North Korea Air Sample Shows Radiation 543
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."
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."
Oh my gawd (Score:3, Funny)
Choreography! (Score:3, Funny)
Re:Choreography! (Score:5, Funny)
Maybe all the North Koreans jumped up and down at the same time.
Oddly enough, external microphones on the jet picked up something that sounded like singing... "I'm so wronery..."Re: (Score:2, Informative)
Re: (Score:3, Interesting)
Re:Choreography! (Score:5, Funny)
The Dear Leader watches everything. He is all-knowing. The Dear Leader was born on Mt. Paektu the Sacred Mountain. His birth was attended simultaneously by a double rainbow and a radiant star in the heavens. Surely that's a sign of Godhood. He is the light of our lives. We are blessed to have his benevolent gaze shining over our great nation.
Hardware? (Score:5, Funny)
Re: (Score:2)
Halifax Explosion! (Score:5, Interesting)
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Halifax_Explosion [wikipedia.org] Atleast 200kTons there...
Re:Halifax Explosion! (Score:5, Informative)
Instead of very large accidental explosions, it might be a bit more topical to talk about known instances in the past where nations have deliberately simulated nuclear bombs with conventional explosives, like the 4 kt Minor Scale experiment: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Minor_Scale_(explosi
Re:Halifax Explosion! (Score:4, Informative)
Now, that 500 tons of (real) TNT was a 0.5 kt blast, about what the North Korea blast is estimated at from the shockwave. Could easily have been a few container loads of TNT. It's a pretty damp squib as far as even first-attempt nukes go.
Re:Halifax Explosion! (Score:5, Informative)
There was a larger deliberate explosion in Canada: the explosion of Ripple Rock [vancouveri...abound.com], off Vancouver Island in 1958. It used 1,375 tons of explosives.
I have seen the Ripple Rock explosion characterized as the "largest man-made non-nuclear explosion ever" or the "largest peacetime man-made non-nuclear explosion ever."
You can watch the CBC footage here [archives.cbc.ca].
In Other News (Score:2, Insightful)
Seriously though - is this really news ? Shouldn't we wait until it's confirmed one way or the other before it makes sense to comment on it ?
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
Re:In Other News (Score:5, Insightful)
So yes, we should know by now, but we don't. This is news.
Re:In Other News (Score:5, Insightful)
So, nobody's really sure what to believe right now, and eventually it'll just fall to consensus on the data we already have.
The best place to hear about the debate's over at ArmsControlWonk [armscontrolwonk.com]. New radionucliotide data, insider info from some well-placed anonymous sources, and insights into the scientific cultures within dictatorships paints an interesting picture.
Re: (Score:3, Interesting)
They never bothered with it before, why bother with it now? I mean evidence just detracts from the issues they are pushing.
So let's see... you're saying that if we got back a first round of air samples, and the only way you heard one way or the other about it was through some leak, you wouldn't be complaining about the lack of transparency? Well, which is it? Do you want the data as it comes, NASA-style, or do you want to wait while the DoD and DoE and other agencie
Assplosives Detonation Velocities table (Score:3, Interesting)
If North Korea says so... (Score:5, Insightful)
Are we justified sanctioning and otherwise punishing it, even if it lied?
This is more than an abstract question (like the famous "if a tree falls in the woods and nobody is there...").
Saddam's Hussein downfall was (at least partially) brought about by his insinuating that he still has WMDs privately — to keep neighbors in fear, soldiers brave, and citizens proud, while claiming loudly, that he got rid of them all (which turned out to be true, after all)...
Re: (Score:2)
The intel for WMD is allegely supposed to have come from Ibn al-Shaykh al-Libi who was tortured after being reditioned. He later claimed he lied under torture.
Re:If North Korea says so... (Score:5, Insightful)
The present-day insurgents weren't in Iraq until after we removed Saddam from power. He ran a run-of-the-mill dictatorship that used his religion (and that of most of his country) as a tool to control people, but he was no religious fanatic. He disliked the Taliban and the Bin Laden extremists almost as much as the U.S. does.
