Subcultural engagement for the 21st Century...
Barbelith is a new kind of community (find out more)...
You can login or register.

Underground > Switchboard >

North Korea claims to have successfully tested Nuclear bomb

All Acting Regiment

10:01 / 09.10.06

Here's the msnbc story, with full text of Korean announcement

North Korea said Monday it had conducted its first nuclear weapons test. The text of the announcement by the country’s official Korean Central News Agency follows. The formal name for North Korea is the Democratic People’s Republic of Korea or DPRK and KPA refers to the Korean People’s Army:

“The field of scientific research in the DPRK successfully conducted an underground nuclear test under secure conditions on October 9, 2006, at a stirring time when all the people of the country are making a great leap forward in the building of a great, prosperous, powerful socialist nation.

“It has been confirmed that there was no such danger as radioactive emission in the course of the nuclear test as it was carried out under scientific consideration and careful calculation.
Story continues below ↓ advertisement

“The nuclear test was conducted with indigenous wisdom and technology 100 percent. It marks a historic event as it greatly encouraged and pleased the KPA and people that have wished to have powerful self-reliant defense capability.

“It will contribute to defending the peace and stability on the Korean Peninsula and in the area around it.”

So what does all this mean?

21:03 / 09.10.06

There is something worrysome about all these disturbed world leaders having control of NUCLEAR weapons.

Mind you, it's rather unlikely that anybody will go to war with North Korea anytime soon, now. Who wants to mess with somebody who has NUKES!?

Is there any historical instance of two nuclear powers waging war directely on each other?

21:32 / 09.10.06

Pakistan and India had engaged in the Kargil War in 1999 when both countries already had nuclear weapons. Obviously, neither country felt the need to use one.

22:49 / 09.10.06

On the bright side, it may not have actually been a successful test afterall...

Jane's Defense Weekly, a premier source on this sort of thing, says that if the initial reports of a .55 kT (half a kiloton) blast are correct "it would suggest that the test had been a "pre- or post-detonation" event (ie a failure), as it had been anticipated that North Korea's first nuclear test would have a significantly higher yield."

...well, we can hope. Oddly enough, the North Korean News Agency is silent about all of this, but it's a pretty funny news site to read through nonetheless...

01:37 / 10.10.06

Slim

Pakistan and India had engaged in the Kargil War in 1999 when both countries already had nuclear weapons. Obviously, neither country felt the need to use one.

We can be thankful for that. Nuking your neighbour is usually not a good idea.

What is bothersome about the whole North Korea story is that there's always this doubt as to whether their nuclear capacity is real or whether this is all just a bluff. I don't understand how come no one can say for sure what their nuke capacity is. I'm seriously concerned about the CIA's ability to prevent a terrorist strike if they can't even ascertain whether NK has nukes or not - not that I'd trust the CIA's answer on that matter, but still...

STOATIE LIEKS CHOCOLATE MILK

01:50 / 10.10.06

There is something worrysome about all these disturbed world leaders having control of NUCLEAR weapons.

You are actually taking the piss there, aren't you?

03:58 / 10.10.06

Dude, nuclear weapons don't kill people; disturbed world leaders with nuclear weapons kill people.

Now, anybody who would like to rule over millions of people is obviously disturbed.

07:29 / 10.10.06

What is bothersome about the whole North Korea story is that there's always this doubt as to whether their nuclear capacity is real or whether this is all just a bluff. I don't understand how come no one can say for sure what their nuke capacity is. I'm seriously concerned about the CIA's ability to prevent a terrorist strike if they can't even ascertain whether NK has nukes or not - not that I'd trust the CIA's answer on that matter, but still...

Well, initial suggestions were that the detonation (if actually nuclear) was below the yield of the devices used in WW2. Still, crude nuclear weapons are just as indescriminately horrible as advanced ones.

10:50 / 10.10.06

I love America's stance on this.
You can have nuclear capability or you can have a future! NOT BOTH! WE'RE WARNING YOU KIM JONG-IL!
*KERBOOOOOOOOOOOOOMRUMBLERUMBLERUMBLE* This atomic bomb will usher in a new age of peace for the Korean peninsular! We Rule!
Ah, well, grr. You are bad and we will TELL YOU OFF!

