NK Nukes
  • NunesNunes June 2009
    North Korea to Launch Photoshop a Nuke Clump of Yellowcake at Hawaii The Middle of the Pacific Ocean in July

    I've been waiting to see if more was going to come out than a bunch of rehashes of the original Japanese article, which I barely trust.

    QUOTE
    The missile, believed to be a Taepodong-2...

    Nothing to worry about, but NK is still rattling sabers, which is ghey.

    Edit:
    QUOTE
    The missile launch could come between July 4 and 8

    If you were thinking about getting me something for my birthday, an embarrassed NK leadership would be pretty sweet.
  • ScabdatesScabdates June 2009
    Among the list of things that scare me more than a nuclear North Korea:

    - Spiders
    - The dark
    - Minorities
    - Bacon
  • I think Kim Jong-il should stop talking big. America has a new style. America will not hesitate to attack anyone that "threatens" its security. I believe that an actual threat would lead to a lot of damage to NK.
  • GovernorGovernor June 2009
    That has been America's style for a very long time, Jedd.
  • romerashromerash June 2009
    OK so let me get this straight

    It's OK for the US to have the largest arsenal of nuclear weapons in the world, but not OK for another country to have one to defend itself?
  • NunesNunes June 2009
    QUOTE (romerash @ Jun 19 2009, 10:05 AM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}>
    OK so let me get this straight

    It's OK for the US to have the largest arsenal of nuclear weapons in the world, but not OK for another country to have one to defend itself?


    Yep. You seem to understand the thinking.

    /NK isn't getting them to 'defend themselves', or probably even attack somebody for reals.
    //It's probably just dick waving.

  • QUOTE (romerash @ Jun 19 2009, 10:05 AM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}>
    OK so let me get this straight

    It's OK for the US to have the largest arsenal of nuclear weapons in the world, but not OK for another country to have one to defend itself?


    Does defending itself include launching nuclear weapons at Hawaii?

    QUOTE (governor)
    That has been America's style for a very long time, Jedd.


    Sadly. But now we are wearing it on our sleeve. We're not even making shit up to lead us into the war (like Vietnam).
  • NunesNunes June 2009
    QUOTE (Jedd @ Jun 19 2009, 11:23 AM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}>
    Does defending itself include launching nuclear weapons at Hawaii?



    Sadly. But now we are wearing it on our sleeve. We're not even making shit up to lead us into the war (like Vietnam).


    QUOTE
    "I have deep concerns about the election," he said yesterday at the White House, when he finally did find his voice. "When I see violence directed at peaceful protestors, when I see peaceful dissent being suppressed, wherever that takes place, it is of concern to me and it's of concern to the American people."


    QUOTE
    "North Korea will not find security and respect through threats and illegal weapons," the president said. "We will work with our friends and allies to stand up to this behavior. The United States will never waver from our determination to protect our people and the peace and security of the world."


    QUOTE
    to prevent regimes (terrorist) that sponsor terror from threatening America or our friends and allies with weapons of mass destruction. Some of these regimes have been pretty quiet since September the 11th. But we know their true nature. North Korea is a regime arming with missiles and weapons of mass destruction, while starving its citizens. Iran aggressively pursues these weapons and exports terror, while an unelected few repress the Iranian people's hope for freedom. Iraq continues to flaunt its hostility toward America and to support terror. The Iraqi regime has plotted to develop anthrax, and nerve gas, and nuclear weapons for over a decade. This is a regime that has already used poison gas to murder thousands of its own citizens—leaving the bodies of mothers huddled over their dead children. This is a regime that agreed to international inspections—then kicked out the inspectors. This is a regime that has something to hide from the civilized world. States like these, and their terrorist allies, constitute an axis of evil, arming to threaten the peace of the world. By seeking weapons of mass destruction, these regimes pose a grave and growing danger. They could provide these arms to terrorists, giving them the means to match their hatred. They could attack our allies or attempt to blackmail the United States. In any of these cases, the price of indifference would be catastrophic.


    [hum]
    *one of these things is not like the others*
    *one of these things just doesn't belong*
    [/hum]
  • romerashromerash June 2009
    why the hell would it nuke hawaii, how is hawaii of any use to them, besides ... your country is the only one in the world that launched a nuclear missile. Sure if you want NK to get rid of them, then get rid of yours too and make the world clean
  • ScabdatesScabdates June 2009
    QUOTE (romerash @ Jun 20 2009, 09:51 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}>
    why the hell would it nuke hawaii, how is hawaii of any use to them, besides ... your country is the only one in the world that launched a nuclear missile. Sure if you want NK to get rid of them, then get rid of yours too and make the world clean


    who are you talking to? none of "us" said they shouldn't be allowed to have nuclear capabilities, we just said that they're dicks and they're acting like dicks.

    moreover, we may be the only country use them in a war, but that was one time in the past, and loads of other countries have nukes; so why does it matter that we've used ours?
  • romerashromerash June 2009
    because most of the "other" nuclear countries arent whining like you
  • BrianBrian June 2009
    QUOTE (romerash @ Jun 20 2009, 11:11 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}>
    because most of the "other" nuclear countries arent whining like you


    Ie. Russia and China.