Saddam's Iraq was a cakewalk. We "accomplished" that mission quickly, efficiently, and with minimal casualties on our side. Then, we started screwing almost everything up, and haven't stopped yet. We needed to create a stabler, more secure country faster, before zealots and extremists had time to enter the country and set up shop. Probably having more troops from a wider variety of allies would have helped tremendously, but that would have required us to earn more allies through discourse and compromise, something this administration is not able to do.
Had we not entered Iraq, Saddam would have continued to do an adequate job of suppressing religious fanatics, and Iraq would not have become another Taliban country. (He would have continued suppressing his own people, too; he was still a dictator, murderer, and thug. I'm not denying that. But there are plenty of other murderous dictators in power around the world, some of which are our allies.) Overall, we've probably left the country in worse shape than if we'd just left it alone.
We should have sent many, many more troops to Afghanistan (where we had internation support and justification for our invasion) to avoid the problems that country is having - resurgent Taliban because we didn't kill them all back then when they were in the open, and the country falling back into its longtime role as the world's opium supplier (something the Taliban had tried to suppress, but now profits from).
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
I agree with your comment but you're technically wrong on this point. The vast majority of these insurgents were in country prior to the war but not actually fighting. And a lot of the Shi'a insurgents are related, literally and figuratively, to the uprising following the first Gulf War that we encouraged then let Saddam crush.
Re:If North Korea says so... (Score:5, Funny)
Well, consider this: if someone comes to you and says "hey, I just crapped in your locker" without laughing, what do you do? either you punch him in the face rightaway for having crapped in your locker, or you don't believe him, look inside your locker, discover no turd, then turn around and punch him in the face for being a stupid asshole. Either way, you punch him in the face.
Re: (Score:3, Funny)
Why, I bomb the locker for a few weeks and then send in 150,000 troops. What else could I possible DO in a situation like this???
correction (Score:5, Funny)
Fixed it.
Re:If North Korea says so... (Score:4, Insightful)
Re:If North Korea says so... (Score:4, Funny)
Re:If North Korea says so... (Score:4, Insightful)
Better to avoid analogies altogether in this case, and talk about rogue nations developing nuclear weapons and selling missile technology to other rogue nations, while holding cities full of people hostage using the credible threat of devastating and unavoidable chemical weapons attacks.
Talk about the actual facts of the matter, and suddenly the whole idea of punching becomes both eminently desireable and eminently unworkable.
What now?
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
OT, but good call. Can you imagine what people would have done if Bush had given a big loud speech blaming Jews for all the evil in the world for the last 2,000 years? Chavez did this. Or if Bush made a public speech with crude sexist comments about foreign female diplomats? Chavez did this (about Rice). Or, to show how petty he was, Bush passed laws to force all the radio stations in the country to play only the music he personally liked? Chavez di
Re:If North Korea says so... (Score:4, Insightful)
Unless you think petty namecalling is equivalent to hundreds of thousands dead. I mean the CIA even tried to kill chavez in a coup, if anything hes remarkably polite considering that. Saddam tried to kill bush's dad and look how he reacted.
NK != IRAN != VENEZUELA
Though that doesnt stop the administration from making you think otherwise.
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
I read his speech at the U.N., so now I like him a LOT.
He's got the balls to tell the truth.
Of course this makes him hated by those who live in darkness and lies.
Re: (Score:3, Informative)
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
Mao killed 60 million of his own people.
The Tsars and the Chinese nationalists were pikers when it came to bad government compared to the communists.
The fundamental law of communism is that it is the worst political system ever invented. No exceptions.
Each one made things worse. (Score:3, Insightful)
It was the Venezuelan dictator who made the speech blaming Jews for all the evil in the world for the last 2,000 years. This speech was Dec. 24, 2005.
