North Korea warns nuclear war imminent

Post by **Sea Skimmer** » 2003-03-02 11:39pm

Tragic wrote:What do you guys thing the rest of the world would do or NK do. if lets say we launch a few stealths into Nk to take out the production plant they claim is making the materials.

Do you think they will attack our troops in the DMZ? or even shell south korean with all that artiualry they have along the zone.? and yes those weapons can reach Soual.

Not a viable plan. We don't know for sure if they have any working devices, and if they do we don't know where they are. While we might cripple there long term capacity, one nuclear shell on Seoul could kill a hundred thousand or so people and knock the worlds economy in a massive recession if not depression.

Even without that, a conventional artillery barrage or biochemical attack could inflict significant damage. Though its possibul only US bases would be hit. The North Korean issue is a stalemate militarily.

Politics are unlikely to resolve it either. Really, unless the North will give up its nukes without a big aid package bribe, the best solution is to just ignore the place and wait for it to collapse.

Tragic · Post by **Tragic** » 2003-03-02 11:51pm

Rescession from South Korean getting bombed?

Post by **Sea Skimmer** » 2003-03-02 11:55pm

Tragic wrote:Rescession from South Korean getting bombed?

Or worse. Remember the huge hits world markets took on 9/11. Now think about what would have happened if all of Manhattan had been destroyed. South Korea produces a huge range of products and components and all of it would be disrupted or destroyed. Not to mention there stock mark being out of action for months if not destroyed outright.

Enlightenment · Post by **Enlightenment** » 2003-03-02 11:58pm

Sea Skimmer wrote:one nuclear shell on Seoul could kill a hundred thousand or so people and knock the worlds economy in a massive recession if not depression.

Nuclear shells are pretty advanced devices. It's highly unlikely that the DPRK has the ability to build devices small enough to be delivered by artillery shell. Chances are, they're still at the Little Boy-Fat Man stage of multi-ton (weight) weapons.

Tragic · Post by **Tragic** » 2003-03-03 12:01am

Wasn't it bacause the U.S. was one of the world economic power houses. And what do they produce actually?

Uraniun235 · Post by **Uraniun235** » 2003-03-03 12:02am

Still, they can sit behind the border and shell Seoul with conventional weapons; that wouldn't be pretty, and it's not like the country has much to lose, given that most of their citizens are already starving.

Post by **Sea Skimmer** » 2003-03-03 12:05am

Enlightenment wrote:
Sea Skimmer wrote:one nuclear shell on Seoul could kill a hundred thousand or so people and knock the worlds economy in a massive recession if not depression.
Nuclear shells are pretty advanced devices. It's highly unlikely that the DPRK has the ability to build devices small enough to be delivered by artillery shell. Chances are, they're still at the Little Boy-Fat Man stage of multi-ton (weight) weapons.

We managed to get them down in size fairly quickly historically. Computers and fabrication technology have come a long way since the 50's. South Africa managed to build bombs that could be easily delivered by Mirage III's in a similar timeframe

I'd say its certain if they have working devices, they could at least fit on a SCUD. One big TOT barrage of conventional and biochemical SUCD's with the nuke in the mix would get through.

Enlightenment · Post by **Enlightenment** » 2003-03-03 12:06am

Tragic wrote:Wasn't it bacause the U.S. was one of the world economic power houses. And what do they produce actually?

South Korea produces everything from ships, cars and steel to SDRAM, clothes and VCRs.

Tragic · Post by **Tragic** » 2003-03-03 12:06am

Yup the bastards give all their food to the people in the army. and i keep getting mixed numbers on there army size. sometime i hear it range from 1 million to 2 million. anyone have an estimate?

Mr. B · Post by **Mr. B** » 2003-03-03 12:07am

The reason for NKs reactivation of its nuclear program is because Bush has forced them in a corner. He put them in the axis of evil and they believe they are next after Iraq. They are just paranoid enough to believe that they will be attacked. So they restarted their nuclear program in hopes that they wouldnt be invaded and to use as a bargaining ship to regain the oil and foodshipments. But with Bushs limited worldview of good and evil, he is unlikely to back down. Apparently it is Bushs calling to take on "evil' in the world. I hope he looks in the mirror soon.

