kallend 2,027 #26 July 6, 2006 QuoteQuoteQuoteI think the failure of the Taepodong2 is a huge embarrassment to N. Korea. The message they wanted to send is that they are a force in this region to be reckoned with. What they have shown is that they cannot carry off a successful launch even in light of all the saber rattling the past few weeks. For now, they are the laughing stock of the region. It's called a "test". You know, kinda like that thing we do with our expensive missile defenseless system. In case you didn't notice, no one's laughing. It was much more than a simple test. N.K. has been hyping this up for over a week. It was meant to send a message. plain and simple and it failed miserably in that regard. For the culturally challenged, Laughing stock is an expression. I'm guessing if I'd said people were laughing their ass off, you'd claim their asses were still attached to their bodies. Maybe you're not old enough to remember the song kids sang in 1957 (apologies to Perry Como): Catch a falling star and put it in your pocket never let it fade away If you catch a sputnik put it in a box and send it to the USA. I fail to see why this is any more of an embarrassment than our missile defense test failures (even after the tests were rigged), the repeated, televised, failures in 1957 to launch the first US satellite, or the failures of the Ariane. I'll wager the NKs learn a lot from their failure, just like other nations have. That's the way it is with rocket science.... The only sure way to survive a canopy collision is not to have one. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
idrankwhat 0 #27 July 6, 2006 Quote For the culturally challenged, Laughing stock is an expression. I'm guessing if I'd said people were laughing their ass off, you'd claim their asses were still attached to their bodies. No, their sitting on their asses right now trying to figure out how to deal with a very serious issue. But gee, I'd bet those oppressed North Koreans could use some liberation. I wonder why oh why the US isn't interested in "spreading democracy" to the poor, downtrodden citizens of a (resource poor) country that has weapons of mass destruction and is directly threatening the United States and its allies by openly developing and testing ICBM's. This is just one more fuck up for the boy george to add to his collection. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Gravitymaster 0 #28 July 6, 2006 QuoteQuote For the culturally challenged, Laughing stock is an expression. I'm guessing if I'd said people were laughing their ass off, you'd claim their asses were still attached to their bodies. No, their sitting on their asses right now trying to figure out how to deal with a very serious issue. But gee, I'd bet those oppressed North Koreans could use some liberation. I wonder why oh why the US isn't interested in "spreading democracy" to the poor, downtrodden citizens of a (resource poor) country that has weapons of mass destruction and is directly threatening the United States and its allies by openly developing and testing ICBM's. This is just one more fuck up for the boy george to add to his collection. Apparently you know very little about the history of the U.S. dealings with N.Korea regarding nuclear weapons. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
rehmwa 2 #29 July 6, 2006 QuoteThis is just one more fuck up for the boy george to add to his collection. Now the North Koreans failure to successfully launch a missile is GWB's fault. That's precious. ... Driving is a one dimensional activity - a monkey can do it - being proud of your driving abilities is like being proud of being able to put on pants Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
idrankwhat 0 #30 July 6, 2006 Quote Apparently you know very little about the history of the U.S. dealings with N.Korea regarding nuclear weapons. Apparently you're mistaken. But feel free to go on your rant about how it's "all Clinton's fault" and that Bush has dealt with NK in the only rational manner possible using his sound diplomatic policy. (damn, I can't believe I actually put those words in the same sentence without falling out of my chair laughing) But really, why aren't we "liberating"? That's what compassionate conservatism is all about right? Liberation? Pre-emptive self defense? Actually I guess it's not "pre-emptive" any more. Yea, I know I'm taking personal shots at Dubya, but that's because he's failed us in everything he's done. This is just the most recent. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
idrankwhat 0 #31 July 6, 2006 QuoteQuoteThis is just one more fuck up for the boy george to add to his collection. Now the North Koreans failure to successfully launch a missile is GWB's fault. That's precious. Sorry if that's what you read. That's not what I meant. Actually that doesn't make any sense. Take out "failure to successfully launch" and insert "desire to" and I would probably agree. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Michele 1 #32 July 7, 2006 Alarming... New information indicates that the TaePo Dong 2 was aimed at or near Hawaii. Reuters/India/World From the link: "But data from U.S. and Japanese Aegis radar-equipped destroyers and surveillance aircraft on the missile's angle of take-off and altitude indicated that it was heading for waters near Hawaii, the Sankei Shimbun reported, citing multiple sources in the United States and Japan." So. Had it become airborne, what would have happened? Would it have hit the US? Or would we have shot it down? Would this be considered an act of war, whether or not it actually was successful, or because it was unsuccessful, does it "not count"? And considering they now have additional rockets fueled and ready to go, what do we do about it? What does Japan do about it? Ciels- Michele ~Do Angels keep the dreams we seek While our hearts lie bleeding?~ Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
