Thread: Is North Koreas time up..?

^ Can't your voice your opinion without being so insulting, PT?

You sound like nurse Bob...

Loo is one of the few nice guys here, he doesn't deserve that tirade of abuse.

(irregardless if he's wrong, or right)...

my turn now lol...

^ He's an unbearable twat but were he to avoid posting atrocious bollocks, there would be no need to be rude to him.

Originally Posted by NZdick1983

Loo is one of the few nice guys here, he doesn't deserve that tirade of abuse.

Thanks you Dickie I do try to be a nice fella.

And as for that PT he is an utter cock-throttling COOOOOOONT and he can FOOOOOK OFFF!!!

Originally Posted by Passing Through

the major nuclear powers are maintaining and upgrading their nuclear weapons systems and that is that.

The upgrading systems to maintain the existing arsenal.

But, tellingly they are not testing new bombs and building bigger more destructive ones with new capabilities.

Only NK is doing this.

Nuclear development is in stasis with the world leading powers while they figure out how to go about a reduction.

You have not responded to my explanation of why reduction is the only logical goal of western nations...

You have not responded to my explanation of why reduction is the only logical goal of western nations...

Haven't I? My apologies. You're continuing to talk out of your singularly uninformed arse and there is pretty much zero reason to think that anyone in power shares you beliefs.

Nuclear development is in stasis

This is just completely untrue. You seem to think that you can deduce some set of facts about the progress of the modernization and upgrade of nuclear stockpiles based on a set of assumptions made by you in the absence of any knowledge of what the fuck any country is actually doing. Your posts are beyond absurd. Either you're a troll or you really do have the intelligence of a mollusk, but either way, there's not really much point taking this any further.

Originally Posted by Looper

Only NK is doing this.

They are testing missiles. Same as other countries do. Of course their missiles can carry nukes, as the missiles of others can...

if you had to give a percentage of this mess turning into an armed conflict with more than 1000 casualties, what would it be?

right now i'd put it at ~20%. certainly more than one in ten, but not quite one in four.

the US flying bombers over the peninsula while generals and senators are talking about the possibility of war is beyond concerning. and god only knows what the north korean response would be if the US/south koreans intercepts one of these missiles.

this issue is not getting the attention it deserves....yet.

Originally Posted by Klondyke

Originally Posted by Looper

Only NK is doing this.

They are testing missiles. Same as other countries do. Of course their missiles can carry nukes, as the missiles of others can...

No that is not correct. NK is in the process of developing a new nuclear capability where they previously had none.

They are attempting to become a nuclear armed country.

That behaviour has to stamped on.

Not just because KJU is unhinged and dangerous but to set an example to the world that such attempts at dragging the denuclearisation drive backwards will not be tolerated.

Originally Posted by Passing Through

This is just completely untrue.

It is true.

The hey-day of western nuclear weapons research was during the cold war. Nowadays existing technology is just kept in maintenance mode. There is no ongoing program of research into building larger and more devastating nuclear weaponry despite such research being easily within our technical capability.

The reason that the brakes have been put on is that the strategic balance of threat has changed. The west cannot use nukes to credibly threaten anyone (due to being an accountable democracy) but the west can very credibly be threatened by nukes in the hands of less civilised organisations.

Nuclear weapons are of no use to western countries now as we have more to lose than the less civilised countries so the net global nuclear threat is now tilted against the west.

Denuclearisation is the only rational goal for the civilised world.

North Korea's night lights show improving economy despite sanctions
Published July 31, 2017 Fox News

A new report from South Korea’s government-run Korea Development Institute includes satellite imagery showing that North Korea’s nighttime lighting conditions improved from 2002 to 2012.

The images also show there was more light seen in areas surrounding the North Korea capital than in 2002.

"The change in the luminous intensity of North Korea shows that the North Korean economy made a turnaround in mid-2000," the report said.

As it happens, 2016 was a banner year for the North Korean economy, according to the Bank of Korea in Seoul. The North’s economy grew 3.9 percent last year, according to bank researchers. That was the fastest pace in 17 years.

Exports to China of coal and other minerals fueled the faster rate of growth. But those exports have reportedly taken a hit this year with Beijing apparently making good on a promise to President Trump to reduce those exports amid the North Korean nuclear crisis.

Even though jet fuel was one of five items banned by the United Nations, Beijing’s export of jet fuel to Pyongyang increased 18.3 percent in the first half of 2017.

The Korea Information Society Development Institute reported last month there were 3.24 million mobile phone users in North Korea in 2015, the latest data available, up from 69,261 in 2009, when the North first allowed ordinary citizens to use mobile phones.

More cars are said to be clogging Pyongyang streets, and diplomats report a denser skyline from just a few years ago. The elites are reportedly shopping on Amazon.com and enjoying a new ski resort and luxury hotel near the capital.