@Queerpirate- The USA is reducing it's nuclear stockpile to enough weaponry to win an all-out overkill war with the Soviet Union (even though it no longer exists and the cold war is over). The Pentagon have explicitly stated that one reason they would use nukes is if N.Korea invades S.Korea. The USA is the only country in the world ever to have used nuclear weapons on an enemy. They have a history of bombing countries far away to gain popular support at home.
Putting these facts together makes me think that most likely use of nuclear weapons is Bush nuking North Korea.

11:06 / 10.10.06

Nuking your neighbour is usually not a good idea.

But a commie country far away full of terrorists run by a dictator is fair game. If not Korea, maybe Iran will do. Somebody needs a regime change by God, and if we haven't got enough troops because they're all in Afghanistan and Iraq, well, we've got spare nukes lying around the place that cost taxpayers good money.

I'm seriously concerned about the CIA's ability to prevent a terrorist strike if they can't even ascertain whether NK has nukes or not - not that I'd trust the CIA's answer on that matter, but still...

You know that the CIA trained the Taliban and Al-Quaeda and provided weapons and training to Iraq for years? All the people causing the US military so much trouble now are using geurilla tactics taught to them by the CIA, I wouldn't rely on them to prevent any terrorist strikes dude, let alone keep an eye on Kim Jong-Il's nuclear programme.
But don't worry, the Russians are on the case (yep, those same ones the US armed the Taliban against);

Russian military experts have revealed that the weapon, with the same 20-kiloton yield as the bomb dropped on Nagasaki, is about 10ft long and weighs four tons. It is too big to fit on to any missile Kim Jong Il's regime currently possesses but if it were detonated above ground it could destroy everything within five square miles.

Although the evil scientist is working on slightly more accurate data reports. Russian authorities said the test was equivalent to 5,000 to 15,000 tons of TNT (5-15 kilotons). The bomb dropped on Hiroshima, Japan in August 1945 had a yield of approximatley 15 kilotons. South Korea, however, guessed that the destructive power of its neighbor's test was much lower: 550 tons of TNT.

14:52 / 10.10.06

New news;
A North Korean official in Beijing told South Korea's Yonhap news agency: "We want this situation to be concluded before the unhappy situation arises in which we fire nuclear missiles, and this depends on how the United States acts."
Pyongyang would return to international talks and abandon its nuclear program if the US took "corresponding measures", the official said, an apparent demand for eased economic sanctions and a change in tone from the White House.

from here

15:14 / 10.10.06

QP:I'm seriously concerned about the CIA's ability to prevent a terrorist strike if they can't even ascertain whether NK has nukes or not - not that I'd trust the CIA's answer on that matter, but still...

QuantumYou know that the CIA trained the Taliban and Al-Quaeda and provided weapons and training to Iraq for years? All the people causing the US military so much trouble now are using geurilla tactics taught to them by the CIA, I wouldn't rely on them to prevent any terrorist strikes dude, let alone keep an eye on Kim Jong-Il's nuclear programme.
But don't worry, the Russians are on the case (yep, those same ones the US armed the Taliban against);

And let's not even get started on what they have been up to in South America in the past 40 years.

I'd just like to point out that my CIA declaration should have had a huge sarcasm flag. My honest, moderated opinion on the CIA is that we should lock these people up somewhere - preferably in a country that practices torture - and throw away the key - any deep-sea abyss would be appropriate.

15:47 / 10.10.06

We can get Homeland Security to do it. Let's give them special powers and pots of cash just to make sure;

I applaud today’s passage of the FY 2007 Homeland Security Appropriations bill by the U.S. House of Representatives by a vote of 412-6. The bill provides $34.8 billion in discretionary appropriations for the Department of Homeland Security and will allow us to build on our many accomplishments. DHS press release Sept 29th 2006

Quis Custodiet Ipsos Custodes? (Who is guarding the guards?) Homeland Security, that's who.

unheimlich manoeuvre

17:47 / 10.10.06

Isn't North Korea, China's plausible deniablity?
I thought this was connected to Japan's newly elected prime minister Abe Shinzo and his wish to revise Article 9 of the Constitution, their "No War" stance?

