Stories
Slash Boxes
Comments

News for nerds, stuff that matters

Slashdot Log In

Log In

Create Account  |  Retrieve Password

North Korea Says It Has Conducted Nuclear Test

Posted by Zonk on Sun Oct 08, 2006 11:28 PM
from the troubling dept.
ScentCone writes "North Korea says that it has conducted its first nuclear weapons test and 'brought happiness to its people.' Japan and China earlier issued an unusual joint statement saying that such a test would be 'unacceptable.' As of 11:10PM EST, the USGS says that it has not detected any unusual seismic activity on the Korean peninsula in the last 48 hours." From the article: "The North said last week it would conduct a test, sparking regional concern and frantic diplomatic efforts aimed at dissuading Pyongyang from such a move. North Korea has long claimed to have nuclear weapons, but had never before performed a known test to prove its arsenal. The nuclear test was conducted at 10:36 a.m. (0136 GMT) in Hwaderi near Kilju city, Yonhap reported, citing defense officials." Update: 10/09 05:50 GMT by J : The U.S. Geological Survey reports a 4.2 magnitude quake; South Korean news is reporting a 3.58 magnitude event; the White House apparently confirms a nuclear test.
+ -
story

Related Stories

[+] North Korea Air Sample Shows Radiation 543 comments
Apocalypse111 writes, "According to CNN.com, air samples taken over North Korea have not yet shown any radiation from the event on Monday that North Korea claims was a nuclear test. This is not definitive proof that the event was non-nuclear, as it may either have been so small and deep that it did not let any radioactive debris escape, or perhaps the North Koreans sealed the site." Furthering speculation over whether North Korea has actually exploded a nuclear device, vk38 writes to point out a (free) article in today's Wall Street Journal claiming that the blast could have been set off by exploding fertilizer (ammonium nitrate). The article points to the Texas City disaster of 1947, in which 7,700 tons of ammonium nitrate exploded in the hold of a ship with the estimated power of 2 to 4 kilotons of TNT.
Update: 10/14 08:03 GMT by Z : The story at CNN has been updated: "A preliminary analysis of air samples from North Korea shows 'radioactive debris consistent with a North Korea nuclear test,' according to a statement from the office of the top U.S. intelligence official."
This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.
The Fine Print: The following comments are owned by whoever posted them. We are not responsible for them in any way.
 Full
 Abbreviated
 Hidden
More
Loading... please wait.
  • Confirmed (Score:5, Informative)

    by sholde4 (815798) * on Sunday October 08 2006, @11:33PM (#16360081)
    According to MSNBC, USGS has just confirmed a 4.2 magnitude tremor at 10:30 am local time Monday.
  • Obvious (Score:5, Funny)

    by suso (153703) * on Sunday October 08 2006, @11:33PM (#16360083) Homepage Journal
    The reason there was no sizable seismic activity is because it was a test, they only split one atom this time. But NEXT TIME!! You just wait and see!
  • by EvilFrog (559066) on Sunday October 08 2006, @11:33PM (#16360085)
    Just making sure, the Korean words for "happiness" and "severe radiation poisoning" aren't similar, are they?
  • Sizemography (Score:5, Informative)

    by Anonymous Coward on Sunday October 08 2006, @11:33PM (#16360087)
    At this moment, US intel claims it "can't confirm" the event. However, US geologists apparently can. [usgs.gov] Transparency is a good thing, especially when it's not intended.

    • Re:Sizemography (Score:5, Informative)

      by Jeff DeMaagd (2015) on Monday October 09 2006, @12:43AM (#16360647) Homepage Journal
      The US has or had satellites that can detect particle bursts from nuclear explosions. If such satellites are still in operation (though likely any current ones are generations improved from the originals), then the US intelligence system would know for certain.

      As an aside, that type of satellite was the type that originally detected gamma ray bursts from billions of years ago and they were almost a total mystery until the last decade.
  • by quax (19371) on Sunday October 08 2006, @11:33PM (#16360089)
    ... did North Korea get its hands on Saddam's missing WMDs?
    • by TubeSteak (669689) on Sunday October 08 2006, @11:58PM (#16360299) Journal
      Well... first Saddam shipped them to Syria

      [Insert "Where In The World Is Carmen Sandiego" theme song] [nyud.net]


      ...

      [Insert "Family Circus" map] [aol.com]

      ...