"But one thing is still true about him, this being pretty much the fundamental law of communism--he's still better than the nasty right-wing fucker who immediately preceded him(Lenin and the Tsars, Mao and Chiang Kai-shek, Castro and Batiste)."
You need to check your history:
L
Three valid examples of communist countries. (Score:3, Insightful)
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
For one thing, American neocons aren't in power. There's a difference between speaking in front of your think tank and being a world leader speaking on the world stage. Chalk this one up to another mention of the "neocon" bogeyman in conversations where it does not belong. Aside from that: can you CITE references where Neocons did what Chavez
Re: (Score:3, Interesting)
Where on the mainstream left are they speaking out against Chavez? There are so many like Mark Weisbrot, "The Progressive" magazine, who grovel at his feet, and I've read numerous articles in "The Nation" as well. Michael Moore is a passionate fan of his.. I don't think I need to even look to see what Chomsky says. Every mainline left magazine and individual I check out so far lo
The dictator who cried "nuclear" (Score:2)
No yelling "FIRE!" in crowded theatres, no yelling "A-Bomb!" at the UN.
Re: (Score:2)
Re:If North Korea says so... (Score:5, Insightful)
Bush claimed that Saddam had an active program and was continuing to stockpile. This is false, and continues to be false.
The only WMD that have been found are the ones that nobody on earth doubted he had. That they were badly accounted for is also not in doubt, as it was all part of Saddam's suicidally stupid bluff. It was not a "stockpile" if it was not maintained, and hence claiming that he had WMD is incorrect if you accept that an impotent WMD is not a WMD.
No relevent devices have been found to this day.
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
Nevertheless, I believe that the Bush Administration should have framed the Iraq War, when it first started, in the terms they frame it in now: Iraq refused to allow UN inspectors to do their jobs, despite numerous UN resolutions requiring it. In other words, Saddam could say he'd destroyed every last WMD until he's blue in the face, but we would never know
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
He had none at the time that it mattered -- when the case for war was made.
It's that simple, and laser focused. No, none of the weapons from before Gulf War I that were not maintained count. And that, so far, is every one we've found.
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
Sanctions? (Score:4, Insightful)
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
Should I be arrested for calling you every night and threaten to shoot you and your children, even if I don't actually own a gun?
The fact that North Korea is saying they have nukes is threat enough to warrant attention.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
You mean threaten to shoot you and your children if you or your children go into his yard.
I can call you every day and tell you this fact if you enter my private property (aka National Sovereignty) that I'm going to shoot you. Heck... I might get into trouble if I don't post this information on my fence.
But the key issue here is whether or not North Korea has a bomb, but rather th
Especially since (Score:5, Insightful)
To run with your analogy this is like someone holding a gun to their child's head and demanding you give them money to not shoot their kid. Regardless of if it's a cap gun, the fact that they'd stoop to that level of blackmail means that they need to be stopped.
Re:Sanctions? (Score:4, Insightful)
The are already starving, lack electricity in 95% of the country, are almost completely uneducated, and make most starving African nations look rich in comparison.
They quite literally have nothing to lose, which is very sad.
Isn't this like a fairy tale? (Score:5, Funny)
No you don't
Boom!
That wasn't a nuke!
Boom!
Sorry, just don't believe you!
Boom!
No no.. never. That was just gas.
errrr.
Oh.. you used all your material and you are out now?
(reminds me of puss and boots with the mouse).
Re: (Score:2)
<toe2toe> the part i like is where IRAQ's going "we got nothing"
<toe2toe> and US is going "PFFFT WE'RE GONNA TAKE YOU OUT"
<toe2toe> and then
<toe2toe> North Koreas going "CHECK OUT OUR NUKES, BUDDY"
<toe2toe> and US is going "Hey... are you iraq? no? THEN STAY OUT OF IT"
It doesn't matter (Score:3, Insightful)
With all the information that is public, it *is* trivial to create a bomb. Access to plutonium, which he has, is the hard part.