Post by **Sea Skimmer** » 2003-03-03 12:15am

Tragic wrote:Yup the bastards give all their food to the people in the army. and i keep getting mixed numbers on there army size. sometime i hear it range from 1 million to 2 million. anyone have an estimate?

There active Army is about 1 million, total forces 1.1 million with the airforce and navy. However there reserves are over two million. However not even there whole army gets fed. It appears most resources go to the officers and a few select corps.

0.1 · Post by **0.1** » 2003-03-03 12:22am

B,

Do you know how long it takes to start up a nuclear program that has been completely shut down and produce a couple of nuclear devices? That's assuming you start from scratch (infrastructure wise) since the entire program has been deactivated for five plus years.

You are saying that the NK restarted their nuclear program in the cold after Bush's speech in 2002 January, and managed to concot a couple of nuclear devices all within a span of nine months. (remember, october 2002 when they told the Americans that they had nukes)

Wow, that's scientific progress. All that capability, and yet they still can't feed their people. Gawd, I wonder how long it took the Russians, or the Chinese, or the Indians or the Pakistanis to do their nuke program. Those stupid idiots are obviously no comparison to the super genisus in NK. Time for America to surrender, cause in another two years, they'll have built the death star, and even Darth Wong will be quivering in his boots.

Post by **Sea Skimmer** » 2003-03-03 12:22am

Tragic wrote:Wasn't it bacause the U.S. was one of the world economic power houses. And what do they produce actually?

In part. However the South is also a huge economy, GDP is something like 475 billion. South Korea produces textiles, all types of consumer goods, especially electronics and computers and their parts. Also cars, heavy machinery, they also have the largest shipyard in the world.

Post by **Sea Skimmer** » 2003-03-03 12:24am

0.1 wrote:B,

Do you know how long it takes to start up a nuclear program that has been completely shut down and produce a couple of nuclear devices? That's assuming you start from scratch (infrastructure wise) since the entire program has been deactivated for five plus years.

You are saying that the NK restarted their nuclear program in the cold after Bush's speech in 2002 January, and managed to concot a couple of nuclear devices all within a span of nine months. (remember, october 2002 when they told the Americans that they had nukes)

Idiot detected. The turnaround time for nuclear devices is about 90 days, and they already had all the equipment in place. Not to mention they already had the uranium ready for at least two bombs when they shut down there reactor in the first place.

The economic problems which have starved the country have little bearing on this capability. Once you have the infrastructure, you can build hundreds of nukes easily. Its developing that infrastructure that takes time.

Remember, the US built the world's first nukes only a few years after the first chain reaction was demonstrated. And they had to discover and devolope many things North Korea's project mangers can read in books.

Tragic · Post by **Tragic** » 2003-03-03 12:28am

Weren't they doing even before bush made his speech.? I may be wrong but I thought i heard somewhere they've been doing it for a few years

Post by **Sea Skimmer** » 2003-03-03 12:31am

Tragic wrote:Weren't they doing even before bush made his speech.? I may be wrong but I thought i heard somewhere they've been doing it for a few years

Yeah, I was just going to add that. Its not a cold restart for the program. North Korea admitted they didn't stop working on bombs. That's what started this whole thing. They couldn't have made very much usage of there separation plant and the reactor was dead. But the R&D and fabrication work needed to make bombs from the uranium they already had could all be done anywhere.

Mr. B · Post by **Mr. B** » 2003-03-03 01:29am

And their nuke program got so much help from the Pakistanis, who traded it for missile tech. They didnt develop those missiles on their own and NK didnt develop the nukes on their own.

Damaramu · Post by **Damaramu** » 2003-03-03 02:15am

I know this the same old shit NK's been saying time and time again.....but still......

I have LOTS of family living in Seoul.....and I get a little worried about it all. I wish I had the money to move 'em all over here.

TrailerParkJawa · Post by **TrailerParkJawa** » 2003-03-03 02:27am

Sea Skimmer wrote:
Tragic wrote:Rescession from South Korean getting bombed?
Or worse. Remember the huge hits world markets took on 9/11. Now think about what would have happened if all of Manhattan had been destroyed. South Korea produces a huge range of products and components and all of it would be disrupted or destroyed. Not to mention there stock mark being out of action for months if not destroyed outright.