Kiltartan Cross

19:59 / 10.10.06

How do you mean, valence? You're not suggesting that the DPRK are in collusion with the Japanese to allow Japan to develop a nuclear arsenal, are you?

unheimlich manoeuvre

20:35 / 10.10.06

No the other way around. North Korea (DPRK) is a client state of China.
The nuclear test, if that's what it was, is China's reminder to Japan to not get any ideas about rearming.
Hence plausible deniablity. Sorry if I was unclear.

21:02 / 10.10.06

Isn't the problem with that theory the very real threat of destabilising the entire region if the UN were to introduce more sanctions, sending hordes of refugees over the border into China, and driving business out of the area?

Not outcomes I'd imagine China would be too keen on, to put it mildly. There are probably a lot easier, and potentially far less costly, ways of sending messages to Japan.

21:37 / 10.10.06

Especially since NK having a nuke just gives Japan another excuse to create a real army...

00:13 / 11.10.06

I'm assuming you all saw the headline in the UK's Sun newspaper? "How do you solve a problem like Korea?"

Kiltartan Cross

07:06 / 11.10.06

Ah right, gotcha, valence, sorry. If memory serves me right, Japan are already fairly well armed, roughly on a par with the UK - they have a strong navy, certainly - the only thing they're really lacking is a serious force-projection capability (no aircraft carriers, for starters). And, ah, nukes.

unheimlich manoeuvre

12:24 / 11.10.06

Perhaps I'm wrong, maybe I'm reading too much into this.

As a result of the nuclear test Japanese Prime Minister Shintaro Abe made his first visit to China rather than say the USA.
I can see parallels between the UK and Europe, and Japan and East Asia. Both being unsinkable American aircraft carriers.

On the question of regional instability former Japanse Prime Minister Junichiro Koizumi managed to anger China with his Nationalist rhetoric and by his annual visits to the War shrines. Given Prime Minister Shintaro Abe's heritage and track record I expect more of the same.

Regarding sanctions, China has a veto on the UN Security Council as they are a permanent member. So it'll be interesting to see what they do.

(It is all very worrying and I find myself being drawn back to read the "How Long Has The World Been Ending?" thread in the Headshop.)

STOATIE LIEKS CHOCOLATE MILK

12:50 / 11.10.06

"How do you solve a problem like Korea?"

Someone at the Sun's getting a prize for that one...

Kiltartan Cross

13:00 / 11.10.06

"Ray - a drop of golden sun..."

16:50 / 11.10.06

I just stumbled over this caricature, and I think it´s so inspired, that you should have the chance to see it, too.

07:59 / 12.10.06

"If the United States continues to take a hostile attitude and apply pressure on us in various forms, we will have no choice but to take physical steps to deal with that," Kim Yong Nam said.
Tensions heated up throughout Northeast Asia on Wednesday, with South Korea's military reportedly readying for nuclear conflict and North Korea warning that an international push for tighter sanctions would be an act of war.
news24

"The United States will push formally on Thursday for tough U.N. punishment of North Korea for its reported nuclear test, but is certain to face strong opposition from China."

N.Korea; Sanctions will lead to war!
US; SANCTION THE BASTARDS!

Where's that thread on US nuclear policy that cites the Pentagon report saying a war in Korea is one grounds for launching? Aha. From Rumsfeld's report;
In setting requirements for nuclear strike capabilities, distinctions can be made among the contingencies for which the United States must be prepared. Contingencies can be categorized as immediate, potential or unexpected.
Immediate contingencies involve well-recognized current dangers… Current examples of immediate contingencies include an Iraqi attack on Israel or its neighbors, a North Korean attack on South Korea, or a military confrontation over the status of Taiwan.
North Korea and Iraq in particular have been chronic military concerns. All sponsor or harbor terrorists, and all have active WMD and missile programs

22:06 / 12.10.06

One of the horrible things about all of this, is that South Korea has pretty much no say in what's going to go down, and is the one that's going to get blown up/fought over if things do happen.

As far as I know, if there's a war, the US Army still assumes control of the South Korean Army too...

Kiltartan Cross

14:55 / 13.10.06

I'm still not convinced that this actually was a nuclear test. A kiloton is a kiloton is a kiloton, and while a literal few thousand tons (or less) of TNT (or whatever) might be a pain to set up, they'd be a damn sight easier than creating a real nuke. The world waits.