N. Korean nuke explodes, 2 missiles fired

[Admin_2]

"After nuclear blast, N Korea fires missiles

By: AFP

Published: 26/05/2009 at 02:57 PM

North Korea reportedly fired two short-range missiles on Tuesday, in a move set to heighten tensions after its latest nuclear weapons test drew global condemnation.

The UN Security Council held an emergency meeting to consider the options after Pyongyang's test of a nuclear device on Monday.

The Council called the test a "clear violation" of international law and immediately began working on a resolution that could impose new sanctions on the secretive North, which has now tested two nuclear bombs in three years.

"This resolution should include new sanctions in addition to those already adopted because such behaviour should have a cost and a price to pay," said Jean-Pierre Lacroix, the deputy French ambassador to the United Nations.

Following the UN condemnation, the North launched one ground-to-air missile and one ground-to-ship missile into the sea Tuesday off its eastern coast near the city of Hamhung, South Korea's Yonhap news agency reported.

"Intelligence authorities are analysing the motives for the firing," it quoted a South Korean government source as saying, adding that each missile had a range of 130 kilometres (80 miles).

In April Pyongyang test-fired a long-range rocket that critics say was in fact a ballistic missile, and on Monday it test-fired three short-range missiles after the nuclear blast.

Russia estimated the force of Monday's underground nuclear explosion at up to 20 kilotons, almost as powerful as the atom bombs that flattened Hiroshima and Nagasaki.

But Martin Kalinowski, a professor at the Carl Friedrich von Weizsacker Centre for Science and Peace Research (ZNF), at the University of Hamburg, told AFP Tuesday: "The yield is about four kilotons, equivalent of TNT, with an uncertainty range from three to eight kilotons."

Tuesday's test provoked condemnation from across the world, with UN Secretary General Ban Ki-moon calling on the UN Security Council to take "the necessary measures" against North Korea.

Susan Rice, US ambassador to the United Nations, warned Pyongyang would "pay a price" if it continued to carry out nuclear and missile tests in violation of international law.

North Korea has repeatedly said it needs a deterrent to ward off an attack by the United States, which it believes wants to topple Kim Jong-Il's regime. Almost six years of disarmament talks have not stopped its nuclear drive.

Some analysts have suggested that Kim, 67, is using the nuclear test to strengthen his hand at home, and so could be even less swayed than usual by more sanctions or international criticism.

"This is part of Kim shoring up support for his regime among the inner circle and the public," Peter Beck, a Korea expert at the American University in Washington, told AFP.

"The internal domestic dynamic is taking precedence over external factors."

Asian and European foreign ministers on Tuesday jointly condemned the first test on Monday while France said it would back sanctions and Germany summoned the North Korean ambassador.

Even China, a permanent member of the Security Council and the North's sole main ally, was strongly critical.

"Disregarding the common objections of the international community, the Democratic People's Republic of Korea has again tested a nuclear device," China's foreign ministry said in a statement.

"The Chinese government expresses its resolute opposition to this," it said.

US President Barack Obama, whose initial overtures to the North since taking office in January have been met with official hostility from Pyongyang, condemned what he called its "reckless" atomic test.

The North Tuesday reiterated complaints that Obama is no better than his predecessor.

"The present US administration is talking about what it called a 'change' and 'bilateral dialogue' but it is, in actuality, pursuing the same reckless policy as followed by the former Bush administration to stifle the DPRK by force of arms," said the ruling party newspaper Rodong Sinmun.

The pro-Pyongyang Chosun Sinbo said Tuesday sanctions against the North would only escalate tensions and called for direct talks between the United States and North Korea.

"No matter how high the degree of pressure is raised against the DPRK, the DPRK will never change its current course," Chosun Sinbo said on its website."

That government just seems to get more and more scary.

[bryanwhat]

It all comes down to one person's desperate cry for attention and recognition. I had to watch "Team America" one more time to remind myself how childish some world leaders can be.

[eagle]

Hearing Obama condemn N Korea's act as reckless is laughable after US and the rest of the Nuclear Bomb holders testing of the past. Who gets to hold the gun. Now who suffers for it ? sanctions against who the people of NK. I think I have heard this all before.

[allseasonsman]

Hearing Obama condemn N Korea's act as reckless is laughable after US and the rest of the Nuclear Bomb holders testing of the past. Who gets to hold the gun. Now who suffers for it ? sanctions against who the people of NK. I think I have heard this all before.

Firstly the USA have not tested in decades so comparisons with the distant past - a past in which the world was in the middle of a cold war are not valid-

Considering that N Korea can hardly feed it's own people and is a nut job state which is one of the most dysfunctional and retarded it is a wonder at all that they should be bothering with Nukes.

There sadly is no solution to this mad state.The regime just wants to keep existing and short of a full nuke pre-emptive strike on the country and the ruthless wiping out of all of its military capability which would result in so much loss of life there is not much that can be done.

As for who gets to hold the gun? Well history decided that a long time ago! Most powerful nations get those choices.

