October 08, 2006
North Koreans Test Nuke: Another Triumph of Diplomacy
From the Associated Press:
Comments are disabled.
Post is locked.
SEOUL, South Korea - North Korea said Monday it has performed its first-ever nuclear weapons test.You just can't negotiate with maniacs.U.S. and South Korean officials could not immediately confirm the report.
The North’s official Korean Central News Agency said the underground test was performed successfully and there was no radioactive leakage from the site.
South Korean intelligence officials said a seismic wave of magnitude-3.58 had been detected in North Hamkyung province, according to Yonhap. It said the test was conducted at 10:36 a.m. (9:36 p.m. EDT Sunday) in Hwaderi near Kilju city on the northeast coast, citing defense officials.
Via Jay at Stop the ACLU, who has a roundup of reactions.
Posted by: Bluto at
10:05 PM
| Comments (22)
| Add Comment
Post contains 123 words, total size 1 kb.
1
Thanks Clinton, madam half-Brite, you did us proud.
Going to make some terror group one really big suicide truck bomb. Where is the next one going to be set off?
Going to make some terror group one really big suicide truck bomb. Where is the next one going to be set off?
Posted by: bill at October 08, 2006 10:18 PM (7evkT)
2
Thanks, Roosevelt, for signing the Yalta Agreement, creating North Korea in the first place.
Thanks, Truman, for firing MacArthur.
Thanks, Eisenhower, for the cease-fire.
Every single administration since Kim Il Sung sent his troops over the border gets the blame for this one.
Thanks, Truman, for firing MacArthur.
Thanks, Eisenhower, for the cease-fire.
Every single administration since Kim Il Sung sent his troops over the border gets the blame for this one.
Posted by: Vinnie at October 09, 2006 01:03 AM (/qy9A)
Posted by: Darth Vag at October 09, 2006 01:30 AM (HSkSw)
4
According to Cheney's 1% doctrine, we should have invaded North Korea a long time ago as a pre-emptive defense. They have WMD, they would probably side with terrorists, and they are openly beligerant towards the US. What gives?
Oh that's right. They don't have any oil. I guess to be fair, it's not like Bush has had 6 years to do anything about it. He was too busy breaking Reagan's record for taking the most vacation time of any president in history.
Rice in '08? Yes, please!
Oh that's right. They don't have any oil. I guess to be fair, it's not like Bush has had 6 years to do anything about it. He was too busy breaking Reagan's record for taking the most vacation time of any president in history.
Rice in '08? Yes, please!
Posted by: Rhyleh at October 09, 2006 03:04 AM (Q+ifs)
5
There is still time to kick Kim Il-Jung in the balls !
North Korean commies will soon taste defeat, courtesy of the much maligned military-industrial complex !
Don't you worry your little pacifist-loving ass !
It is time for peace on the Korean peninsula. But first, there must be red hot war.
North Korean commies will soon taste defeat, courtesy of the much maligned military-industrial complex !
Don't you worry your little pacifist-loving ass !
It is time for peace on the Korean peninsula. But first, there must be red hot war.
Posted by: Darth Vag at October 09, 2006 03:16 AM (HSkSw)
Posted by: Rhyleh at October 09, 2006 04:03 AM (Q+ifs)
7
Thanks Clinton, madam half-Brite, you did us proud.
This is just old. Clinton and Albright have not been in power for SIX YEARS!
So, what's been going on that past six years to stop this? Please, I want to know.
I'll wait.
This is just old. Clinton and Albright have not been in power for SIX YEARS!
So, what's been going on that past six years to stop this? Please, I want to know.
I'll wait.
Posted by: David (SNAFU Principle) at October 09, 2006 08:29 AM (YkghQ)
8
" He was too busy breaking Reagan's record for taking the most vacation time of any president in history. "
And during war-time to boot! Fore! L o ~~~~~~~~~~~ O 7
And during war-time to boot! Fore! L o ~~~~~~~~~~~ O 7
Posted by: Last gasp Larry at October 09, 2006 11:37 AM (Dd86v)
9
Larry, you're pathetic. Your last gasp can't come too soon for me. Not your death, mind you, just your last gasp on this blog.
Posted by: jesusland joe at October 09, 2006 11:42 AM (rUyw4)
10
Rhyleh:
Did I miss the part in your "1% doctrine" article, that says exclusively, military action is the only course for the solution?
Are you now suggesting Military action is now needed now that all the diplomatic channels are closed? or do you want to sit round the table with Kim and buy him off as a solution?
If you want to identify the policy as failing, surely you can point to a better one, right?
Did I miss the part in your "1% doctrine" article, that says exclusively, military action is the only course for the solution?
Are you now suggesting Military action is now needed now that all the diplomatic channels are closed? or do you want to sit round the table with Kim and buy him off as a solution?
If you want to identify the policy as failing, surely you can point to a better one, right?
Posted by: davec at October 09, 2006 12:14 PM (QkWqQ)
11
Of course not, military action should always be a last resort. However, the consensus among the 6 nations involved in the talks is that the US needs to engage in a series of one-on-one talks with North Korea. However, for some unexplained reason, the Bush administration has refused to engage in these talks, insisting that 6-way talking be the only way.