      And that's how they got to North Korea

      • Re:Ask Rummy. (Score:5, Informative)

        by SEE (7681) on Monday October 09 2006, @01:57AM (#16361077) Homepage
        North Korea already had plutonium-producing reactors in 1994, which it claimed were for the purpose of making power. The deal was to sell them light-water reactors as replacements, because light-water reactors are not suitable for plutonium production without heavy modification, and have NK shut down and seal its plutonium reactors.

        So what NK then did was start refining uranium to weapons-grade in centrifuges. In 2003, the U.S. officially asked them if they were doing this, and they announced they were. So the U.S. cancelled the shipment of the light-water reactors, because North Korea was building nukes anyway. That's right, the ABB reactors never made it to the DPRK.

        Then, North Korea responded to this by breaching the seals on the plutonium-producing reactors, and started refining the plutonium.

        So, to take your gun analogy and make it actually reflect the facts, let's assume a lunatic already has a fully-automatic AK-47, which they say they need to shoot crows that are eating their crops. The police come by, nod and smile, and convinces the lunatic to lock up the AK-47, and in exchange the police will give him a SuperSoaker to drive off the crows. The lunatic then starts making pipe bombs. A few days later, the former CEO of SuperSoaker has joined the police, and he comes by and asks the nut if he's making pipe bombs. The nut say yes, so the new officer tells him to stop it or he won't be given the SuperSoaker. In response, the nut unlocks his AK-47 and shoots off a few rounds.

        You then come along, and accuse the owner/police officer of being responsible for the gunfire because he was CEO of the SuperSoaker manufacturer.

        I guess when you have moral integrity, the only important facts are the ones that don't get in the way of your indignation.
  • by ScentCone (795499) on Sunday October 08 2006, @11:35PM (#16360111)
    USGS and other international players are now reporting 4.2 magnitude (Richter scale) tremor at the indicated time of the test. China says they got a 20-minute warning, which they passed along to the US and other western governments.

    Looks like it will be a busy day in diplo-land, and a noisy day in pundit-land.
      • by terrymr (316118) * <.terrymr. .at. .gmail.com.> on Sunday October 08 2006, @11:58PM (#16360297)
        From here: [iris.edu] a one killoton explosion is equivalent to about 4.0. Maybe it was just a butt load of dynamite and not nuclear at all.
      • This page [unr.edu] (scroll down to the header "Seismic Energy") lists richter 4.0 as corresponding to 1kT and 4.5 as 5.1kT (richter is a log scale). So kind of a pissy sub-tactical range yield (i.e. nothing you'd want to be close to, but not a city killer either). For comparison's sake, Trinity, Fat Man, and Little Boy were all in the 12-22kT [wikipedia.org] range.
        • by jafac (1449) on Monday October 09 2006, @12:17AM (#16360457) Homepage
          A "dud" (or partial) sounds consistent with everything else we know.

          We know that it's probably a plutonium device (using processed fuel from a reactor that had been secured and monitored until they kicked out the inspectors).

          A plutonium device is an implosion device, and implosion devices are usually much harder to get right the first time (hence the need for testing).

          To keep things in perspective - they're still a long way from being able to put an operationally reliable device on an operationally reliable ICBM.

          But this is still very bad news.
          • You have violated a number of important slashdot rules.

            There is no "blame" in your post. This is clearly against the slashdot AUP ("all posts shall contain angry, bitter, and/or whiny assertions, accusations, and/or innuendos that blame lies squarly upon the party of your choice").

            Worse, you are also clearly violating the certainty clause of the AUP ("all posts shall express absolute certainty of position; any acknowledgement that the facts are ambiguous shall result in the immediate revocation of your slashdor posting license."

            And, finally, you have not expressed smug superiority, used excessive jargon to support an incomprehensible point, or displayed a willful ignorance of the context of the situation -- also violating the AUP ("All posts shall express smug superiority, use excessive jargon, and/or display a willful ignorance of the context of the situation").

            Slashdot cannot tolerate posts like this. If word got out, people might think that some of the users were over 20 years old, or (worse!) had some actual life experience and knowledge of what they're talking about.

            -b

            PS: Yes, I was careful to stay within the AUP myself.
  • Walmart (Score:5, Funny)

    by stinkydog (191778) <coughlio@NOspAm.hotmail.com> on Sunday October 08 2006, @11:35PM (#16360113) Homepage
    Time to head to the 24 hour Walmart and stock up on ammo and bottled water. I think I hear the 4 horsemen of the apocolypse mounting up. I'll keep the mutants off my land.