DaVinci 0 #33 July 7, 2006 QuoteSo. Had it become airborne, what would have happened? Would it have hit the US? Or would we have shot it down? Chances are they would have diverted it so as not to nuke Hawaii. But they wanted to show that they could have if they wanted. QuoteWould this be considered an act of war, whether or not it actually was successful, or because it was unsuccessful, does it "not count"? Not an act of war since there was no damage. But there will be some additional pressure since they were trying to prove a point. QuoteAnd considering they now have additional rockets fueled and ready to go, what do we do about it? What does Japan do about it? Well, thats a hard question. They do not want war, they want money and support. I suspect we will give it to them, and they will act like they are going to dismantle their program, but will not. Then the UN will pass resolutions that will be ignored (starting to sound familiar?) At some point a very tense situation will happen. Both sides knowing that they are on the brink of a nuclear war. It will be a new cold war, except this time one person will be an insane dictator. I think if he remains in power he will eventually launch one at Japan. But since he has them, you can't really do anything about it but through politics. I would LOVE for the UN to actually do something about this. But the UN has a history of not doing anything, or not doing very well. Darfur for example. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
champu 1 #34 July 7, 2006 QuoteChances are they would have diverted it so as not to nuke Hawaii. But they wanted to show that they could have if they wanted. I strongly doubt the TD-2 that was launched a couple days ago was carrying a warhead, let alone a nuclear one, if that's what you're suggesting. Crazy? Perhaps. But I don't think they're that stupid. QuoteWell, thats a hard question. They do not want war, they want money and support. I suspect we will give it to them, and they will act like they are going to dismantle their program, but will not. Then the UN will pass resolutions that will be ignored (starting to sound familiar?) At some point a very tense situation will happen. Both sides knowing that they are on the brink of a nuclear war. It will be a new cold war, except this time one person will be an insane dictator. I think if he remains in power he will eventually launch one at Japan. But since he has them, you can't really do anything about it but through politics. I don't see the situation panning out as you describe, but I suppose your guess is as good as mine. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
rehmwa 2 #35 July 7, 2006 Quotethey want money and support. I suspect we will give it to them, and they will act like they are going to dismantle their program, but will not. why not? it worked for them before ... Driving is a one dimensional activity - a monkey can do it - being proud of your driving abilities is like being proud of being able to put on pants Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Andy9o8 2 #36 July 7, 2006 It appears, from what I read in the news yesterday, that neither Russian nor China are going to support economic sanctions against N. Korea. That being the case, I'll bet the N. Koreans believe - and probably with good cause - that they can fire off those missiles with impunity, and publicly tell the world to stick it up their ass if they don't like it. "Whadda youze gonna do about it?" they probably feel. So far, the answer seems to be "Not too much." Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
bch7773 0 #37 July 7, 2006 Quote "Whadda youze gonna do about it?" they probably feel. So far, the answer seems to be "Not too much." I almost wish that we would cut off all food aid to them. Then after they are starving, they can revolt and overthrow Kim. unfortionately that didn't really work on Iraq. So I don't know what we can do. MB 3528, RB 1182 Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
pirana 0 #38 July 7, 2006 QuoteQuoteQuoteI hope we take the North Korean issue at least as seriously as we took the Iraq non-issue. Come on Bill you know they little or no resources in NK.....now if they had OIL.. we would have 500,000 troops there in a heartbeat after pumelling them with shock and awe for a few months first. Um, yeah... how's that "It's all about the oil" working for you at the local gas pumps, anyway? It appears to be working out very well for the guys that got us in this mess, while the average citizen is taking it in the shorts; at the pump for now, and everywhere else to follow. What a shocker!" . . . the lust for power can be just as completely satisfied by suggesting people into loving their servitude as by flogging them and kicking them into obedience." -- Aldous Huxley Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
SkyDekker 1,465 #39 July 7, 2006 QuoteAnd considering they now have additional rockets fueled and ready to go, what do we do about it? What does Japan do about it? Wag their finger at them and say in their best valley girl voice: That is soooo last century? Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
DJL 235 #40 July 7, 2006 Come on guys. He's just a little [urlhttp://www.youtube.com/watch?v=YDuyJrJCKqw]Lonely[/url]."I encourage all awesome dangerous behavior." - Jeffro Fincher Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Kinaa 0 #41 July 9, 2006 Failure? There is a comment in our newspaper that Korea crashed the rockets on purpose (tanks were not full) to avoid bigger crisis if they reach Japan. It sounds pretty logical to me. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
azdiver 0 #42 July 10, 2006 QuoteI find it curious that the White House considers that North Korea is not an immediate threat to the US. They have nuclear weapons and partially working ICBM's; keep in mind the missile made it 40 seconds into its very first test flight. Contrast that to Iraq, which was billed as a grave and gathering threat - the next warning we got "could come in the form of a mushroom cloud." Iraq had no working ICBM's or nuclear weapons, and no programs to produce such. I hope we take the North Korean issue at least as seriously as we took the Iraq non-issue.i think they are taking it as a serious threat, one must remember that nk has one million soldiers sitting on the border waiting for the chance to go over, we currently dont have enough men, munitions in place to stop that from happening if they tried, china is also a problem we dont need to get in a war with china, if we did every one would have to be in the millitary to stop it, or we would have to carpet bomb them with nukes, unlikely to happen. and so far as it goes about their nuke program we dont know if or how many they might actually have. iraq on the other hand we new had them, 500 chemical war heads were found in iraq, buried in the desert. as for why we were not told about this sooner. my guess is that they didnt want the terrorist looking for them to use against us troops, say their wasnt any to keep them from looking makes good sense to me. sadam had already used wmd's. proof to the world that he would do it againlight travels faster than sound, that's why some people appear to be bright until you hear them speak Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
