicule all you want but America's Christian roots have helped the USA to be a source of good in this world. This truth is completely obvious.

[Tarlam!]

TB, I rather live in a country where most of my leaders follow Christianity rather than other religions, philosophies, or cults. Modern history proves this point again and again.

()I am not ashamed to say that I believe that Jesus lived, He died and was resurrected, and will come again one day.()

Woah, Kiwon. I can't deal with Christ AND Nukes on the same thread!

O.K. I can, but I am freaked. Maybe because the only thing seperating us as I type this is the Yellow Sea! I just hit my room in Shanghai. I LOVE Shanghai!

Now, to Christ. Y'know, having a bunch of friends of Muslim faith is something I value. That stated, I have no problem with my leaders being Moslim or Christian or Jewish, for that matter. They might be Hindi's, or Shoah's or Buddhists etc etc. That may be, because I am a non practicing Free Mason. Yes, contrary to what you may have heard, I am allowed to say "I'm a Mason" in public.

I have a problem with Religion running States. I resent the Ayatollah as much as I resent the USA Bible Belt boycotting products because they disapprove of advertising. I just think State and Church should always be seperated.

Now, to Nukes. I forgot to mention China in my post above. Dear Kiwon, nothing you wrote, made my argument weaker. With respect, you posted an emotional claim based on not using the bomb since you did, so, you guys get to police the world. That's not enough for me, I'm afraid.

As long as your wonderful (I mean it) country is in a position to wipe other states off of maps, all countries have a right to strive to stop you.

I know America isn't interested in nuclear warfare. But, what if that changed? What if you elected a guy that not only went to war, but, went to nuclear war?

[digitaldean]

What we are seeing here is the logical outcome from a failed foreign policy.In 2002, Bush referred to Iraq, Iran, and North Korea as the "axis of evil." We then invaded Iraq, while refusing to engage in direct talks with the other two. Does it really surprise anyone that Iran and North Korea would accelerate their nuclear weapons programs after seeing what we did to Iraq? So we now have one country of the axis with nuclear weapons, one that is pursuing them, and one on the brink of civil war. Obviously, we wouild like to see a change in regime in North Korea, but how do you make that happen? China probably doesn't want it, because they don't want a communist regime on their doorstep going under, for a variety of reasons. As we have seen in Iraq, getting rid of a brutal regime does not automatically lead to peace and security. I wish I had a solution to offer, but the situation is so bad that it is hard to come up with good options. The North Korean government is so dysfunctional that it is hard to impose sanctions on the government without creating a huge humanitarian crisis in North Korea. Perhaps China can talk some sense into the North Koreans, but it is hard to be optimistic.

It's apparent that the "Chia Dictator" (as Dennis Miller calles Kim Jong-Il) has proven that he can't be trusted. He had a negotiated settlement during the Clinton adminstration. That got us real far didn't it? Somehow the "trust, but verify" clause must have been missing from this agreement.

The invasion of Iraq did NOT cause this problem. The problem is a freaky little guy who wears $5000 platform shoes who's willing to pi$$ off the country propping it up (China), just to show he can be part of the nuclear club.

Though I trust as far as I can throw my Dodge Dakota, the U.N. should get off it's collective arse and show some real teeth. Not the weak-kneed effort it has shown against Iran or like the dozen and a half resolutions thrown against Saddam that never worked (dare I say "oil for food program").

The world needs to unite against Iran and N. Korea the same way it was done in 1991 to get Iraq out of Kuwait. Considering Europe's hands off attitude, Russia's indifference and China's seemingly unwillingness to stop their satellite's nonsense, this seems unlikely.

China needs to exert it's influence over N. Korea. They have blocked the Sec. Council even discussing N. Korea for the past decade. Now that North Korea has figuratively mooned them, it's time they step up to the plate and do some of the heavy lifting here. Since China tacitly allowed N. Korea to get this far to the nuclear stage, the U.S. and the U.N. should be exerting pressure on them to help clean up the mess they could have stopped.

I am more than willing to go the extra mile to get something done diplomatically. Even if Lil Kim's nuclear test was a dud, military options aren't the way to go yet. With only 30-odd thousand US troops in the DMZ and ONLY a million or so DPRK troops within 50 miles of Seoul and the 38th parallel, military options would not work. Frankly, there is no really decent military alternative on this, so we don't have a real alternative for the moment. There is no easy solution to this problem.

And for those who think it's OK for North Korea to have nukes...I think you need to seriously re-examine that. North Korea has already sponsored the Moro Islamic Liberation Front to over throw the Phillipine gov't. and sold ballistic missile technology to Iran and Syria to help prop up its missle program.

The sad part is Kim Jong-Il is willing to starve and intimidate his people to keep himself in power.

[Tarlam!]

So, the point is, l'il Kim wears 5k shoes and shouldn't get the Bomb?

Come on. The U.N. has no leg on this.

As long as Israel has a Bomb, everybody else should have one, too. Don't you get it? Kill ALL bombs, then, you might expect rogue states to settle down. Otherwise, just keep pissing in the wind.

[digitaldean]

So, the point is, l'il Kim wears 5k shoes and shouldn't get the Bomb?

Come on. The U.N. has no leg on this.

As long as Israel has a Bomb, everybody else should have one, too. Don't you get it? Kill ALL bombs, then, you might expect rogue states to settle down. Otherwise, just keep pissing in the wind.

No, that isn't the point. It's because it's nut jobs like him that will sell a nuclear device to a terrorist group or detonate one in his own region.

Yes, I'd like to see no nukes anywhere in the world also. But until that utopian day happens, you have to keep N. Korea from having nukes. Just how, pray tell, do you expect to get rid of the nukes anyway?

Also, Iran does not need nukes either. Considering the mullahs have already stated they want Israel gone, nukes would be used on Israel the first chance they get.

Also until nukes are done away with you have to expect nations to live up to their agreements.

[woodbuck27]

Main Link **:

http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/15190745/?GT1=8618

*** World aligns against N. Korea for nuclear test

See Link to launch **

*** World weighs North Korea sanctions

See Link ** to launch:


News Release Oct. 9,2006:

U.S. circulates draft resolution at U.N. calling for sanctions on Pyongyang

The United States on Monday proposed stringent U.N. sanctions against North Korea, including a trade ban on military and luxury items, the power to inspect all cargo entering or leaving the country, and freezing assets connected with its weapons programs. NBC's Andrea Mitchell reports.
Nightly News

*** The nuclear-armed planet - A look at arsenals around the globe

See Link ** to launch

Oct. 9: North Korea says it has successfully performed its first-ever nuclear weapons test. NBC's Mark Mullen reports.