    SD
  • by Dr. Zowie (109983) <slashdot@defor e s t . o rg> on Sunday October 08 2006, @11:51PM (#16360237)
    Seismic results can be faked with conventional explosives -- 30,000 tons of TNT is expensive but can be amassed even by a small nation like North Korea.

    However, the world's most sensitive neutrino detector (Kamiokande) is under 1,000 km away. If the North Koreans detonated a 10-30 kiloton device, several times 1013 neutrinos from it should have passed through Kamiokande. I don't know Kamiokande's exact quantum efficiency, but it should be able to detect a pulse like that. After all, it detected Supernova 1987-A...
  • by Toxicgonzo (904975) on Sunday October 08 2006, @11:52PM (#16360257)
    At least they're not building Battlecruisers.
  • by istartedi (132515) on Monday October 09 2006, @12:05AM (#16360351) Journal

    The other day I read a story where they interviewed a Chinese soldier who was disgusted with the NKs. Why? Because they returned a border crosser, a young woman. This took place on a bridge over a river that divides China and NK. As soon as she was signed over, the NKs took a sharp steel wire and ran it through the flesh between the thumb and forefingers of a hand. They led her away screaming. Apparently, this is routine behavior. Other Chinese border guards related stories of NKs running the wire underneath the collarbones of returnees, harnessing them together. Needless to say, these people are not seen at the border again.

    In the same article, there were stories of NKs sneaking into China, robbing banks, in general making trouble. However, most of the border crossers are coming to China to find prosperity and freedom. Yes. Prosperity and freedom. In a country that we usually associate with wage slavery and oppression. The woman at the bridge knew she would be killed. They must all realize they will be killed, yet they risk being returned. Now that has *got* to be one lousy place to live.

    I don't see how the NK regime can last. It's just a question of how it's going to go down. If I were the premier of China, I'd make a secret deal with SK to put a military sqeeeze on the place, since NK would probably be overwhelmed by a Chinese invasion. The Chinese could really come out looking like good guys if they then turned it over to SK for re-unification ala Germany. I'm not that optimistic though. I think we're more likely to see the "Korean autonomous zone" or some such nonsense that's really part of the Chinese empire. Maybe real soon now.

    • by sheepathon (1011045) on Monday October 09 2006, @01:46AM (#16361023)
      Every country officially says they are in favor of reunification, but in reality: South Korea doesn't want reunification because obviously their government would become the legitimate one and have to foot the bill. This would likely bankrupt SK and lead to a depression in the area that would be felt all over international markets. Not to mention most South Koreans are quite racist (no offense, it's just how it is), even towards their Northern brethren. Think of it like...the way educated Americans see rednecks who paint confederate flags on their cars and think the South won the Civil War. Japan doesn't want reunification because the SK govt (well, just the Korean govt, since we're talking about reunification) would now have nuke tech in their hands. This will make Japan nervous, seeing as they don't have nuclear weapons and having their Korean neighbors next door in possession of nukes is a bit unsettling. China doesn't want reunification because then US troops would have free access to more than just the 38th parallel - they could wander about the Yalu river (right on China's border with NK). The United States doesn't want reunification because of the insane hit to the SK economy that will accompany reunification, and a few other reasons I can't recall...I studied this in a class a couple of years ago so I need to go dig up my notes. But the official stance of all the countries is that they support the reunification of these divided Korean peoples...heh.
      • by Jah-Wren Ryel (80510) on Monday October 09 2006, @01:30AM (#16360929)
        North Korea is going to collapse in an internal military coup.

        Well, a coup of some sort. Chances are, China will be a major backer of any such event too.

        From the analyses I've been reading, it is likely that this nuke test was a military coup of sorts, as was the missile test a few months ago. The military is the largest power structure in the DPRK and shooting off their weapons as a show of strength against the perceived threats of just about every other country is a big goal of theirs, big enough to override the concerns of the rest of the government regarding sustainability (foreign aid has dried up to a trickle in the last few years, and their recent efforts at counterfeiting US dollars have not gone over so well either).

        Despite the typical demonization of western media, 'dear leader' Kim certainly understands that these tests are not likely to improve relations with any other country and are not in the best interest of maintaining his dictatorship and his role has chief party animal. So in that sense at least, the fact that the tests have occurred suggests that his grip on control of the country is not iron-clad.
  • Contrary to North Korean propaganda, North Korea having nukes has more to do with Russia, Japan, China, and South Korea than it does with the United States. Northeast Asia is currently the most economically dynamic area of the world. And yet, in the center of this region sits a basket case. A country in a cult of personality throwback to the early 1950s, still fighting the Korean War.