I hate to introduce politics, but it has to be said, Saddam maybe, could have, possibly, been working on something, if you look at the intelligence "just so." North Korea, has been openly saying they are working on these bombs. North Korea sells arms to our enemies. I blame Bush on all counts. The guy is all about acquiring power, but without the wisdom or honor to use it well.
I am remeinded if Bill Maher, Usually you have an administration that is corrupt or one that is inept. The Bush administration is both.
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
Re: (Score:2)
I used to make this division between corrupt and inept as well, until I realised that the best way to disguise corruption is to fake ineptitude. While people can be sued for corruption, it's much harder to sue for incompetence. So the thief keeps part of the money, does a shoddy job with the remainder and people think he's a bad administrator, but still honest.
That said, I'm
Re:It doesn't matter (Score:4, Insightful)
Which is why Kim Jong Il is still in power and Saddam isn't.
Bullies don't pick on those who could seriously fight back.
Implosion devices are not trivial, a dud I bet (Score:4, Insightful)
And, because in the modern age there are thousands of seismic sites and many radiological sites that can detect the seismic and radioactive signature of a nuclear explosion, a nuclear test is also the announcement that you have succeeded in your nuclear ambitions. For a recent example of how a nuclear test is both final exam and public announcement, see Pakistan.
So the fact that a successfull nuclear test would be quite apparent (and as we are seeing the absence of a nuclear test as well), and that NK called China to tell them so they would be sure China was watching closely, tells me that this was probably a real nuclear test. A test that, it would appear, failed. If memory serves, they told China to expect a 2KT explosion, with the actual measurement at about 0.5KT?
Sounds to me like they had at best a partial detonation of the nuclear material, but didn't have the timing of the high explosives good enough to pack all the plutonium into a small enough ball for it all to react before the reaction force blew it apart.
Saddam could bluff about having chemical weapons. Kim can bluff about developing nukes, but it really doesn't make sense to try to bluff a nuclear test. And of course we know he desperately wants them. So I'm going with the theory that this was a real nuclear test, just a failed one, and North Korea doesn't have a working nuke yet, but they are very close. The data from just this test may be enough for them to fix it.
hm, (Score:3, Interesting)
One can easily see from the increase in prestige and offers that Iran has been given for just saying that they want nuclear power that it gives your country an "edge"... I think it has backfired a bit - but we'll have to wait and see. Either way it's understandable why he would want to make it look like he has them. If Kim was thinking about the situation rationally then he would also know why China wouldn't want to put too many conditions on North Korea - which is to say that what China really fear is thousands of immigrants flooding in, after all, the nukes North Korea has will never rival China; and they can't even deliver the bombs anyway! (as far as I know they only have the ability to deliver something like that on a boat or train, really)
C'mon (Score:5, Interesting)
Re: (Score:3, Funny)
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
Re: (Score:3, Interesting)
yes, it may or not be... (Score:3, Insightful)
OK, get back to the question. If a nuke was buried deep enough and the caverns sealed before the blast, with a very small nuke, would radiation escape to be detected? And wasn't there a lot of talk the other day that the seismograph guys were good enough to tell just from the signature?
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
I think that "total" economic sanctions would be effective. This means absolutely nothing in or out--no food, no medicine--nothing. Despite complete self-reliance being Dear Leader's wet dream, the NK regime would collapse.
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
Re: (Score:2)
I think what was meant was that they can tell whether it was natural earthquake or an artificial explosion. My guess is that an earthquake is a drawn-out affair relative to an explosion, which would be closer to a single peak. I think the easier to build types of nuclear bombs are single-stage so you probably wouldn't get a major double spike that would make it known for certain that it
Chemical explosion, is my bet (Score:5, Informative)
The revised seismic figures were (if I recall right) something like 0.5 kT equivalent. The smallest easy-to-build bombs (those that have supercritical assemblies without hyper-compression of the metal) yield something like 10-30 kT, so this was either a fizzled nuke or a large pile of ANFO (or something like that).