Updated: 10:33 p.m. ET Oct 9, 2006

UNITED NATIONS -

The world's nations expressed opposition to North Korea on Monday for staging a nuclear test denounced even by key allies. President Bush called it “a threat to international peace and security,” and the U.N. Security Council weighed severe sanctions to punish the impoverished but reclusive communist nation.

Bush called the communist regime’s claim of a nuclear test a provocative act and warned Pyongyang against exporting nuclear materials.

“Once again, North Korea has defied the will of the international community, and the international community will respond,” Bush said.

Bush said North Korea already is one of the world’s leading proliferators of missile technology, including transfers to Iran and Syria.

“The transfer of nuclear weapons or material by North Korea to states or nonstate entities would be considered a grave threat to the United States,” Bush said in a brief statement in the diplomatic reception room at the White House.

“And we would hold North Korea fully accountable for the consequences of such action.”

There was no talk of military action.

But the United States circulated a draft U.N. resolution late Monday that would condemn North Korea’s nuclear test and impose tough sanctions on Pyongyang for flagrantly disregarding the Security Council’s appeal not to detonate a device.

The draft, obtained by the Associated Press, incorporates proposals circulated by the U.S. earlier in the day, and adds new proposals from Japan that would ban all countries from allowing any North Korean ships in their ports or any North Korean aircraft from taking off or landing in their territory.

The new Japanese proposals would also impose travel restrictions on high-ranking North Korean officials.


Nine years and a day

The reported test came one day after the ninth anniversary of reclusive North Korean leader Kim Jong Il’s accession to power.

Members of the 15-nation Security Council were unanimous Monday in denouncing the claim amid worldwide concern that it could seriously destabilize the region, with even North Korean ally China saying it was strongly opposed to the move.

“No one defended it, no one even came close to defending it,” U.S. Ambassador John Bolton said.

“I was very impressed by the unanimity of the council ... on the need for a strong and swift answer to what everyone agreed amounted to a threat to international peace and security.”

The Security Council had warned the impoverished and isolated nation just two days earlier not to go through with a test, and Bolton said Washington will seek U.N. sanctions to curb North Korea’s import and export of material for weapons of mass destruction, as well as its illicit financial activities.


Sanction specifics

Bolton and key U.S. allies, including Britain and France, sought a resolution under Chapter 7 of the U.N. Charter that would seek punishing measures, going beyond the limited sanctions in a measure adopted by the council in July after North Korea conducted seven missile tests.

Chapter 7 grants the council the authority to impose a range of measures including breaking diplomatic ties, imposing economic and military action.

North Korea’s U.N. ambassador Pak Gil Yon said the Security Council should congratulate his country instead of passing “useless” resolutions or statements.

AP Television News footage showed North Koreans going about their daily business and there were no signs of heightened alert by security forces in Pyongyang on Monday, hours after their government said it performed a nuclear weapons test.


Flowers for father

People also laid flowers by a statue of Kim Il Sung, the current leader’s father who died in 1994, ahead of Tuesday’s 61st anniversary of the North Korean Workers’ Party that he founded. Red flags of the party draped buildings and lampposts.

Iranian state radio, meanwhile, blamed North Korea’s reported nuclear test on U.S. pressure, saying the test

“was a reaction to America’s threats and humiliation.”

Iran has said it will not abandon uranium enrichment despite the threat of international sanctions over its disputed nuclear program, which Tehran insists is purely for peaceful purposes.

Bush said the United States was still attempting to confirm that a nuclear test had actually taken place.

Still, he said,

“such a claim itself constitutes a threat to international peace and security.”

A U.S. government official, who spoke on condition of anonymity because of the political sensitivity of the situation, said the seismic event could have been a nuclear explosion, but its small size was making it difficult for authorities to pin down.

South Korea’s National Intelligence Service chief Kim Seung-kyu reportedly told lawmakers signs of suspicious movement were spotted at another suspected test site.

The current members of the nuclear club are:

the United States, Russia, Britain, France, India, Pakistan and China.

Israel is widely believed to have the bomb but has not publicly declared so.


No doubts for Moscow

Reports about the size of the explosion were conflicting. Only Russia said the blast was a nuclear explosion but the reaction of world governments reflected little doubt that they were treating the announcement as fact.

“We have no doubts that it (the test) was nuclear,” Russian Defense Minister Sergei Ivanov said.


*** Who is Kim Jong Il?

To launch see Main Link ** (Page 2).

North Korea expert Charles Armstrong of Columbia University discusses what's known about Kim Jong-Il.

The Russian Foreign Ministry summoned Pyongyang’s ambassador to Russia, demanding that North Korea:

“immediately take steps to return to the regime of the Nuclear Nonproliferation Treaty” and to the six-nation talks.

South Korea’s geological institute estimated the force of the explosion to be equivalent to 550 tons of TNT, far smaller than the two nuclear bombs the U.S. dropped on Japan in World War II.

The head of South Korea’s spy agency said the blast was equal to less than 1,000 tons of TNT, the South Korean Yonhap news agency reported.

France’s atomic energy commission similarly estimated the blast measured at around 1 kiloton or less — equivalent to the explosive force of 1,000 tons of TNT.

Ivanov said it was far more powerful, equivalent to 5,000 to 15,000 tons of TNT.

The U.S. Geological Survey said it recorded a magnitude 4.2 seismic event in northeastern North Korea. Asian neighbors also said they registered a seismic event, and an official of South Korea’s monitoring center said the magnitude 3.6 tremor wasn’t a natural occurrence.

Japan dispatched three aircraft to waters between Japan and the Korean peninsula to monitor radiation levels, the Defense Agency said. Russia reported no increase in radiation levels in its Primorye territory, which borders North Korea.


How Big a Blast compared to bombs dropped in WWII in 1945 on the Japanese Cities of Hiroshima and Nagasaki?

See ** Main Link (page 2) for a graph.

Nuclear blasts give off clear seismic signatures that differentiate them from other explosions, said Friedrich Steinhaeusler, a professor of physics at Salzburg University. Even if the bomb the North Koreans detonated was small, sensors in South Korea would likely be close enough to categorize the explosion as nuclear, he said.

“I think we have to take them at their word. They’re not the type of regime to bluff,” said Peter Beck, Seoul-based analyst for International Crisis Group, a conflict-resolution think tank.


Shift of balance of power?