    While China continues its relentless march to economic modernity and eventual superiority, while South Korea has the most advanced internet culture in the world (see recent slashdot story still on the front page from the New York Times), and while Japan is pretty much the most advanced nation on the planet, according to a number of measures (GNP, life expectancy, etc), North Korea keeps its citizens in prisoner camps, rummaging for leaves to eat, while it focuses every ounce of its words to the world and every drop of its resources on military belligerence. And counterfeiting currency. And making methamphetamine. And now nukes.

    North Korea can easily kill a quarter million people in Seoul anytime it wanted to with conventional weapons in a couple of hours. Its rockets could carry a number of nasty things to Tokyo very easily. And now nukes.

    I really don't see North Korea's neighbors tolerating this scenario much longer. I don't see how they can. China has been reluctant to muzzle its maddog little psycho neighbor since it frightens the hated Japanese more than anyone else, but surely China can see now how North Korea's insane belligerence threatens China's economy just as much as it gives the Japanese nightmares. And North Korea, famously, when presented a line in the sand, does all it can do to cross it. But going nuclear may be a line in the sand it should not have crossed, if self-preservation was ever its goal. But self-preservation never seems to have been North Korea's goal. More like a headlong rush into self-realized armageddon.

    I don't see this ending well, I really don't. Don't go to Seoul or Tokyo for awhile folks, I'm really worried about Northeast Asia right now, I don't see this ending well. North Korea has too much of a deathwish. And now nukes.

  • by bmo (77928) on Monday October 09 2006, @01:04AM (#16360789)
    It's not a nuke.

    Compare the purported "nukular test":

    http://aslwww.cr.usgs.gov/Seismic_Data/telemetry_d ata/INCN_24hr.html [usgs.gov]

    Notice how long this lasts.

    To a _real_ nuclear test

    http://can-ndc.nrcan.gc.ca/recent/980528_e.php [nrcan.gc.ca]

    Again, notice how long this lasts. Hint: look at the scale of both graphs.

    One of these things is not like the other.

    I'm sure that you can figure it out for yourself.

    --
    BMO
    • Re:If this is true (Score:5, Insightful)

      by dorfmann (1010467) on Sunday October 08 2006, @11:44PM (#16360179)
      Nukes are the most useless weapon any country can have, simply because you can't use them. If North Korea nukes the South, the Americans will nuke North Korea; if the Americans nuke North Korea, the North Koreans will nuke the South. So both sides have to rely on their conventional armies, just like before.

      Not only that, the North Koreans have claimed to have nukes for ages now. This sort of publically-announced test is just an extremely expensive and technologically advanced version of chest-beating.

      HOWEVER, assuming you are American, if you (and a significant majority of your countrymen) allow this to scare you and both 1) reelect jingoist pro-war politicians, and 2) support launching a 'pre-emptive' war against North Korea, things will become very dreadful indeed for the Korean peninsula.

      As a wise man once said, 'the only thing to fear is fear itself'.
      • Re:If this is true (Score:5, Interesting)

        by lordofthechia (598872) on Monday October 09 2006, @12:01AM (#16360311)
        "Nukes are the most useless weapon any country can have"

        Nukes may be useless in that it's pointless to launch them (unless you do want to bring about the armageddon), but they do have a purpose. Being a nuclear power almost guarantees that your country won't get invaded. Nobody would risk you launching your nukes as a last ditch effort to "save" your country.

        Reason it's called a peacetime weapon.
        • Re:If this is true (Score:5, Insightful)

          by SEE (7681) on Monday October 09 2006, @02:17AM (#16361175) Homepage
          Being a nuclear power almost guarantees that your country won't get invaded.

          Having a defense guarantee from an allied nuclear power is considered to be similarly protective, as is having the capital of your nearest hostile neighbor under your guns.

          That is, North Korea doesn't need a deterrent against the U.S., because it has a defense guarantee from China and artillery in place plenty capable of pulverizing Seoul, able to inflict tens to hundreds of thousands of casualties. If North Korea is being rational, and is doing this to have deterrent to invasion, the country they're trying to deter from invading is China.