I find that obstinance confusing, as we are simply talking about diplomatic conferencing. My suggestion would be to 1) engage in one-on-one talks, 2) coordinate a regional security policy with the other regional players, especially China, 3) send money and arms to N. Korean democrats and subversives and 4) increase our intelligence surveillance in the region by training up more translators and field agents.
Of course right now the policy has been to ignore the N. Korea propblem altogether, which as I understand it completely goes against the 1% doctrine.
I find that obstinance confusing, as we are simply talking about diplomatic conferencing. My suggestion would be to 1) engage in one-on-one talks, 2) coordinate a regional security policy with the other regional players, especially China, 3) send money and arms to N. Korean democrats and subversives and 4) increase our intelligence surveillance in the region by training up more translators and field agents.
Of course right now the policy has been to ignore the N. Korea propblem altogether, which as I understand it completely goes against the 1% doctrine.
Posted by: Rhyleh at October 09, 2006 03:29 PM (Q+ifs)
12
1.) We have already negotiated with them directly, it has put us in this situation.
On October 12, 1994, the United States and North Korea signed the "Agreed Framework": North Korea agreed to freeze its plutonium production program in exchange for fuel oil, economic cooperation, and the construction of two modern light-water nuclear power plants. Eventually, North Korea's existing nuclear facilities were to be dismantled, and the spent reactor fuel taken out of the country.
On August 31, 1998 North Korea launched a modified Taepodong-1 missile in a launch attempt of its Kwangmyŏngsŏng satellite. US Military analysts suspect satellite launch is a ruse for the testing of an ICBM. This missile flew over Japan causing the Japanese government to retract 1 billion in aid for two civilian light-water reactors.
14 November: US President George W Bush declares November oil shipments to the North will be the last if the North does not agree to put a halt to its weapons ambitions.
They didn't, so there ended their aid, how stupid do you have to be to think you can talk your way out of a situation, when you're being blackmailed with a Nuclear device?
2
China? -- They have routinely denied sanctions, along with Russia, you're really stretching here.
3
Arming subversives, kind of how Reagan shipped arms and money to the ISI? the irony runs thick.
4
To what end? we already knew they were going to test before they did? we knew before they launched the test missle, I mean what more will intelligence do, you're talking about buying him off, or talking -- what does intelligence do? mixed messages much?
The policy is to ignore blackmail, which has pushed him to the point of desperation, and humiliation as weapon after weapon program shows sign of failure.
On October 12, 1994, the United States and North Korea signed the "Agreed Framework": North Korea agreed to freeze its plutonium production program in exchange for fuel oil, economic cooperation, and the construction of two modern light-water nuclear power plants. Eventually, North Korea's existing nuclear facilities were to be dismantled, and the spent reactor fuel taken out of the country.
On August 31, 1998 North Korea launched a modified Taepodong-1 missile in a launch attempt of its Kwangmyŏngsŏng satellite. US Military analysts suspect satellite launch is a ruse for the testing of an ICBM. This missile flew over Japan causing the Japanese government to retract 1 billion in aid for two civilian light-water reactors.
14 November: US President George W Bush declares November oil shipments to the North will be the last if the North does not agree to put a halt to its weapons ambitions.
They didn't, so there ended their aid, how stupid do you have to be to think you can talk your way out of a situation, when you're being blackmailed with a Nuclear device?
2
China? -- They have routinely denied sanctions, along with Russia, you're really stretching here.
3
Arming subversives, kind of how Reagan shipped arms and money to the ISI? the irony runs thick.
4
To what end? we already knew they were going to test before they did? we knew before they launched the test missle, I mean what more will intelligence do, you're talking about buying him off, or talking -- what does intelligence do? mixed messages much?
The policy is to ignore blackmail, which has pushed him to the point of desperation, and humiliation as weapon after weapon program shows sign of failure.
Posted by: davec at October 09, 2006 04:24 PM (QkWqQ)
13
1. "...how stupid do you have to be to think you can talk your way out of a
situation, when you're being blackmailed with a Nuclear device?" As my answer pointed out, I never said that I would isolate our response to diplomacy. How stupid are you for not realizing that?
2. Obviously China and Russia will continue to enable N. Korea until we are able to convince them of our intentions in the region. N. Korea is really just a proxy of China; if we can make security assurances to the Chinese, that will influence their support for N. Korea. Any decision on N. Korea must be preceeded with a decision about our policy on China, particularly the Taiwan issue.
3. Arming subversives as a foreign policy tool is not an inherently anti-liberal position, the issue is screening who gets the weapons. For example, arming the Mujahadeen against the Soviets was very short sighted, as was backing Saddam against Iran. Arming nationalist democrats in North Korea is not necessarily bad, it depends largely on who we choose to represent us.
4. What does more intelligence do? It arms us with more information with which to neutralize the potential threat. If you honestly don't see how that could be advantageous, there's little point in continuing the conversation.
situation, when you're being blackmailed with a Nuclear device?" As my answer pointed out, I never said that I would isolate our response to diplomacy. How stupid are you for not realizing that?