In the last discussion I made a big deal about the Kamioka observatory and how they "should" have been able to see neutrinos from the blast -- but with an 0.5kT blast the number of neutrino interactions is only 1 or 2, so they can't be expected to distinguish a large chemical explosion from a very small fizzled nuclear explosion.
Re: (Score:2)
t's not so hard to pile up ten thousand tons of conventional explosive, and as discussed in the previous thread on the test itself there is some value in convincing your neighbors that you have nuclear weapons regardless of whether you actually have them.
No it's not, but it's pretty hard to pile up ten thousand tons of conventional explosive in a remote area and not have anyone with a satellite see you do it.
Re: (Score:3, Interesting)
Nobody is talking about 10,000 tons. The estimate is 500 tons. At a density of about 1.65, 500 tons of TNT is about a 21 foot cube. About two or three moving van loads, although you'd need to spread it a bit thinner than that for the weight. If you're digging a hole and setting up instrumentation for a test, a few extra trucks spread over several weeks or months is no big deal.
Re: (Score:2)
However, I think it's probably better to take the claim at face value than risk being wrong.
Re:Chemical explosion, is my bet (Score:5, Informative)
I find it very implausible that it could have "fizzled." It's a damn chain reaction - set it and forget it, as the saying goes.
Then you need to learn a bit more about nuclear physics. Plutonium is a bit trickier to set off as a nuclear weapon do the fact that it can start a reaction before it's compressed down to the intended size. What happens is the chain reaction stops short of the intended yield because the ball of plutonium literally blows itself apart before you get enough generations of neutron reactions to yield enough energy.
A dud, if you ask me (Score:3, Informative)
On the other hand, gun type bombs are not really tested that much. Little boy went straight to hiroshima without testing, because th
Re:Chemical explosion, is my bet (Score:5, Interesting)
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
Re:Chemical explosion, is my bet (Score:5, Informative)
You should have called in some mining engineers. Your analysis is a bit off.
The speeds involved were close enough -- although the detonation of 500 tons of TNT takes about half a millisecond and given your energy for the neutrons that takes closer to a microsecond -- but either kind of explosion has to couple the energy to the rocks surrounding and propagate out from there as seismic waves for the seismic people to detect it. That coupling is going to be affected by the precise nature of the surrounding rock -- density, water content, etc. Without knowing that, it will be hard to tell the difference even with good seismic signals (or a much more powerful blast).
There were only (as I recall) a few stations that even detected the blast, enough to triangulate it but not enough for really good signal data. Good enough to tell that it was an explosion rather than an earthquake, but not to determine the kind of explosion.
Re: (Score:3, Interesting)
The seismic people have enough experience looking at explosions to be able to tell chemical from nuclear, and this one apparently looks nuclear. It also looks to be 0.5kT or so. That makes it by far the smallest yield 1st test ever. Which either means they have perfected making small bombs (which is incredibly complicated and wasn't done by the Los Alamos people until 15 years after their first test), or they failed in their test. The latter is
Fall-out (Score:2)
It still makes sense... (Score:4, Informative)
Also, the estimates (which vary according to which country you ask) are less than 1 kt. As far as nukes go, that is very tiny. How much rad would you expect from this? How deep was the explosion? I know that they registered seismic activity, which was how they knew it happened. How accurate can one guage depth using seismographic equipment?
For some perspective, the US 1954 Castle Bravo test was 15 MEGA tons, and it was a mistake, they were only expecting like 1/3rd of that. The "ruskies" detonated 50 Mt, the largest ever, in 1961. There has been over 2,000 nuclear tests by the world nuke powers since they began, most of them from the US.
maybe it was a neutron bomb? (Score:2)
A neutron bomb is a type of tactical nuclear weapon developed specifically to release a relatively large portion of its energy as energetic neutron radiation to harm biological tissues and electronic devices that are otherwise relatively protected from the heat blast without causing nuclear fallout.