I really hope none of this comes to fruition. The cost of the war in Iraq will be bad enough. A war in South Korea will fuck world markets up bad. The economy is bad enough here, that I honestly dont sleep well anymore.

j1j2j3 · Post by **j1j2j3** » 2003-03-03 08:24am

Sea Skimmer wrote:
Tragic wrote:Wasn't it bacause the U.S. was one of the world economic power houses. And what do they produce actually?
In part. However the South is also a huge economy, GDP is something like 475 billion. South Korea produces textiles, all types of consumer goods, especially electronics and computers and their parts. Also cars, heavy machinery, they also have the largest shipyard in the world.

[nitpick] GDP is more than 850 billion(more than Canada). - according to CIA factbook [/nitpick]

But I assume that other than DRAM and LCD production most other products can be easily replaced from Japan and Taiwan. Actually both countries might even benefit from NK nuking SK. And nobody will actually miss Hyundai cars would they ?

0.1 · Post by **0.1** » 2003-03-03 01:31pm

Idiot detected. The turnaround time for nuclear devices is about 90 days, and they already had all the equipment in place. Not to mention they already had the uranium ready for at least two bombs when they shut down there reactor in the first place.

And the turnaround time for nukes are 90 days. Hmmm, for which country?
You know the turnaround time for nukes for NK? Cool, Are you some kind of NK insider with the inside track on their program?

Your source for the 90 days on NK turnaround?

jegs2 · Post by **jegs2** » 2003-03-03 02:01pm

0.1 wrote:B,Wow, that's scientific progress. All that capability, and yet they still can't feed their people. Gawd, I wonder how long it took the Russians, or the Chinese, or the Indians or the Pakistanis to do their nuke program. Those stupid idiots are obviously no comparison to the super genisus in NK. Time for America to surrender, cause in another two years, they'll have built the death star, and even Darth Wong will be quivering in his boots.

The North Korean leadership serves one purpose -- the survival of the regime. The people exist to service the regime -- whether millions die or not is irrelevant to the North Korean tyrant. You cannot look at North Korea and like regimes through rose-colored (i.e. from a Western point of view) glasses, or you will remain contentedly ignorant. All of their resources are bent on that regime survival, and they perceive that nuclear weapons are the security they need IOT ensure that survival.

Admiral Valdemar · Post by **Admiral Valdemar** » 2003-03-03 02:11pm

Bah, Korea and their nuclear war this and armageddon that.

When will they learn that we don't want to nuke the bejeezus out of them, just mildly tenderise them with lots of B-52s.

Post by **Sea Skimmer** » 2003-03-03 03:05pm

0.1 wrote:
Idiot detected. The turnaround time for nuclear devices is about 90 days, and they already had all the equipment in place. Not to mention they already had the uranium ready for at least two bombs when they shut down there reactor in the first place.
And the turnaround time for nukes are 90 days. Hmmm, for which country?
You know the turnaround time for nukes for NK? Cool, Are you some kind of NK insider with the inside track on their program?

Your source for the 90 days on NK turnaround?

Stuart Slade along with repeated public statements by the CIA and other branches of the US government. Its not what I'd call new information. Nuclear bombs are very easily to build once you have everything set up, as the North already does.

Since you can do nothing but attempt to nitpick public statments, while clearly not even bothering to do a simple web search before posting loads of crap...

Concession Accepted

0.1 · Post by **0.1** » 2003-03-03 10:15pm

Concession Accepted

What fantasy land are you living in.

You obviously didn't get the point of the message the first time. So, I will try again. The entire point is that had the NK dismantled their structure for nuclear weapons, nine month is not enough to get a weapons program off and build up weapons.

The fact that you pointed out the following reinforces my point:

Yeah, I was just going to add that. Its not a cold restart for the program. North Korea admitted they didn't stop working on bombs.

and I wrote:

Do you know how long it takes to start up a nuclear program that has been completely shut down and produce a couple of nuclear devices? That's assuming you start from scratch (infrastructure wise) since the entire program has been deactivated for five plus years.

hmmm, you're telling me that you see a significant difference in these two lines? Ok, here is a hint when you say "not a cold start" and when I say "start up a program that has been completely shut down" it means the same thing, but I suppose English might not be your first language, so I'm happy to clarify in the future. Feel free to ask.