Although North Korea has long claimed it had the capability to produce a bomb, the test would be the first manifest proof that it had done so. A nuclear armed North Korea would dramatically alter the strategic balance of power in the Pacific region and would undermine already fraying global anti-proliferation efforts.

“The development and possession of nuclear weapons by North Korea will in a major way transform the security environment in North Asia and we will be entering a new, dangerous nuclear age,” Japanese Prime Minister Shinzo Abe said at a news conference in Seoul after a summit with South Korean President Roh Moo-hyun.

Abe, facing his first major foreign policy test since his recent election, called for a “calm yet stern response.”

Japanese Foreign Minister Taro Aso warned such a test would

“severely endanger not only Northeast Asia but also the world stability.”

South Korea said it had put its military on high alert, but it had noticed no unusual activity among North Korea’s troops.

China, the North’s closest ally and its main source of food, expressed its “resolute opposition” to the reported test and urged the North to return to six-party nuclear disarmament talks.

It said the North “defied the universal opposition of international society and flagrantly conducted the nuclear test.”


Putin, Blair condemn action

Russian President Vladimir Putin told his Cabinet that Moscow “certainly condemns the test conducted by North Korea.”

British Prime Minister Tony Blair said the test was a “completely irresponsible act.”

The North has refused for a year to attend six-party international talks aimed at persuading it to disarm, calling for the U.S. to drop sanctions it has imposed to punish it for alleged counterfeiting and money laundering.

It pulled out of the Nuclear Nonproliferation Treaty in 2003 after U.S. officials accused it of a secret nuclear program, allegedly violating an earlier nuclear pact between Washington and Pyongyang.

The North’s official Korean Central News Agency said the test was successful, with no leak of radiation.

North Korean scientists “successfully conducted an underground nuclear test under secure conditions,” the government-controlled agency said, adding this was

“a stirring time when all the people of the country are making a great leap forward in the building of a great prosperous powerful socialist nation.”

“It marks a historic event as it greatly encouraged and pleased the ... people that have wished to have powerful self-reliant defense capability,” KCNA said.

“It will contribute to defending the peace and stability on the Korean Peninsula and in the area around it.”

South Korea said the test was conducted at 10:36 a.m. (9:36 p.m. EDT Sunday) in Hwaderi near Kilju city on the northeast coast. South Korean intelligence officials said the seismic wave had been detected in North Hamkyung province, the agency said.


Crowded Security Council agenda

North Korea was added to the agenda of an already scheduled Security Council meeting that officially nominated South Korean Foreign Minister Ban Ki-moon to succeed Kofi Annan as secretary-general, and he said he would work to resolve the North Korean crisis.

The Security Council resolution adopted in July imposed limited sanctions on North Korea and demanded that the reclusive communist nation suspend its ballistic missile program — a demand the North immediately rejected.

The resolution bans all U.N. member states from selling material or technology for missiles or weapons of mass destruction to North Korea — and it bans all countries from receiving missiles, banned weapons or technology from Pyongyang.


*** Roiling the region

Launch Video fr. page 3 of Main Link **.

Oct. 9: NBC's Andrea Mitchell reports on the likely diplomatic fallout from North Korea's underground nuclear test.

The North is believed to have enough radioactive material for about a half-dozen bombs. It insists its nuclear program is necessary to deter a U.S. invasion.

The North has active missile programs, but it isn’t believed to have an atomic bomb design small and light enough to be mounted on a long-range rocket that could strike targets as far as the U.S.

Speculation over a possible North Korean test arose earlier this year after U.S. and Japanese reports cited suspicious activity at a suspected underground test site.


Economic impact in region

South Korean stocks plunged Monday following North Korea’s announcement of the test. The South Korean won also fell sharply.

Markets in South Korea, the world’s 10th-largest economy, have long been considered vulnerable to potential geopolitical risks from the North.

The two countries, which fought the 1950-53 Korean War, are divided by the world’s most heavily armed border.

The conflict ended in a cease-fire that has yet to be replaced with peace treaty, are divided by the world’s most heavily armed border. However, they have made unprecedented strides toward reconciliation since their leaders met at their first-and-only summit in 2000.

Impoverished and isolated North Korea has relied on foreign aid to feed its 23 million people since its state-run farming system collapsed in the 1990s following decades of mismanagement and the loss of Soviet subsidies.

© 2006 The Associated Press. All rights reserved. This material may not be published, broadcast, rewritten or redistributed.


Comment woodbuck27:

None of this is good news PACKERRATS.

My take is that we can't any longer concentrate OUR opinions on what should or shouldn't be, but rather what must be done to deal with "the fact" that North Korea has assumingly joined the Nuclear Arms Family of Nations without permission and what that means to the World in real terms of "a threat ".

It's encouraging to me that today N.Korea's leading allay and supplier of the necessities of life (food) China, has joined the World's Nations in condemming this reported Nuclear test.

The question is what will N. Korea's reaction be in the future to severe sanctions, that will in effect cripple that Nation, if China plays hardball against it's allay?

The other question I have, is realistically, will China "in fact" hold up in regard to maintaining cooperation with the rest of the World's Powers in exercising sanctions against it's allay?

Severe and continuous sanctions are a proper course opposed to military intervention, that is both unacceptable and impossible considering the security of the people in the far East Nations ; but what stress will this place on N.Korea and it's citizens in terms of health? Looking at that. Are the sanctions realistic?

Will continuous and alligned Nations sanctions against N.Korea, piss that Nation off, as the impact of these sanctions brings N.Korea to it's knees?

Overall View.

This may be "in fact" be... a much to do about nothing in final analysis?

The World Powers "in fact" simply need to relax.

Relax "the hype". Be :cool:

My name is Ed.

[digitaldean]

The unfortunate part if nothing is done and N. Korea keeps progressing with nukes is that there will be probably be proliferation of nukes in the Far East.

There has been discussion already of Japan repealing part of their constitution to allow them to pursue nuclear weapon technology. It will only get worse if nothing gets done.

The test may have possibly been a dud. It may not have. Kim may be rattling his saber just to get more goods from the west.

Yes, playing it cool will help the situation. But there does have to come a point and time when the rubber meets the road and this has to get resolved. It's dragged on for nearly 8 years.

No, military options aren't the answer at this stage. But there will have to be something done and soon. Unfortunately, here's another despot who's willing to use his citizens as sacrificial pawns in all of this.

That's not avoiding playing it cool. That's just stating a fact.