    Oh wait...
  • ScabdatesScabdates June 2009
    QUOTE (romerash @ Jun 20 2009, 11:11 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}>
    because most of the "other" nuclear countries arent whining like you


    who is you?!?!

    the united states of america is not a person!
  • romerashromerash June 2009
    that's the best reply you could come with?
  • GovernorGovernor June 2009
    Ramy, there isn't a westernized country in the world that wants North Korea to have nuclear weapons. The United States is not the only country upset about the plutonium production or missile tests.

    Now, people on this board generally (there are some exceptions) don't care very much about North Korea obtaining nukes, so I don't know who's cage you're trying to rattle. However, there are some significant differences between what North Korea is doing and what everyone else with nuclear weapons is doing: they've threatened to use the nuclear weapons as a pre-emptive strike against any nation they feel is threatening their sovereignty. That is an extremely bold, and scary statement.

    Now, North Korea doesn't have any missiles that can reach the US. The missile they plan to test fire will fall into the pacific 500 miles away from Hawaii if it even reaches its maximum range, which many do not. It will, however, as other missiles have done in the past, fly directly over Japan. That is a pretty big fucking deal, no matter who the nations are.

    Now, as for the whole "the US is the only nation to have used a nuclear weapon in combat" nonsense, please. First of all, Canada was a key contributor to the Manhattan project, so you'd have to be ignorant or a fool to assume your country wasn't in part responsible for the nuclear attacks on Japan. Beyond that, Canada has been key to shaping nuclear proliferation around the globe since the end of the second world war.

    I support the complete disarmament of nuclear weapons from the entire planet. I really do. I wish it was more of a possibility than it seems to be. But get off your high horse about it. Canada has them too, and so does every other westernized country. If the US got rid of every nuclear weapon it had tomorrow, there would still be more than enough nukes on the planet to destroy all life countless times.
  • romerashromerash June 2009
    I know, many fucking countries have nukes around the world, even india and pakistan, ...etc.

    BUT, the US is trying to FORCE a country to stop its nuclear research, when the US is STILL making more the moment i'm typing this.

    As far as I know, there are some countries that are close to NK that said they wont interfere (believe its china and russia)

    I'm not trying to say the USA is shitty and the rest of the world are angels, no. The whole politics world is full of crap, but if you're trying to maintain the status of strongest country in the world by forcing other countries to not be able to defend themselves if the US launches a nuke on them, then yeah ..
  • GovernorGovernor June 2009
    No, the entire international community (including China and Russia) is trying to force a country to stop its nuclear research. Your whole argument seems to hinge on the very incorrect idea that the US is single-handedly strong-arming North Korea, and it bothers me to no end. It's not that I don't agree that the US should stay out of other country's affairs, but it is disingenuous for you, a citizen of another country that opposes a nuclear-armed Korean peninsula, to call the US out for sharing the exact same view.
  • QUOTE (romerash @ Jun 21 2009, 04:56 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}>
    ...
    BUT, the US is trying to FORCE a country to stop its nuclear research, when the US is STILL making more the moment i'm typing this.
    ...



    The US is trying to force a country, WHO THREATENED TO LAUNCH A NUCLEAR MISSILE AT THE US, to stop its nuclear research.

    No shit?
  • EvestayEvestay June 2009
    plus are we really still making new nukes nowadays?
  • GovernorGovernor June 2009
    We are making new nukes. Our total number of nuclear weapons is not increasing, but we are constantly producing new nukes and disposing of existing nukes.
  • NunesNunes June 2009
    QUOTE (Governor @ Jun 22 2009, 01:23 AM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}>
    We are making new nukes. Our total number of nuclear weapons is not increasing, but we are constantly producing new nukes and disposing of existing nukes.


    The number of total nukes globally is actually decreasing, or at least that's what I remember reading. I'll look for some info.

    There's something like 1700 in our arsenal now? or 1700 globally... I can't remember.
This discussion has been closed.
← All Discussions

Howdy, Stranger!

It looks like you're new here. If you want to get involved, click one of these buttons!

Sign In Apply for Membership