Team America (Score:3, Funny)
a sign of the times (Score:2, Funny)
North Korea proves they still arn't "big time". (Score:3, Insightful)
Personally I think it proves they DONT have a bomb.... yet. And more likely their real first test will be over Japan/Israel/South Korea/ whereever else, and their second will be during the all out nuclear bombardment where all the countries give them all the nuclear power they need, though they'll have to figure out how to contain it.
North Korea and Iran are both playing dangerous games. They are acting like children at the grown ups tables. Let's hope they mature or get slapped before they become teenagers who get into a massive car accident and "kill" one or more of the adults
Take him at his word (Score:3, Insightful)
I disagree... (Score:3, Insightful)
WSJ article is crap. (Score:2)
FTFA in question:
Uh, what?
It wasn't a nuke (Score:2)
Underground Nuclear Explosions (Score:5, Interesting)
As far I understood an article I read some time ago, the gigantic heat of the explosion melts the surronding soil into a glass cave which conceils the radioactive mess.
The problem is only after years of even decades, this glass sealing can (and at some point will) break and set the radioactivity free. Then the radiation levels will boost up... Thats another problem of humanity waiting we create now (our legacy for our kids).. all this sealed nuke-eggs from past underground expiriments loosing integrity at some future point.
It seems to me, the whole point of having a... (Score:3, Insightful)
Who bets this was a well calculated plan by some sensible N.K. scientists to demonstrate that in fact they have nothing for us to fear.
Of course idiot Kim wouldn't know what a real nuke is capable of, probably felt the earth shake and thought to himself, "cool, now I have a big penis too.". Also a calculated response from some sensible N.K. scientists.
Duh (Score:3, Interesting)
Hm...why would they be shipping railcars full of explosive anywhere?
Face it, "dear leader" is just an attention wh0re.
Although I confess I expected that he would have at least loaded the cave with a bunch of Fiestaware? Old smoke detectors? bought off ebay to give it SOME sort of radiation signature.
North Korean Explosions (Score:3, Insightful)
See http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Ryongch
k2r
It's politics. (Score:3, Interesting)
I knew China wasn't really going to do much about the advertised nuclear testing in North Korea. Just days ago, fellow Americans argued that China would help America every step of the way. The reports on BBC News beats a far different tone.
The problem with Nukes is two fold really. First, it's pretty much science and that much every man has the right to know; problem solving is a capability inherent in all humans. So, I think the main factors of developing such technology reside soley in ability to apply the acquired/developed knowledge of a group of scientists. Controlling who gets what materials currently known to work. Politics comes into play here, make the world look down on you if you do go through with it. But, nothing can stop a person from going to a library and picking up a book; and for men of the calibur to become Generals and National Leaders... determination is every bit as tangible as the solid brick wall infront of you.
I have little doubt in my mind that North Korea detonated a nuclear device. We all have a very basic and crude understanding of how it fundamentally works. It's really only a magnitude of elegance and stability between my 600lbs of home-made shock stabalized nitro-glycerin, nitrocelulos and gun-powder, all crudely shape charged towards colliding necessary fuels together with enough force to initiate a violent nuclear reaction. But, how on earth am I going to get the "fuel" from? All the other stuff is relatively easy to come by with a little effort.
Sooner or later, Afghanistan will have the capacity to build a thermo-nuclear device. Sri-Lanka, Madagascar, Iran, Chechnya perhaps. An elegant, stable one even; probably far more sophisticated and engineered than what we currently have, by the time they do. Along the way, those opponents against developing nuclear arms are left with their hands tied behind their back. Like I said, there's only two real controlling factors, politics and resources. Once an interest group gets their hands on the resources, they may ignore the politics if they so choose to. Which leads me to...