          On the other hand, they may not be trying to deter a Chinese invasion. They might be trying to deter, say, a U.S. defense of South Korea in case of a North Korean invasion. One way to do that is to say, to Japan, "You interfere, and we'll nuke Tokyo". That could quite well get the Japanese to deny the U.S. use of Okinawa, which would logistically cripple any U.S. military response. While NK might not have the ability to hit the U.S. with a nuke at this time, they certainly could hit Japan with one (if the missile doesn't blow up in flight).
          • Re:If this is true (Score:5, Interesting)

            by Martin Blank (154261) on Monday October 09 2006, @03:11AM (#16361471) Journal
            North Korea doesn't need a deterrent because the US won't invade unless North Korea crosses the border first. The US has seen significantly more hawkish characters than Bush and Rumsfeld on the topic of Korea. No one wants to fight there. It's horrendously mountainous, the winters are bitter cold, and the elite corps that would be handling any nuclear weapons are bound to be even more fanatical than the best of the Iraqi Republican Guard.

            That said, the descriptions from the Russians about North Korea's bomb place it at 3m in length and weighing about four tons, which is far more than any North Korean missile can mount and more than most of their planes can handle. There is zero chance of North Korea mounting nuclear missile attack in the next few years, and they would have to learn some very powerful miniaturization tricks before they could threaten anyone at a significant range.
          • Re:If this is true (Score:5, Insightful)

            by Grym (725290) * <anprice2@NOspAm.vt.edu> on Monday October 09 2006, @12:38AM (#16360619)

            That isn't true under all circumstances. You'll still get invaded if you have no credible 2nd strike capability (ie. I'll nuke your nukes).

            Second Strike capability is really a bit of a misnomer, because things like nuclear counter-attack submarines are simply a gaurentee of retaliation but not actually a requirement for retaliation to take place.

            Take Cuba, for instance, during the Cuban Missile Crisis. It had no second strike capability. And yet, the defense estimates at the time suggested that even after a massive carpet bombing campaign unparallleled in history which would produce similar devestation to multiple nuclear weapons, Cuba would still be likely to retaliate and hit at least one major American city with one of its nukes.

            All it takes is one hidden missile silo or the survival of a single a mobile launcher. Would you be willing to risk it? JFK wasn't--and because of that, he probably saved a lot of people's lives.

            -Grym

            • Re:If this is true (Score:5, Insightful)

              by flooey (695860) on Monday October 09 2006, @12:43AM (#16360645)
              After an invasion of South Korea the US is left with an ugly choice, let SK fall or risk Nuclear retalliation against a 3rd neighboring coutnry from the NK.

              I'm not sure you have an accurate picture of the Korean DMZ. The zone itself is covered in landmines, and each side has more than a million men guarding it (with United States troops already being part of the South Korean force). An invasion by either side would be a long and bloody struggle to get more than a couple miles into the other country.
            • Re:If this is true (Score:5, Interesting)

              by nordicfrost (118437) on Monday October 09 2006, @01:33AM (#16360953)
              What people are forgetting is the clear and present danger NK presents to China. NK is still stuck in a cold war with the US and SK, while China has moved on. Remember; NK lives on good will from China, and there are almost no defenses on the border to China. The DMZ is a nightmare for invading, but the north border is just to walk over. Mark my words, if there's an invasion of NK, the Chinese are on the side of the West and probably among SK soldiers. The political views of NK are a far cry from what China wants as its neighbour.
              • Re:If this is true (Score:5, Interesting)

                by awful (227543) on Monday October 09 2006, @04:38AM (#16361799) Homepage
                There are a variety of complicating factors as to what all this adds up to, but the unifying element is Japan.

                Since WW2 Japan has had an explicitly 'peaceful' constitution that precludes it from engaging in any military action other than self-defense.

                In recent years though Japanese politicians and strategists have been reconsidering this posture, due largely to the continuing belligerence of North Korea, and more recently because of the strong nationalist and anti-Japan sentiments emanating from China.

                Memory of Japanese nationalism and militarism within East Asia is very very strong (partly because of Chinese govt efforts to remind everyone of Japan's atrocities at every opportunity). There is great suspicion within China and Korea (Nth and Sth) of Japan. If Japan becomes alarmed by Nth Korea's (and they will) they may start down the path of a more expressly offensive military posture, even to the point of pursuing their own weapon. At this point China would be very very angry and nervous indeed. An arms race in East Asia is a real possibility.

                In this light - the absolute best thing the US government can do right now is to immediately reassure the Japanese government and people that they are still very much protected by the US nuclear umbrella, that there is no need for Japan to pursue its own nuke, and that they should restrain their understandable urge to assume a more offensive military posture.