[Deputy Nutz]

Christ, I betcha 17 year old high school Physics students could put together a nuclear bomb given the right equipment. It took N. Korea 60 plus years to just get the basics down. My only fear with N. Korea is selling the technology to a terrorist group.

I agree with Tarlam, why should one country with the bomb tell another country not to have it? Now when the bomb can go from a state to a an individual then there is a problem and you have to be proactive about stopping a transfer like that to happen.

[Fosco33]

Christ, I betcha 17 year old high school Physics students could put together a nuclear bomb given the right equipment. It took N. Korea 60 plus years to just get the basics down. My only fear with N. Korea is selling the technology to a terrorist group.

I agree with Tarlam, why should one country with the bomb tell another country not to have it? Now when the bomb can go from a state to a an individual then there is a problem and you have to be proactive about stopping a transfer like that to happen.

The insane beauty of nuclear or bio weapons is the assured destruction of property and life - on either side. If country A has the weapon and B does not, A must use restraint. If both countries possess the technology, MAD applies.

If a terrorist uses the weapon, who do you retaliate against? There is no retribution or retaliation that can assure no future attack occurs.

Another insane beauty of this technology is the unique identification of nuclear waste. If N Korea decided to get into WMD sales and a terrorist act occurs (or a weapon is found) that can be tied back to reactors in NK (through intelligence and monitoring) - they are completely screwed.

If the isolated kid down the block wants to barricade himself from the world and not play with the other kids (even the crazy ones) with a big baseball bat, who cares? Let him be...

Now, the bigger issue is that Iran is watching all this go down. They'll see UN sanctions likely be imposed on N Korea and maybe continue to go along w/ nuclear development w/ monitoring. Or, they could develop one in secret - that's the scarier part to me...

[Fosco33]

fizzle......

Korean test 'went wrong,' U.S. official says-

The U.S. believes North Korea tried to detonate a nuclear device and "something went wrong," a government official told CNN Tuesday. The official confirmed North Korea told China before the test that it would be a 4 kiloton device. The official added the unexpectedly small blast, of a half kiloton or less, indicates the test was not very successful.

[woodbuck27]

"I know America isn't interested in nuclear warfare. But, what if that changed? What if you elected a guy that not only went to war, but, went to nuclear war? ' Tarlam!

What's your point based "in reality" man.

We don't live in a movie script Tarlam!.

We live "in reality"Tarlam!, and such a man as President (as you suggest could exist) would be impeached or otherwise forced from his office... as President of the United States of America.

To even consider such a possibility of a man being the Head of State of the most important Nation in the World; and linking that to a suggestion of him being insane...is hardly realistic therefore moot. :cool:

[woodbuck27]

" I am more than willing to go the extra mile to get something done diplomatically. Even if Lil Kim's nuclear test was a dud, military options aren't the way to go yet. With only 30-odd thousand US troops in the DMZ and ONLY a million or so DPRK troops within 50 miles of Seoul and the 38th parallel, military options would not work. Frankly, there is no really decent military alternative on this, so we don't have a real alternative for the moment. There is no easy solution to this problem. . . .

And for those who think it's OK for North Korea to have nukes...I think you need to seriously re-examine that. North Korea has already sponsored the Moro Islamic Liberation Front to over throw the Phillipine gov't. and sold ballistic missile technology to Iran and Syria to help prop up its missle program. . . .

The sad part is Kim Jong-Il is willing to starve and intimidate his people to keep himself in power. " ..... digitaldean


Yes. The answer doesn't lie in Military intervention, when the Worlds Nations and people are praying to their Higher Powers for World PEACE.

The scheduled PROGRAM of Sanctions against N.Korea, with the full and consistent support of N. Korea's allay China. Will ONLY (on a consistent basis), place the spotlight on N. Korea's Leader Kim Jong Il leadership, as the populace is stressed by a lack of food supplies, that predominately comes via China.

What is of primary concern in this stance, will be how pissed off Kim Jong Il may become, as his Country faces this food shortage?

In the face of that another question.

Will China weaken and withdraw it's present stance of supporting a UN policy of sanctions, including food supply to N.Korea?

Any option of discussion regarding disarmament of Nuclear Weapons World wide is strictly Utopian in concept thinking, therefore pointless rhetoric.

We will have to live with "a fact of life" of the Great Nations having Nuclear capability. This isn't the issue.

What is one of the issue's, is to continue to ensure that security in the area of N.Korea is maintained.

A further issue is a hard pitted response or N.Koea's demands. That before N.Korea even considers a return to the table to discuss the matter of the Worlds Powers, not wanting that nation to have Nuclear weapon capability; all sanctions against N.Korea must be dropped.

Sadly, North Korea's leaders have proven that Treaty's and their word isn't to be trusted. This further complicates the matter.

The correct option to bring N.Korea to it's knees in this issue, is a policy of stiff and prolonged sanctions against this rogue Nation. This will cause internal pressures on N. Korea's Leadership to first of all disarm and prove that it has disarmed and will then sign a TREATY to never move in this direction in the future.

The Worlds Nations under the direction of the UN Security Council must play hardball and starve N. Korea into submission. This is sad, as we are aware that this Nations people to a large extent, are already and have been suffering a selfish and dictorial leaders dark will.

[Deputy Nutz]

Does Canada get any Electorial Votes For the American President?

[woodbuck27]

Does Canada get any Electorial Votes For the American President?

No Deputy Nutz of course not.

Many Canadians (like myself) consider your President the most powerful man on the planet. We pay very strict attention to your due process Sir.

In school we likely learn about as much about your History as you did.

The US of A is OUR Neighbor, Our Friend and OUR closest allay and we share the same fight against terrorism and any real threats to world peace with your country. :mrgreen:

[Tarlam!]

such a man as President (as you suggest could exist) would be impeached or otherwise forced from his office.

To even consider such a possibility of a man being the Head of State of the most important Nation in the World; and linking that to a suggestion of him being insane...is hardly realistic therefore moot. :cool:

You need to get a dose of reality old buddy. The President of the USA can nuke anybody he wants, anytime. He might be impeached, but only after the fact.

Have you already forgotten one US President pushed the button? Twice? Why on earth would you call him insane? He wasn't.

Many people claim the current President doesn't have all his marbles. I am definately not one of them, BTW.

The USA being the MVN of the World is your take. I'm not sure everybody, even in Canada, agrees with that sentiment.

You suffer from a similar mindset as most westerners. I am writing this mail from Shanghai. People around here plan in terms of multiple centuries. You, on the otherhand, do not. You think perhaps in generations at best.