"I am very disappointed in China," Trump wrote, "...they do NOTHING for us with North Korea, just talk. We will no longer allow this to continue. China could easily solve this problem!"

That tweet came as US Air Force B-1B bombers flew over the peninsula, in the latest Trump administration effort to show that the sanctions are indeed backed up by a potential military deterrent.

North Korea's night lights show improving economy despite sanctions | Fox News

^
(I am confused, who to believe to?)

North Korea: US not seeking regime change, says Rex Tillerson

The US government is not seeking a regime change in North Korea, the secretary of state says, amid tensions over Pyongyang's weapons programme.
"We're not your enemy," Rex Tillerson said, adding that the US wanted a dialogue at some point.

But a Republican senator said President Donald Trump had told him there would be a war with North Korea if its missile programme continued.

North Korea: US not seeking regime change, says Rex Tillerson - BBC News

Originally Posted by Klondyke

A new report from South Korea’s government-run Korea Development Institute includes satellite imagery showing that North Korea’s nighttime lighting conditions improved from 2002 to 2012.

Fatboy probably cracked on to the night light econo-metric and set up some fake lights to bluff his way a little bit further.

Originally Posted by Klondyke

But a Republican senator said President Donald Trump had told him there would be a war with North Korea if its missile programme continued.

Why not just evacuate Seoul as part of the strategy. Expensive sure but worth while if the war is gonna happen. It would send a message that the US is serious.

Fatboy will shit his trousers if he thinks it is on.

He might even capitulate without a shot being fired.

Tillerson Forced to Clarify US Policy (Again) After Nikki Haley Demands North Korean Pancakes


Haley was previously reprimanded for announcing on television that the United States was seeking regime change in Syria at the exact same time that her supposed boss, Rex Tillerson, was telling the press the exact opposite.

But it appears Nikki is still struggling to control her passion for unnecessary, inaccurate statements that will probably get us all killed. For example, here is her latest Security Council statement about North Korea:

Yes, America is taking a stand against North Korea: "The time for talk is over". Bold. Decisive. Suicidal. This is the Nikki Haley that everyone knows and despises.

Is the time for talk "over", though? Not according to the Secretary of State, who made the exact opposite claim a day later because he probably realizes what "the time for talk is over" would actually mean:
Washington does not seek regime change in North Korea and at some point would like to have a dialogue with Pyongyang to de-escalate the tensions on the peninsula, US Secretary of State Rex Tillerson has said.

“We do not seek a regime change; we do not seek the collapse of the regime; we do not seek an accelerated reunification of the peninsula; we do not seek an excuse to send our military north of the 38th parallel,” Tillerson told reporters Tuesday in Washington DC.

“We would like to sit and have a dialogue with them about the future that will give them the security they seek and the future economic prosperity for North Korea,” Tillerson said.

Tillerson Forced to Clarify US Policy (Again) After Nikki Haley Demands North Korean Pancakes

^Is that a special style of pancakes?

Fatboy?

Double maple syrup?

Bacon?

Originally Posted by Looper

The hey-day of western nuclear weapons research was during the cold war. Nowadays existing technology is just kept in maintenance mode. There is no ongoing program of research into building larger and more devastating nuclear weaponry despite such research being easily within our technical capability..

Denuclearisation is the only rational goal for the civilised world.

You obviously know very little about this subject, so let me give you an insight from a UK perspective.

The UK's Trident nuclear warheads are designed ,manufactured, and built here AWE and are subsequently assembled into Lockheed Martin supplied Trident D5 nuclear missiles at Faslane in Scotland.

AWE employs circa 10,000 people across these two sites, and using such facilities as this Orion laser facility | AWE

The Aldermaston site is constantly carrying out research and development into new weapon systems, investigating how to miniaturist weapon systems, improve efficiency of yield, carry out theoretical research into pure fusion weapons, carry out full scale detonation of stimulant fission stage of weapon systems and record the results with high speed x-ray photography, use of super computers to analyse code recorded from UGT tests in the Nevada desert (prior to the CTBT), investigating and developing new manufacturing capabilities for future weapon systems.

Research effort is also expended on the production of components that are sourced from the US, should it ever be needed.

In fact every avenue of research into design and manufacture you can possibly imagine is taking place (just short of producing a working weapon system) at these locations, after all you don't need 10,000 people just to maintain the Trident warheads.

You can read more about here Home page | Nuclear Information Service

Also google the term JOWOG to see how the UK collaborates with its US equivalent.

Originally Posted by Listerman

just short of producing a working weapon system

So not actually producing new nuclear weapons systems.

I am sure the UK and US carry out research to keep up to date on what is possible.

But it is not very likely that the strategic plan of western countries is in the direction of expanding nuclear weapons capability in terms of actually building bigger and more powerful nuclear weapons.