                In this situation the US needs to make sure that there is no possible excuse for China and Japan, and to a lesser extent, Sth Korea, to begin an arms race. The best way to do that is restrain Japanese militarism, be firm with Nth Korea, and involve China in everything it does to resolve the situation.

                The wild card in all of this is Taiwan. Taiwan is going through a very interesting political situation - and Taiwanese pro-independence politicians might be considering using such sentiment to shore up their own position (rocked by a corruption scandal). Taiwanese independence will almost certainly force China to attack Taiwan (they've always said they would), and so the US could be dragged into a war it can't actually fight.

                We live in VERY interesting times.
      • Re:If this is true (Score:5, Insightful)

        by Flwyd (607088) <dotslash&trevorstone,org> on Monday October 09 2006, @12:33AM (#16360589) Homepage
        Understanding the MADness of Mutually Assured Destruction requires a bit of mental gymnastics.

        Thinking with MADness, it's in North Korea's interest to convince the world that it has nukes. Without nukes, they have no feasible deterrent against an army of superior strength (U.S., China, etc.).

        When dealing with nuclear weapons, safe is better than sorry, so when someone announces "We have nuclear weapons," one should act as if they did. However, repeated claims without evidence can lead others to think the claimant is bluffing. The next step is therefore to perform a nuclear test, proving "Yes, I am a skunk, and yes, my glands are charged." It's no coincidence that India and Pakistan conducted their first nuclear tests within about a month of each other. It's a high stakes, high tech, high investment Mexican standoff.

        So in one sense, "nukes are the most useless weapon" because they take an enormous amount of resources for a handfull of bombs the owners hope to never use. On the other hand, building a single nuclear bomb can be a lot more cost effective than establishing a large enough army to deter one's enemies.

        It does not make me comfortable to know that people like Kim Jong Il and George W. Bush are in charge of weapons of mass destruction. As Robert McNamara revealed in The Fog of War [imdb.com], the fate of the world could rest on having inaccurate information.

        The technology problem has been solved. Now it becomes a political and psychological problem. To see how small things can lead to big problems, watch Dr. Strangelove [imdb.com], perhaps the only movie I think everyone should watch.
        • Re:If this is true (Score:5, Insightful)

          by Darkman, Walkin Dude (707389) on Monday October 09 2006, @04:28AM (#16361749) Homepage

          So in one sense, "nukes are the most useless weapon" because they take an enormous amount of resources for a handfull of bombs the owners hope to never use.

          Actually, in the Sun Tzu sense, nukes are the perfect weapon. They allow you to win a war without ever firing a shot.

        • Re:If this is true (Score:5, Insightful)

          by jcr (53032) <jcr@ma[ ]om ['c.c' in gap]> on Monday October 09 2006, @02:14AM (#16361163) Journal
          If there had been even the remotest chance that Saddam Hussein had had weapons of mass destruction, do you think we'd have invaded Iraq?

          The question was actually whether he stlll had them. His use of chemical weapons and his program to develop nukes was not in doubt. The cease-fire that he agreed to after being ejected from Kuwait obligated Iraq to destroy those weapons, and prove that they had done so. It was not the job of the weapons inspectors to go hunting for them. Their job was to witness, document and audit Iraq's disarmament.

          -jcr
          • Re:If this is true (Score:5, Insightful)

            by Anonymous Coward on Monday October 09 2006, @04:37AM (#16361797)
            But the poster you are replying to is correct in stating that he parent is wrong. If you are a country that is not the United States and your policies, culture, national interests or form of government conflicts with the national interests of the United States, then nuclear weapons are not only a useful weapon, they are the ONLY useful weapon.

            Iraq did not have nukes and we knew this and we invaded.
            North Korea is worse than Iraq and Iran, has nukes, and we will NEVER invade.
            Iran doesn't have nukes, and we are pushing to invade before they get them.

            The message is clear: if you don't have nuclear weapons and the U.S. doesn't like you, you'd damned well better get them ASAP.

            • by OrangeTide (124937) on Monday October 09 2006, @04:35AM (#16361785) Homepage Journal
              It is more complicated than that. N. Korea (among other countries) have territory disputes with Japan. Japan's hands are tied because of Article 9 forbidding Japan from using threat or use of force to settle disputes. And it's unlikely that Japan could defend itself successfully against N.Korea if a hot war were to erupt. Part of the agreement with the US is that the US provides defensive forces, and works as a proxy to lean on nations that have disputes with Japan.