[Scott Campbell]

Until the entire world is prepared to dismantle nuclear weapons, why, exactly, should countries forfeit their right to strive for military equaility?

Because if they don't, we may have to kill them in the interest of global stability.

The U.S. has tried the live and let live approach to world politics, and everybody knows how well that worked. You live in the country that gave birth to Hitler and the Third Reich. The country you live in erected factories for the explicit purpose of applying process improvement principals to their goal of exterminating an entire race of people. The country you live methodically set about blitzkrieging virtually defenseless countries to pursue their goal of global domination. So pardon me if I yawn at your moral outrage over our use of a new technology to end WWII.

As long as there are countries that allow crackpots and madmen to rise to power, there will be the need for a benevolent Superpower. It's a crappy job, because you'll never make all the people happy all of the time.

But the bottom line is this:

Were not all speaking German.

[Tarlam!]

So your argument is based on crimes comitted in Germany over 50 years ago, the USA needs nuclear weapons? Pardon me for yawning here. The country I live in doesn't resmble Nazi Germany. Even the language has gone through two reforms. You have more Nazis living in America than Germany has today.

BTW, I displayed no moral outrage, I merely pointed out some facts. In your attack on the country I live in, you have totally bypassed the discussion at hand, which is whether or not countries have a right to pursue nuclear weapons of their very own.

EDIT: Hitler was born in Austria....

[Scott Campbell]

which is whether or not countries have a right to pursue nuclear weapons of their very own.

EDIT: Hitler was born in Austria....

What right does Kim have to even lead his own country? What qulifications does he have other than being a member of the lucky sperm club?

[MJZiggy]

I tend to doubt that insane people should be allowed weapons of mass destruction, but that's just my base rule. Don't give weapons to crazy people. That govt. really needs to be overthrown from within...

[Scott Campbell]

So your argument is based on crimes comitted in Germany over 50 years ago, the USA needs nuclear weapons? Pardon me for yawning here.


You suffer from a similar mindset as most westerners. I am writing this mail from Shanghai. People around here plan in terms of multiple centuries. You, on the otherhand, do not. You think perhaps in generations at best.


Ok, make up your mind. You either want me thinking in terms of multiple centuries, or you don't.

[Tarlam!]

Ok, make up your mind. You either want me thinking in terms of multiple centuries, or you don't.

Just stick with the programme. We can debate the 3rd Reich, but I'm pretty sure we're on the same page.

We can discuss the US world policy, I am pretty sure, we are volumes apart.

My point on thinking in centuries is forward thinking. No doubt, you will now quote "remember history, or be damned to repeat it" yada.

Still, you're avoiding the "kern". Why should the USA have nukes, and N. Korea/Iran not?

[Scott Campbell]

Now, to Nukes. I forgot to mention China in my post above. Dear Kiwon, nothing you wrote, made my argument weaker. With respect, you posted an emotional claim based on not using the bomb since you did, so, you guys get to police the world. That's not enough for me, I'm afraid.

As long as your wonderful (I mean it) country is in a position to wipe other states off of maps, all countries have a right to strive to stop you.


A right to stop us???? I find it ironic that 2nd tier world powers lay claim to equal status during good times, but when all hell breaks loose these same slacker countries expect the mighty United States to step up as the leader of the free world and spend it's money, and shed it's blood to restore the order.

And then as soon as we've completed all the dirty work, these countries decide it's once again convenient to demand their equal status back.

It's certainly not true of all countries. But we get taken advantage of by the majority. In general, the world community leaches off their rich and gullible Uncle Sam.

[MJZiggy]

Still, you're avoiding the "kern". Why should the USA have nukes, and N. Korea/Iran not?

Because if they get them, the first thing they will do is use them?

[Scott Campbell]

Still, you're avoiding the "kern". Why should the USA have nukes, and N. Korea/Iran not?


I'm sure we could rattle off 15 or 20 reasons why, and the international community certainly seems to agree with us. But it all boils down to this:

1) The world is a safer place because the US has nukes.
2) The world is a less safe place because N. Korea has nukes. Same thing with Iran.

[rdanomly]

Now, to Nukes. I forgot to mention China in my post above. Dear Kiwon, nothing you wrote, made my argument weaker. With respect, you posted an emotional claim based on not using the bomb since you did, so, you guys get to police the world. That's not enough for me, I'm afraid.

As long as your wonderful (I mean it) country is in a position to wipe other states off of maps, all countries have a right to strive to stop you.


A right to stop us???? I find it ironic that 2nd tier world powers lay claim to equal status during good times, but when all hell breaks loose these same slacker countries expect the mighty United States to step up as the leader of the free world and spend it's money, and shed it's blood to restore the order.

And then as soon as we've completed all the dirty work, these countries decide it's once again convenient to demand their equal status back.

It's certainly not true of all countries. But we get taken advantage of by the majority. In general, the world community leaches off their rich and gullible Uncle Sam.

Check this book out some time:
http://search.barnesandnoble.com/booksearch/isbnInquiry.asp?z=y&EAN=9780452287082&itm=1

The book isn't a report and it seems like there has been some fictionalization, but I definately would not describe Uncle Sam as gullible. Maybe more like convieniently looking the other way while other entities do what they do to get paid.

[woodbuck27]

such a man as President (as you suggest could exist) would be impeached or otherwise forced from his office.

To even consider such a possibility of a man being the Head of State of the most important Nation in the World; and linking that to a suggestion of him being insane...is hardly realistic therefore moot. :cool:

You need to get a dose of reality old buddy. The President of the USA can nuke anybody he wants, anytime. He might be impeached, but only after the fact.

Have you already forgotten one US President pushed the button? Twice? Why on earth would you call him insane? He wasn't.

Many people claim the current President doesn't have all his marbles. I am definately not one of them, BTW.

The USA being the MVN of the World is your take. I'm not sure everybody, even in Canada, agrees with that sentiment.

You suffer from a similar mindset as most westerners. I am writing this mail from Shanghai. People around here plan in terms of multiple centuries. You, on the otherhand, do not. You think perhaps in generations at best.

Your thoughts are interesting (as usual :roll: ) and I've recorded them Tarlam!.

I will come back to YOU " on your thoughts" as YOU certainly deserve to be rebuted.

The OLE Tarlam! Vs woodbuck27 debate lives on at PACKERRATS.

I TRUST that won't detract from the importance of the general debate afforded in this very excellent thread and topic of discussion.

Otherwise Tarlam!... I'm sure your alive and living well in Shanghai. :mrgreen:

As an extention of that thought...