They are simply not a credible threat coming from civilised countries. The stigma of nuclear weapons is so great that even in situations when small tactical nuclear weapons are the best choice (e.g. bunker busting cave systems in Afghanistan) the US still opts not to use them and to use conventional explosives instead.

The threat is tilted entirely against the west when it comes to nooks which is why the long term game plan has to be reduction and elimination.

Originally Posted by DrB0b

That's because that's 1950's thinking. Nobody needs multi-megaton monsters anymore. Current plans are for developing smaller tactical nuclear weapons rather than strategic city-busters.

Meh. Maybe they are dabbling in keeping an up to date capability in battlefield tactical weapons (even though they never use them even when they are the best option due to the stigma)

But they are not building bigger and bolder ICBM systems.

But KJU is building a new system of full on 20-30 Kiloton ICBMs which are the MAD type of weapon.

The weapons MAD was designed for have outlived their usefulness since the end of the cold war.

No civilised countries are trying to expand their MAD capability.

The type of weapon used for the MAD scenario is nothing less than liability for the civilised world now.

Any country like NK trying to develop a new capability to try and re-ignite the MAD game needs to be stopped in its tracks.

Their supposed justification is a nonsense. They are not living in the real world if they think the US or the west has any interest in invading them and changing their regime except for the very fact that they are engaging in this enormously dangerous enterprise with nuclear weapons.

Why would we be interested in these anachronistic minnows except for there berserk nuclear program?

NK must be stopped.

Originally Posted by Looper

But KJU is building a new system of full on 20-30 Kiloton ICBMs which are the MAD type of weapon

Wrong again!

Anything under 100KT is considered in military parlance as tactical.

Hiroshima was 40KT, and a Trident D5 missile can have up to 8 off 80KT MIRVed warheads.

Originally Posted by Looper

Maybe they are dabbling in keeping an up to date capability in battlefield tactical weapons

Wrong again!

This type of weapon system is already in the US arsenal, with yields of typically under 10KT

Originally Posted by Looper

No civilised countries are trying to expand their MAD capability.

So do you include Israel in that assessment?

Originally Posted by Looper

NK must be stopped.

But that is just the problem is'nt it? Whatever you may think of the NK leadership, they know that by having a credible nuclear warhead and and ICBM to go with it, despite all the bluster from Trump and co, nothing will come of it. Hence the breakneck speed of the development of ICBM's seen of late.

Just look at Pakistan as another prime example, despite years of terrorist activities directed at America from organisations within Pakistan that are allowed by the Pakistan government to continue to exist, have you ever heard America threaten to invade Pakistan and take out the leadership? No because they have a very credible nuclear deterrent.

Originally Posted by Listerman

This type of weapon system is already in the US arsenal, with yields of typically under 10KT

Yes I know they already have battlefield nooks. I was referring to the smaller nooks for use on the battlefield when I said tactical. Maybe the technical kilotonage can include bigger nooks under the tactical umbrella and maybe I should have used the term 'battlefield' rather than tactical.

Originally Posted by Listerman

So do you include Israel in that assessment?

Well I do, yes. Although they are not such an immediate short term worry as NK.

Originally Posted by Listerman

But that is just the problem is'nt it? Whatever you may think of the NK leadership, they know that by having a credible nuclear warhead and and ICBM to go with it

Well it is indeed the problem.

Various nations have acquired nuclear capabilities since the cold war for various reasons. But none of them behave with the psychotic belligerence of NK.

I don't think the world can afford to let these fruitcakes have nooks.

I think it is time to bust a cap in fatboy's ass.

Originally Posted by Listerman

Just look at Pakistan as another prime example, despite years of terrorist activities directed at America from organisations within Pakistan that are allowed by the Pakistan government to continue to exist, have you ever heard America threaten to invade Pakistan and take out the leadership? No because they have a very credible nuclear deterrent.

Well Pakistan is a different kettle of fish. Their main belligerent is India. For the US, on the scale of friend and foe when it comes to Islamic nations, Pakistan is probably towards the friendly end.

Originally Posted by Looper

Well Pakistan is a different kettle of fish. Their main belligerent is India. For the US, on the scale of friend and foe when it comes to Islamic nations, Pakistan is probably towards the friendly end.
[at] [at]

Any weaponry stockpile does not matter. Only what matters is whether the country's leader is classified as a "dictator"...

^Well I think unhinged bellicose rhetoric would be a good initial criterion for deciding that a regime is not going to be allowed to play with the big boys toys.

They are beggars in a region of advanced economies.

They cannot be allowed to use nuclear weapons to leverage advantage over civilised non-nuclear economically advanced neighbours.

Originally Posted by Looper

The stigma of nuclear weapons is so great that even in situations when small tactical nuclear weapons are the best choice (e.g. bunker busting cave systems in Afghanistan) the US still opts not to use them and to use conventional explosives instead.

Stigma?

What about the nuclear fallout and shit?