2. Obviously China and Russia will continue to enable N. Korea until we are able to convince them of our intentions in the region. N. Korea is really just a proxy of China; if we can make security assurances to the Chinese, that will influence their support for N. Korea. Any decision on N. Korea must be preceeded with a decision about our policy on China, particularly the Taiwan issue.
3. Arming subversives as a foreign policy tool is not an inherently anti-liberal position, the issue is screening who gets the weapons. For example, arming the Mujahadeen against the Soviets was very short sighted, as was backing Saddam against Iran. Arming nationalist democrats in North Korea is not necessarily bad, it depends largely on who we choose to represent us.
4. What does more intelligence do? It arms us with more information with which to neutralize the potential threat. If you honestly don't see how that could be advantageous, there's little point in continuing the conversation.
Posted by: Rhyleh at October 09, 2006 07:08 PM (Q+ifs)
14
I never said that I would isolate our response to diplomacy.
1. Which one of these drops the non-diplomacy hammer?
1) engage in one-on-one talks
2) coordinate a regional security policy with the other regional players, especially China,
3) send money and arms to N. Korean democrats and subversives and
4) increase our intelligence surveillance in the region by training up more translators and field agents.
Surprise! China does not care what the U.S wants! see Sudan, See Iran for more of the same blocking of every proposal just like with North Korea.
There never is a way to screen who you're arming, especially using proxies as we did with the ISI -- further I think arming people for an insurrection might break the armistice agreement, don't you think?
What more intelligence do you want? as a media consumer you've already found out ahead of time that intelligence said they would test a intercontinental Missile, and a Nuclear weapon -- just imagine what they withhold? also all the intelligence in the world means nothing,if you do nothing meaningful with it.
I never said that I would isolate our response to diplomacy.
1. Which one of these drops the non-diplomacy hammer?
1) engage in one-on-one talks
2) coordinate a regional security policy with the other regional players, especially China,
3) send money and arms to N. Korean democrats and subversives and
4) increase our intelligence surveillance in the region by training up more translators and field agents.
Surprise! China does not care what the U.S wants! see Sudan, See Iran for more of the same blocking of every proposal just like with North Korea.
There never is a way to screen who you're arming, especially using proxies as we did with the ISI -- further I think arming people for an insurrection might break the armistice agreement, don't you think?
What more intelligence do you want? as a media consumer you've already found out ahead of time that intelligence said they would test a intercontinental Missile, and a Nuclear weapon -- just imagine what they withhold? also all the intelligence in the world means nothing,if you do nothing meaningful with it.
Posted by: davec at October 09, 2006 07:22 PM (QkWqQ)
15
Why JJ! Shouldn't you be out on the green following the lead of your fearless leader? Pretending that everything is not a screw-up and somehow the world will set itself in right during your 5-week war-time vacation? Fore! L o ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ O7
Posted by: Last gasp Larry at October 09, 2006 07:28 PM (Dd86v)
16
Nah, Larry, on my 5-week vacation I've been on the shooting range sharpening my skills with the Socom II, and in the woods putting up deer stands and scouting out deer trails and deer movement patterns. I have a feeling this guncraft and woodcraft will come in handy pretty soon. I have also recently bought a generator, a large supply of MRE's, a shitpot full of ammunition, gas masks, antibiotics, Tamiflu, medical masks and a few other things that are none of your business. I don't play golf.
Posted by: jesusland joe at October 09, 2006 09:57 PM (rUyw4)
17
A real Davy Crockett, heh JJ? Maybe you should take up golf. Might be good for your paranoid schizophrenia and delusions of grandeur ..... Fore! L o ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ O 7
Posted by: Last gasp Larry at October 10, 2006 01:14 AM (Dd86v)
18
Damn! Why won't the spacing come out right? ................................ Fore! L o ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ O 7
Posted by: Last gasp Larry at October 10, 2006 01:16 AM (Dd86v)
19
my guess: you're a moron.
Posted by: davec at October 10, 2006 01:33 AM (QkWqQ)
20
Rice in 2008. Ha, ha. You've got to be kidding. Thats sick. Better Al Sharpton. At least we know what he stands for.
Posted by: Greyrooster at October 10, 2006 05:09 AM (xJ3Xm)
21
Jesusland Joe: How long do MRE's last? I know where there is a storage unit full of them. I recommend Cipro as antibiotic. Expensive as hell though. $980.00 for 120 caps, unless you know how to get it discounted. Maybe Mexico? But could you trust it to be the real thing? Haven't checked on Canada.
Posted by: Greyrooster at October 10, 2006 05:14 AM (xJ3Xm)
22
Don't forget tincture of iodine or betadine solution, if you haven't purchased Potassium Iodide pills (expensive) it will still protect from thyroid cancer from radioactive iodine, if used topically on your forearm / abdomen.
Posted by: davec at October 10, 2006 12:55 PM (QkWqQ)
43kb generated in CPU 0.0132, elapsed 0.0761 seconds.
34 queries taking 0.0682 seconds, 177 records returned.
Powered by Minx 1.1.6c-pink.
34 queries taking 0.0682 seconds, 177 records returned.
Powered by Minx 1.1.6c-pink.