We are WORLD's apart in OUR views Maan.

[woodbuck27]

Link:
http://news.sympatico.msn.ctv.ca/TopStories/ContentPosting.aspx?newsitemid=CTVNews%2f20061013% 2fki_moon_061013&feedname=CTV-TOPSTORIES_V2&showbyline=True

Some of that in a synopsis:

Canadian relatives thrilled for next UN chief

13/10/2006 9:37:40 PM

South Korean Foreign Minister Ban Ki-moon's appointment as head of the UN is bittersweet, his Canadian cousin says, referring to this week's crisis over North Korea's nuclear threat.


Ban Ki-moon,

http://news.sympatico.msn.ctv.ca/images/Feeds/ctv/ctv_topstoriesV2/160_ap_kimoon2_061013.jpg

newly appointed Secretary General of the United Nations speaks at a press conference after he was elected at a meeting of the General Assembly at U.N. headquarters in New York, Friday, Oct. 13, 2006.

Kang is a committee director at the Korean-Canadian Cultural Association.

"Everyone said to him congratulations, but he said

" I'm not getting that feeling yet, because North Korea weighs heavy on my mind."

Ban has said publicly he will work to resolve the crisis over North Korea's nuclear threat.

He repeated this commitment to his cousin, when he called the Kang home in Oshawa Wednesday, to celebrate his impending appointment.

Friday, the celebration became official...

Ban, 62, will succeed Kofi Annan as the UN's eighth secretary-general on Jan. 1.

Annan predicted Ban would be "a future secretary-general who is exceptionally attuned to the sensitivities of countries and constituencies in every continent."

Paul Evans, co-CEO of Vancouver's Asia Pacific Foundation, met with Ban in New York two weeks ago. He says the career diplomat's appointment comes at an interesting time for Koreans.

"It's the best of times and the worst of times in South Korea right now," Evans told CTV.ca.

"For South Koreans, it's a sign of special pride that a South Korean would be selected for the post."

"But it's also the worst of times, with the North Korean nuclear test, essentially now straining relations all over northeast Asia."

Ban was heavily favored to win the appointment, according to four informal polls in the UN Security Council. While there is no formal policy, the position of secretary-general rotates among the continents, and many considered it Asia's turn.

"Ban was seen as the person who could get the support of the entire Security Council, including both China and the United States, said Evans.

Ban is well known for his close ties to the United States.

He received his master's degree in public administration from Harvard University in 1985. His cousin remembers...

Ban's interest in U.S. politics was sparked at a much earlier age.

"In 1962, he visited the United States," said Kang,

"He met President John F. Kennedy, who gave him a pencil case. He gave it to me, but I was too young to understand why he was so excited."

According to Evans, Ban's warm attitude to the U.S. could have been the tipping point in his selection.

He was seen as someone who could gain the U.S. confidence.

"For the last four or five years, there's been a feeling that U.S. unilateralism has lead it into collision with the UN. The philosophy of wanting to work with the U.S. is a necessary prerequisite of the secretary-general," Evans said.

While the rest of the world waits to see how Ban will perform, his family already expresses confidence in his leadership.

"He's worked in foreign affairs for 40 years," said Kang.

"He's my cousin, so of course I say this, but Koreans know he is a genius."


Comment woodbuck27:

I'm thinking.

It'll take... more than genius, to unravel this mess.

CRAP I hate this stuff. "How has the world gone so crazy"... some may ask?

I believe that History often / to... just repeats itself It's always been crazy, because people become enamoured with wrongful POWER LORD's, that are lost in theie selfish ego-maniacle nonsence.

We get trapped in their bullshit.

Yet... we trap ourselves in OUR slack attitudes and weak stances.

It should be every man/woman's position, to encouage rightful purpose in ways of thinking and living for the good not evil that is predominating societies all over the world. We must pay better attention to events outside of OUR own lives, with at least some proper form of consciosness and decent conviction.

Why?

Because not enough of us, do come to realize... the TRUE VALUE in the term..."POWER to the people".

This person ... that... often takes the stance of powerlessness, and the "what can I do response/whine" and it /that mushrooms. The money POWERFUL win out over more purposeful candidates in terms of overall goodand holisitic agendas.

Young people today are the worst for denying themselves the POWER of their vote.

We must realize that this issue, that we discuss on this thread is important and try to reach some valid conclusion. "a proper response"... rather than toss the salad around as a distraction. :mrgreen:

My name is Ed.

[Tarlam!]

Zig, Scott, 'buck,

pure rhetoric on you parts. Why would l'il Kim use nukes once he has them? He has them. He hasn't used them yet. Argument just collapsed.

Scott, the world is not better because your country has nukes. It makes L'il Kim, Pakistan et All want their own. Finally get that as a fact. It is a fact. It's called an Arms Race.

'buck. I am not vs you. That's in your head and it is flattering ONLY YOU.

None of you have made a case for the USA to have nukes, and everybody else not to; The fact is, THERE IS NO CASE.

[Joemailman]

I agree with Tarlam here. This seems like a case of "The Nuclear Club" wanting to bar any new membership. Personally, I worry about the fact that Pakistan has them more than I do about North Korea. It's just a matter of time before another coup occurs in Pakistan. When it does, we could very easily have a situation where people friendly to Al-Qaeda have their hands on a nuclear weapon.

[Fosco33]

None of you have made a case for the USA to have nukes, and everybody else not to; The fact is, THERE IS NO CASE.

We developed the technology. Saying we shouldn't have nukes is akin to saying China shouldn't have blackpowder :crazy:

It was a sad day in the world's history when the US had to end an extremely bloody war to use these weapons - if Pearl Harbor hadn't occured and the Nazis didn't try to take over the world - the US wouldn't have been in a position to develop or use this weapon.

As I stated above, nuclear warfare has an inherent beauty in it's power - and MAD would assure that nation wartimes would avoid nukes at all costs.

Having rouge gov'ts w/ unknown motives wanting nukes and terrorists wanting to destroy US citizens with them is :crazy:

Not having US nukes is equally :crazy:

[Tarlam!]

Fosco, the USA didn't share nuclear technology with anyone. So, by your argument, anybody who develops the technology is entitled to have it.

Einstein (a German) encouraged Roosevelt to develop the bomb, because Hitler was doing it. This fact also lends to my theory that as long as any country persist with maintaining a nuclear arsenal, other countries will pursue similar goals, if only to "keep up with the Jonses".