Perhaps, the only thing left to do is try to belittle the effort of the target (North Korea), hiding under the reality that not one authority in the entire world would have any allies at all should they pre-emptively launch a nuclear weapon at anyone. Then, quitely, accept the fact they have Nuclear Weapons. I'm surprised that one may often run into an American at a bar or club, who has yet to aware of the fact India and Pakistan are Nuclear. Even knowing so, still doesn't sit right due to how much poverty exists in those countries...
So, I think all of this hooplah (including the wikipedia implicitly saying that the explosion was conventional by adding it to a list of large conventional explosions.), is just aftermath propoganda warfare.
UPDATE: U.S. claims evidence of test (Score:3, Informative)
Hello, the size of the explosion doesn't matter (Score:3, Funny)
It's simply a statement in poker game. You didn't believe we could do it... Nah, nah, nah, nah, nah, nah. Now pay up!
The truth is that if North Korea fuel actually was used in a terrorist attack on the US, north korea would be blown off the map and there would be raidiaon fallout in asia for at least 20 to 40 years and to a lesser extent all over the rest of the world.
China already knows the score, they will be notified of any immmenent attack and given the option of taking North Korea out themselves when the time comes in exchange for something like a hundred billion dollars. Of course south korea would be devestated and that's why we don't just do it now.
According to CNN, radiation has been detected (Score:5, Informative)
From http://www.cnn.com/2006/WORLD/asiapcf/10/13/nkore
WASHINGTON (CNN) -- 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.
The statement, from the office of Director of National Intelligence John Negroponte, was sent to Capitol Hill but not released publicly. CNN obtained it from a congressional source.
If confirmed, the nuclear weapons test that North Korea claimed it conducted on Monday would be the first of its kind since Pakistan's underground blast in 1998.
Pyongyang's claim has renewed fears of a regional arms race and that North Korea might aid terrorists with nuclear materials or technology.
The national intelligence office statement said the air samples were collected Wednesday, and analysis found debris that would be consistent with a nuclear test "in the vicinity of Punggye" on Monday.
"Additional analysis is ongoing and will be completed in a few days," the statement said.
The South Korean Defense Ministry told CNN that the United States has informed it that radioactivity has been detected.
The report is in contrast to information provided to CNN earlier Friday from two U.S. government officials with access to classified information. Those officials said that an initial air sampling over North Korea showed no indication of radioactive debris.
The White House said it had no confirmation that the North Koreans conducted a nuclear test.
"We've seen the various press reports," said National Security Council spokesman Fred Jones. "We still have no definitive statement on the event. The intelligence community continues to analyze the data."
The U.S. Air Force flew a WC-135 Constant Phoenix atmospheric collection aircraft on Tuesday to collect air samples from the region.
The intelligence community and the military will also continue to collect air samples in the region and use satellite information to try to collect radiological data that would confirm a nuclear test, officials said. But as time goes on, it will be increasingly difficult to achieve confirmation.
Officials emphasized earlier Friday that the data collected are preliminary and provide no conclusive evidence about the North Korean event.
It is possible there was no radiological data. That could be the case if: the North Koreans successfully sealed the site; it was such a small detonation and so deep underground there was no escape of nuclear debris; or the test was actually conventional explosives.
The U.N. Security Council has agreed to vote Saturday on whether to impose sanctions on North Korea over the purported nuclear test, according to John Bolton, the U.S. ambassador to the United Nations.
CNN's Suzanne Malveaux, Jamie McIntyre and Barbara Starr contributed to this report.
Re: (Score:2, Funny)
Bush Lies Again (Score:4, Funny)
Just because NKorea is also falsely claiming they're real, doesn't mean that Bush can slander them by agreeing.
Re:Of course they don't (Score:5, Informative)
US has evidence of radioactivity from North Korea [cnn.com]
Re: (Score:2)
Makes me wonder how many corners they cut to get this thing to work. I feel sorry for the people directly involved, even though they are probably better off than the normal N Korean man in the street.
I hope nobody had to go down the hole to play the Major TJ Kong role and (so to speak) ride it in.