nanook 1 #43 July 10, 2006 Fixed it. . . Lonely Funny stuff_____________________________ "The trouble with quotes on the internet is that you can never know if they are genuine" - Abraham Lincoln Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Michele 1 #44 July 10, 2006 Quotei think they are taking it as a serious threat, one must remember that nk has one million soldiers sitting on the border waiting for the chance to go over, we currently dont have enough men, munitions in place to stop that from happening if they tried, china is also a problem we dont need to get in a war with china, if we did every one would have to be in the millitary to stop it, or we would have to carpet bomb them with nukes, unlikely to happen. and so far as it goes about their nuke program we dont know if or how many they might actually have. iraq on the other hand we new had them, 500 chemical war heads were found in iraq, buried in the desert. as for why we were not told about this sooner. my guess is that they didnt want the terrorist looking for them to use against us troops, say their wasnt any to keep them from looking makes good sense to me. sadam had already used wmd's. proof to the world that he would do it again Interesting. I think, in addition to your comments, that there is also the fact that in Iraq, Sadam had violated many of the "cease-fire" conditions, was shooting at our planes, and was in violation of quite a few of the UN sanctions...and that made it easier to go into Iraq. We don't have quite that footing in regards to NK, at least not at this time. And that is a pretty big footing to not have. My newest concern is if the UN sanctions NK (but two of the 5 permanent members of the UN Security Council won't agree) in any way which restricts their ability to procure cash, the idea of selling some of the nukes to other..."less desireable" groups/countries might just occur to Il. And he's nutty enough to do that, too. It's an interesting, difficult and dangerous problem the world faces - I hope we find the way through this before the shit hits the fan...but I don't hold out too much hope - the Korean culture can be very dogmatic and righteous, and Kim Jong Il doesn't seem to have a firm grasp on reality. Sigh... Ciels- Michele ~Do Angels keep the dreams we seek While our hearts lie bleeding?~ Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Misternatural 0 #45 July 10, 2006 Japans response to the missile tests; yeah well I hope your next one is all fizzy too! and..Elvis lives! " All this aggravation ain't satisfactioning me"Beware of the collateralizing and monetization of your desires. D S #3.1415 Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
billvon 3,006 #46 July 10, 2006 >i think they are taking it as a serious threat . . . . I hope so. One good sign is that they are taking a diplomatic approach very seriously, and enlisting other countries to help them push such a solution through. The US alone can't stop NK, but the rest of the world might. >iraq on the other hand we new had them, 500 chemical war heads >were found in iraq, buried in the desert. Right, we found a lot of empty shells. They just didn't have any real WMD's in them. We know he HAD WMD's; we sold them to him. But there were no usable WMD's in his country when we invaded, as both the White House and the CIA now admit. (Rather than turn this into another thread about Iraq's missing WMD's, perhaps a Yahoo News search on the topic might be more fruitful.) Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Misternatural 0 #47 July 10, 2006 I have recently had a discussion with a rocket engineer about the use of laser devices to disable missiles in flight,yes I know this smacks of the Star Wars rhetoric of the reagan era. BUT now the guidance technology has caught up to the delivery technology ie mirrors that can flex focus with the use of nano coatings. Plus computer guidance systems which can calculate the focus point of contact on a missile travelling at multiple mach speed. Imagine that only a small hole is needed in the engine section to cause a total missile failure.. Talk about erectile dysfunction for missile deployed weapons. That my friends is what I call a promising future. By the time the N Koreans have a viable weapons program this defense system may already be in place. "hey they have the internet on computers now" H SimpsonBeware of the collateralizing and monetization of your desires. D S #3.1415 Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
azdiver 0 #48 July 10, 2006 according to news i had heard and the declassifeid docs just released the 500 shells they found were full some containing mustard gas and the rest had serine gas in them and were ready for use. if i can find the linkagain or web page i will post it and u can then decide for your selflight travels faster than sound, that's why some people appear to be bright until you hear them speak Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
DaVinci 0 #49 July 15, 2006 QuoteI strongly doubt the TD-2 that was launched a couple days ago was carrying a warhead, let alone a nuclear one, if that's what you're suggesting. Crazy? Perhaps. But I don't think they're that stupid. Oh I don't think they had a warhead. I think they were just trying to prove they could do it. QuoteI don't see the situation panning out as you describe, but I suppose your guess is as good as mine. I think that Kim on hie death bed will try and launch one. I hope that no one lets him. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