It is on record that Oppenheimer (received his PhD in Germany) and many of his team petitioned to shelve the technology after they witnessed the devestation of the first test site.

http://inventors.about.com/library/weekly/aa050300a.htm

[Fosco33]

Fosco, the USA didn't share nuclear technology with anyone. So, by your argument, anybody who develops the technology is entitled to have it.


Not entirely true.

We've given nuclear technology to other countries (friends and enemies alike). I don't have time to research all the timelines of the past century but a quick search found the US gave/sold IRAN a nuclear reactor in the 60s and blueprints for a 'firing set' from a former Russian scientist at Clinton and the CIA's bidding in 2000. In '05 we gave India civilian nuclear technology (to hasten their rise to global power to counteract China). In '78 we almost did the same for Egypt but they rejected the oversight requirements.

The United Kingdom tested its first nuclear weapon ("Hurricane") in 1952, drawing largely on data gained while collaborating with the United States during the Manhattan Project. Its program was motivated to have an independent deterrent against the USSR, while also remaining relevant in Cold War Europe

In fact, the US has offered nuclear assistance numerous times - with a caveat of full disclosure of international monitoring and signing the nuclear non-proliferation treaty. The Atoms for Peace program launched by U.S. President Dwight Eisenhower in 1953. As soon as the U.S. Atomic Energy Act was passed in 1954 (which allowed the U.S. authorities to enter cooperative arrangements with other countries).

Tar, I've stated pretty plainly that I don't think terrorists or rouge gov't should have nukes. I'm fine w/ any sane country, willing to be monitored, having nukes as the remnants would trace the weapon to country of origin - and without theft or fraud would lead to an immediate response by one of the 7,000+ nukes the US maintains. I'm questioning now the relevance of the NNPT and IAEA.

Interesting read from LA Times today:

http://www.latimes.com/news/nationworld/world/la-fg-nukes15oct15,0,3389816.story?page=2&coll=la-home-world

Some excerpts:

Countries that had nuclear weapons when the treaty went into effect — the United States, Russia, Britain, France and China — were allowed to keep them, whereas others were asked to forswear them.

The "haves" made the commitment to reduce and eventually eliminate their arsenals, and the "have-nots" agreed not to seek atomic weapons as long as they could have the advantages of nuclear technology for peaceful purposes.

The International Atomic Energy Agency, the United Nations' nuclear watchdog, was put in charge of making sure countries refrained from taking steps toward making fissile material suitable for bombs. But the treaty, in effect, permitted any country that wanted nuclear weapons capability to go down that road.

[Tarlam!]

Agreed. The US offered peaceful technology as the carrot of contolling states. Germy, too, for instance. I should have made that differentiation.

They also protect Germany and other states with nuclear weapons.

[woodbuck27]

Zig, Scott, 'buck,

pure rhetoric on you parts. Why would l'il Kim use nukes once he has them? He has them. He hasn't used them yet. Argument just collapsed.

Scott, the world is not better because your country has nukes. It makes L'il Kim, Pakistan et All want their own. Finally get that as a fact. It is a fact. It's called an Arms Race.

'buck. I am not vs you. That's in your head and it is flattering ONLY YOU.

None of you have made a case for the USA to have nukes, and everybody else not to; The fact is, THERE IS NO CASE.


Tarlam!

It's difficult to apply any meaningful learning exchange when YOU jump all over yourself with "SLAM BAM commentary" as you elicit below Tarlam! :idea:

" 'buck. I am not vs you. That's in your head and it is flattering ONLY YOU."
Tarlam!

Sometimes "an EGO SUCK Mask" proceeds US, Maan. Please GET REAL Tarlam!. This issue has hardly anything to do with YOU or I.

Discussion with you Tarlam!... always gets to "more challenging than trying to teach an OLD dog new tricks". Why is that?

SWEEP it away !

TRY to attack just this ISSUE... with focus. Try harder Tarlam! to keep any?EGO SUCK MASK out of it PLEASE.

Back to the matter at hand, Tarlam!

My objective is to discover on this thread a direction that is both plausable, (realistic) and effective in ensuring that NO more Nations / Countries have nuclear weapon capability that may/will lead to a disaster. To tackle this matter inside a context of what exists.

To ensure a course of acting responsible for OUR future. More important. That of future generations. Freedom of potential harm of a Nuclear Holocaust.

Tarlam! your approach: Disarmament on a World wide scale.

woodbuck27: I am on the side of saying that approach isn't realistic. It won't happen in OUR foreseeable future, probably ever.

Given the wide division in OUR views on this issue, introduces a classic debate on the scale of. Is it " BLACK or WHITE ". There can be no GRAY area's. Ehh ?

I believe to get to the Black or white one must examine the gray.

OK ?? Tarlam! May we confine OURSELVES within the context of the issue?

I have faith in a proper discussion that we will realize an answer we all may live with. No pun intended.

Tarlam! and woodbuck27 are miles apart in ** OUR personalities. May we confine this to proper intellectual discussion? Too much of that ** is pointless in regards to seeking a solution that will protect OUR future.

Too much of that will damage this thread.

Maybe my wishes are as Utopian as your suggestion of " World Wide Nuclear Weapon Disarmament", as a solution, Tarlam! ?

We need FOCUS.

Only then may we determine through respectful discourse a method both real and effective.

Maybe in you. I'm guilty of rhetoric tantamount to suggesting that "your out to lunch" Tarlam!. If I'm just that... everytime I pop into your view that's sad.

I don't pursue a challenge, involving Tarlam!. I pursue TRUTH.

I'm sitting here and thinking. WOW ! Isn't that nice that Tarlam! has "of course" the ultimate response. Get rid of all the Nuclear weapons. Of course that is "the BEST way". :mrgreen:

Then I scale the issue of protection and nuclear arms back to the common man's right to or not to own a gun (for whatever reason). Given that I certainly realize that my World is composed of GOOD and EVIL.

What is my responce to any government stance to take my guns from me?

Well clearly, that response is NO !

There is absolutely no reason for my Government to dictate what I may own that is not going to be used in any way to do harm to innocent people.

So "in fact" I have my pseudo Nuclear weapon and noone's taking it from me and I will only voluntarily give my guns up, if that is overall suitable for me.

I don't even want the Government to regulate me and my guns (my property in my proper and responsible care). When such a program is over the top unrealistic given it's cost monetarily and an invasion of my privacy and rights.

Why should the GOOD and generally respectful people like myself, live without a gun, or worse offer ourselves up to a system "a Gun Registry" that may inform the BAD guys... of my capability to defend myself from their evil intents?