              But probably the biggest issue is that Kim Jong-il is a lunatic. Saddam Hussein was not a lunatic. That is the biggest difference between a war with Iraq and a war with N.Korea. Also Saddam's military was quite small, while N.Korea's military is the fifth largest in the world. (roughly the same number of troops as the US)

              I think everyone agrees that a war with N.Korea between any nation (Japan, US, S.Korea) would be an utter nightmare. And the nightmare has only gotten worse with the progress N.Korea has made with thier nuclear arsenal. We cannot entirely trust Kim Jong-il to simply use nukes as a negotiation strategy, he may actually use them (and claim that somehow he was provoked).

              What better way to assert N.Korea's sovereignty than to lob a nuke on one of the disputed islands in the Sea of Japan? Sort of an "if I can't have it, then nobody can"
          • Re:If this is true (Score:5, Informative)

            by whereiseljefe (753425) on Monday October 09 2006, @01:18AM (#16360875) Homepage
            Actually, sending in people you care deeply about tends to hamper you abilities to fight a war. Take for instance McClellan during the U.S. Civil War. Had he not been afraid to use the North's overwhelming numbers, McClellan would have ended the civil war much earlier than it did (it took Grant to realize that all he had to do was send wave after wave of troops and he would break Lee, despite the fact that McClellan was the only Northern commander that was near the intellectual level of General Lee).

            That being said, what you are trying to say is it would be wrong for Bush to pull strings to keep his loved ones out of harms way, which if he does have anyone in the military (I smell an entire family tree of ivy league pussies... W's dad must feel greatly dissapointed) I have no doubt we would have done that.

            As to your last part, I'm tired of that damned argument. These kids willingly joined the army, yes to pay for college, but they were told repeatedly and voluntarily swore an oath (no fucking fine print) that when the U.S. goes to war, they will probably have to ship off and if that is the case, there is nothing they can do about it. I feel little sympathy for these kids, I mean it sucks over there but you did sign up with the military, what did you expect? Why didn't you go for the National Guard, hmm? Your chances of being deployed over seas to hostile combat zone are dramatically reduced in that organization.
          • by Barnoid (263111) on Monday October 09 2006, @01:51AM (#16361053)
            US either better bomb this guy back to the Stone Age, or else be prepared to have nukes floating all around the world.

            Speaken like a true American. Wage wars, but plz not at home. Why care about collatoral damage, as long as it is so far away?

            I happen to work in Seoul right now, and I'm actually more afraid of Bush & his friends than North Korea. NK will not attack the South unprovoked because even their nutcase of a dictator knows that such an act will certainly end his reign. However, if you provoke him and lead him to believe he's about to be invaded/bombed/..., he might actually be tempted to send a couple of missiles down to Seoul, just to prove that NK is dangerous.

            I hope that the U.S. and Japan won't push it too far.
      • by hero_or_what (245446) on Monday October 09 2006, @01:02AM (#16360777)

        I do agree that by cutting a deal with New Delhi, the US govt essentially squashed the NPT. But then, that's what happened to the Kyoto treaty as well.

        The NPT by itself is a relic of the cold war and extremely biased. What it basically says is that 5 countries can build and maintain as many Nuclear weapons as they want while the rest of the world should not. Ideally, if Nuclear Non Proliferation was to work, the NPT should have contained a timetable for the reduction/removal of all nuclear weapons, including those stockpiled by the big five. The NPT isn't about reducing the risk of a Nuclear Winter. Its about maintaining a military advantage and is purely political in its framework.

        I'm all for reducing the risk of Nuclear Proliferation, but I'm not convinced that NPT is the tool to use. What we need is for the big 5 to show the way and reduce their stockpile and then enforce the NPT.

      • Maybe - just maybe - because India is the world's largest democracy?

        While India has not yet signed the NPT, they do have a no first strike policy.

        They are surrounded by a communist military dictatorship on one side (China) and an Islamic fundamentalist dictatorship on the other (Pakistan - one supported by US).

        You can hardly blame a nation-state for doing what is necessary for survival.

        Secondly, the transfer of technology has only for the purpose of energy and power. India has also agreed to let international observers to ensure that the plants do not enrich weapons-grade fissile material but use them only for energy.

        And btw, comparing India to NK is a nice troll there - the H1B bit was a nice add, too. One is the world's largest democracy that's been making economic progress by leaps and bounds, and the other is a military dictatorship run by a crazy person.