It's a case of what they don't know may hurt them. I'm as many men. I would not hesitate to defend myself or my loved one's and property with a gun. if that option was called upon.

I'm OLD School- tough as they come. Noone ever invades my life with evil intent and doesn't suffer me. If necessary, I would not hesitate to bring that invader down with whatever means is at my disposal. Even to go as far as using my guns as a weapon. Whatever it takes !!

SoTarlam! It's come see come saw.

Countries that already have Nuclear Weapon capability will NOT disarm,Tarlam!

In order for that to work "in Utopian Theory" is that ... ALL Nuclear weapons would have to vanish fron OUR planet.

The next or logical question, based on that as a solution. How do YOU propose that be accomplished? Base your solution/plan on reality.

That usually, in a REAL sense, comes down to cost and then it's tossed away. So again from that standpoint ...NO to Nuclear Weapon disarmament on a world wide scale. It's just not practical as a solution.

It's an unreal proposal you make Tarlam! and also very dangerous to even consider. May I add and putting it in Black and White terms, Tarlam!

That suggestion is plain n' simple.... STUPID to consider as a viable option !!

Back to woodbuck27 and my guns.

Well they have always been used strictly to prepare for and to hunt wildlife. I don't own guns with any real day to day emphasis on having them as a source of protection. I have other means of security, but no less I deserve the right to keep them and do so in privacy and to back myself up if the evil side comes down on me and my home.

I'm well aware that "the Bad Guys" are everyday gaining more POWER to and do harm innocent people. To deny that "as a reality" in all aspects of living today, is a delusion and a means to encourage only the Bad guys determination to harm all of us Good guys.

They don't discrimminate as the opportunity may present itself.

We must examine this issue from the concept of.

Does N.Korea have a Nuclear weapon? If so as it now appears they do. Then the proper approach is for N.Korea to get rid of that capability. No other option is available to N.Korea as "the World" overwhelmingly supports NO to Nuclear Arms and N.Korea.

How do we exercise pressure on N. Korea and monitor N. Korea as the measures are put in place, to disarm N. Korea of any Nuclear Weapon capability. That is the issue of focus here Tarlam!, not anything else.

Why are we getting sidetracked with discussion on something as stupid as World Wide Nuclear Weapon disarmament, that just isn't practical or sensable from any standpoint Tarlam! ???

To go there is to waste OUR God given abilitiy to reason capably.

The solution to all car accidents = Get rid of all car? :idea:

Hardly. Not the proper resonse.

The solution to all murders or other violations of "the Law" and in the commission of any such crimes using a gun = Get rid of all guns? :idea:

Hardly. Not the proper response.

The proper resosponse to the World generally opposing N.Korea and Nuclear Weapon capability = The rest of the World's great Power's getting rid of their arsenal's of Nuclear Weapons? :idea:

Hardly. Not the proper response when that has hardly anything to do with the problem.That problem is N. Korea, not the World's Powers,Tarlam!.

So what have you got Tarlam! to counter my position? :?:

[woodbuck27]

Agreed. The US offered peaceful technology as the carrot of contolling states. Germy, too, for instance. I should have made that differentiation.

They also protect Germany and other states with nuclear weapons.

Tarlam!

The U S of A's place in the World, with it's leading edge in Nuclear Weapon Technology and POWER is in place to "in fact" act as a deterrent to any Rogue Countries Administration. Possibly exercising an option of threatening the rest of the world with the threat or othewise of a Nuclear weapons attack. By it's own means or otherwise exporting it's capability to unstable groups that have no other agenda but destruction. ie terrorists.

Canada trusts and relies on OUR neighbors POWER or authority to utilize this deterrant... as it must. For the promotion of PEACE and any threat of a Nuclear calamity by any Rogue Government or terrorist/hate group.

The argument may be simplified, Tarlam!?

If only one of two nations...

The US of A or N. Korea... was allowed to have this POWER of Nuclear weapons and technology; to produce Nuclear weapons for it's own means or export to whomever?

and...

You Tarlam!, have the full authority to decide which Nation "in fact" gets that POWER exclusively.

Of these two Nations. Which Nation do you choose to veto, considering all that each Nation represents for the benefit of the World overall?

That's right.

Now take the next step, Tarlam!

Given the US of A's POWER and it's deterrant factor, against any other Nation using Nuclear Power Tecnology for other than peaceful needs/means.

Would you see this issue of who has Nuclear Power Tecnology for possibly destructive means; extended to a Nation such as N. Korea, as it's perceived to be by an overwhelming majority of the World's Nations/Countries?

There you go. Good.

So how do we disarm or otherwise ensure that N. Korea buckles to the desire from the UN?

That N. Korea doesn't have a plan, means or otherwise intent to produce a nuclear weapon for itself?

That N. Korea doesn't have any capability of exporting technology and or fissionable materials to enable a bomb of any size or description outside it's borders?

That and only that is the primary issue of concern in this thread.

None other. :idea:

:cool:

[Tarlam!]

Woodbuck, I saw you addressed 2 posts to me. I refuse to read your novel-length-feature posts, as I have clearly indicated. Maybe yourwin the argument in your posts. But, I will not read that amount of text. From anyone.

Enjoy your colossal victory.

[woodbuck27]

Woodbuck, I saw you addressed 2 posts to me. I refuse to read your novel-length-feature posts, as I have clearly indicated. Maybe yourwin the argument in your posts. But, I will not read that amount of text. From anyone.

Enjoy your colossal victory.

Enjoyment??

I'd get more enjoyment banging my head into a brick wall Tarlam!

Your like "the Texas holdem' player that announces. . . "I'm all in" and then breaks out in a silly giggle and says "only joking boys".

Your stances maan. :crazy:

[Tarlam!]

Your stances maan. :crazy:

Look at the where's Woody thread and you will note that you have a great reputation for accelerating the scroll wearage. It's not just me. Your posts are too long and too cryptic for the average Joe - that' me - to decipher.

You're a highly valued poster. That's what counts. I just can't be bothered to read your eternally long posts. I am not alone with my crazy stance.

[Freak Out]

Such a nice Dear Leader....

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2008/12/10/AR2008121003855.html?hpid=artslot

Story is to long to cut - paste.

[texaspackerbacker]

Why resurrect the bogus "nuke" test thread to post this stuff?

Also, what would you suggest we do about this prison camp stuff? From your history of posting, Freakout, you don't seem like the gung ho interventionist cowboy type.