        Way to go, combining Slashdot's racist prejudices and logical fallacies all in one go.
    • by tezbobobo (879983) on Sunday October 08 2006, @11:49PM (#16360219) Homepage Journal
      Actually, this is not so much about terrorists as residual cold war thinking. Most political scietists would treat this as either the fallout of superpower foriegn policy from the cold war, or indeed claim that the cold war is not in fact over.

      America is acting no different from usual so it is not right to claim it is run by violent religious extremists. That's a comparative qualitative assessment. It is instead run by what would be known as 'realist' (not the dictionary def.) ideologists - those who would unilaterally further America's interest..
    • by GoldTeamRules (639624) on Monday October 09 2006, @12:06AM (#16360363)

      I agree...damn democracy...if only Bush were a dictator, the US would be able to defend itself properly!

      In fact, this is really all Clinton's fault for being soft on them in the first place...

      If the Dems would stop critisizing Bush, Iraq wouldn't be in this mess...really, we should kill all the Dems first, then go after the Iranians, then the North Koreans.

      Actually, I think we can all agree that the answer to the NK problem, really, is more tax cuts! Tax cuts and getting rid of queers. If you're not with me, you're against me.

    • by antifoidulus (807088) on Monday October 09 2006, @12:18AM (#16360461) Homepage Journal
      We weren't going to be invading North Korea even before they had nuclear weapons. The reason is that half of South Korea's population as well as their political, economic, and cultural capitol is well within the range of North Korea's (relatively crude) artillery. Kim Jong Il has threatened to turn Seoul into "a sea of flames" and he can do it without nukes. There is no way that the US or anyone would be crazy enough to attack North Korea.
    • by abb3w (696381) on Monday October 09 2006, @12:25AM (#16360515) Journal

      I think you meant that headline to say "Bush administration secretly tells N. Korea to announce that they have conducted their first nuclear test before the November election".

      Try again. If you want to do conspiracy theories, you ought to do them right.

      MSNBC [msn.com], via Daily Kos [dailykos.com]:

      On Sept. 19, 2005, North Korea signed a widely heralded denuclearization agreement with the United States, China, Russia, Japan and South Korea. Pyongyang pledged to "abandon all nuclear weapons and existing nuclear programs." [...] Four days later, the U.S. Treasury Department imposed sweeping financial sanctions against North Korea designed to cut off the country's access to the international banking system, branding it a "criminal state" guilty of counterfeiting, money laundering and trafficking in weapons of mass destruction.
      Now, add in this report dated September 20th [newsmax.com]:
      In the past week, Karl Rove has been promising Republican insiders an "October surprise" to help win the November congressional elections.
      It's October. "SURPRISE!!!"
        • by sanman2 (928866) on Monday October 09 2006, @12:29AM (#16360547)
          NKorea can sell to the highest bidder. That's the real threat -- not missiles/warheads launched from Pyongyang, but missiles/warheads shipped out from Pyongyang.

          AlQaeda will be sending their emissaries to NKorea, along with fat checkbooks.
          Because NKorea will indeed sell. They will do anything that gets them moolah and or influence.
    • by Shihar (153932) on Monday October 09 2006, @01:45AM (#16361017)
      Countries like the US and other powerful nations have nuclear weapons as well, I don't see why North Korea should not get a piece of it.

      Because "the US and other powerful nations" have stable governments that won't fire the weapons. North Korea does not. Because "the US and other powerful nations" cares about its citizens enough to not blatantly kill them by the millions. North Korea does not.

      When we talk about North Korea we are talking about a nation that has managed to kill of 10% of its fucking population in under a decade. They test chemical weapons on humans. If you want a hell on Earth, you couldn't point to a nation closer to achieving it. To top it all off, it isn't like this is a stable nation. This is a nation that is basically run by military gangsters with a cult of personality figurehead. You couldn't point a nation in this world that giving nukes to is a bad idea even if you tried.

      You would be better off to simply give nuclear weapons to the mob... though I suppose you think that the mob has the "right" to nuclear weapons to. The only thing that separates North Korea from every other horrible criminal organization in the world is that North Korea inflicts far more suffering are more people and control enough territory that we recognize them as a nation.

      No fucked up sense of justice justifies letting North Korea have nukes. The rest of the world is and rightfully should be doing everything in their power from keeping this insane dictatorship from swinging around more power then it already does.