USA = most powerful nation state by far. Morality or questions of right are wrong are basically irrelevant it just is. As bad as it might seem to have the USA as the most dominant nation state and leading power on this planet, one only has to look at some of the alternatives to see that things could be much worse!

I say ban all nukes- then lets ban armies- then war and then murder and then crime and then poverty etc etc etc etc. Sure it is simple really just lets wish it all away.

Now back to the real problem at hand? Well we have a nut job nations state testing nukes and long range missiles despite the fact that nobody has and intention or desire to attack them! What to do about such a state? Well maybe Eagle thinks we should just say that it is fine and dandy that N Korea should become a full blown nuke nation?

Maybe it is no big deal? But I doubt it and would prefer that such a nation not have any ability to cause problems outside its own borders

[eagle]

allseasonman wrote:

now back to the real problem at hand? Well we have a nut job nations state testing nukes and long range missiles despite the fact that nobody has and intention or desire to attack them! What to do about such a state? Well maybe Eagle thinks we should just say that it is fine and dandy that N Korea should become a full blown nuke nation?

I didn't say they should have them but calling them reckless after the US showered Iraq with depleted uranium in 2 invasions killing and crippling Iraqis and US soldiers as we speak. Man is no where near together enough to handle Nukes. We are a reckless species and should all be banned from possessing weapons but hey then we would be beating each other with fists. For all the talk of NK we watch them test and are wary of China and it sounds like I've heard this all before.

[Mister Moobs]

allseasonman wrote:

now back to the real problem at hand? Well we have a nut job nations state testing nukes and long range missiles despite the fact that nobody has and intention or desire to attack them! What to do about such a state? Well maybe Eagle thinks we should just say that it is fine and dandy that N Korea should become a full blown nuke nation?

I didn't say they should have them but calling them reckless after the US showered Iraq with depleted uranium in 2 invasions killing and crippling Iraqis and US soldiers as we speak. Man is no where near together enough to handle Nukes. We are a reckless species and should all be banned from possessing weapons but hey then we would be beating each other with fists. For all the talk of NK we watch them test and are wary of China and it sounds like I've heard this all before.

You have heard it all before.

[Neo]

Eagle does have a good point. Obama looks pretty ridiculous saying that North Korea is breaking international laws when the US has literally thousands of nuclear missiles.

[grezzzy_greer]

The west is in a no-win situation when it comes to that nutter in NK...he is a bad tempered spoilt brat - for all his 67 years...

The problem is that even when the west is clearly not interested in attacking the place, he drums up attention by taking provocative steps. If we ignore the prat, he jumps up and down and screams, and if we don't then we are fulfilling his rhetoric to the people in NK that the west wants to attack them...

No - we don't - in fact, we don't even want to go to your drab cold ****-hole country - the problem is that the people of the place are so brainwashed by the military (democratic - yeah right!) government there, that they daren't take a crap without asking for permission in triplicate... ok I'm exagerating...but they really are told complete rubbish about the west...

I recall seeing a doco where the kids in school hated America because in America they kill and eat children...!!! No joke...

[CiaranM]

Eagle does have a good point. Obama looks pretty ridiculous saying that North Korea is breaking international laws when the US has literally thousands of nuclear missiles.

well problem is during the cold war (and yeah i'm old enough to remember it) nuclear weapons were described as a deterrent and not as offensive weapons.

now i have no wish to see iran, n. korea, syria or whoever have nuclear weapons, but if india, pakistan (FFS), israel etc r allowed to have them, it does come across as a tad hypocritical !!

and after what happened to iraq u can understand why they might want them as a DETERRENT !!!!

[Neo]

well problem is during the cold war (and yeah i'm old enough to remember it) nuclear weapons were described as a deterrent and not as offensive weapons.

Correct me if I'm wrong, but hasn't the cold war ended already? Quite a long time ago as I recall. 8)

[CiaranM]

well problem is during the cold war (and yeah i'm old enough to remember it) nuclear weapons were described as a deterrent and not as offensive weapons.

Correct me if I'm wrong, but hasn't the cold war ended already? Quite a long time ago as I recall. 8)

i think so ... but the point i'm making is that the US and Nato claimed they were using nukes as a deterrent and not for offensive purposes !!

an arguement which is as true today as it was then !!

[Neo]

well problem is during the cold war (and yeah i'm old enough to remember it) nuclear weapons were described as a deterrent and not as offensive weapons.

Correct me if I'm wrong, but hasn't the cold war ended already? Quite a long time ago as I recall. 8)

i think so ... but the point i'm making is that the US and Nato claimed they were using nukes as a deterrent and not for offensive purposes !!

an arguement which is as true today as it was then !!

Kim Jong Il could say the same thing about his weapons.

[CiaranM]

well problem is during the cold war (and yeah i'm old enough to remember it) nuclear weapons were described as a deterrent and not as offensive weapons.

Correct me if I'm wrong, but hasn't the cold war ended already? Quite a long time ago as I recall. 8)

i think so ... but the point i'm making is that the US and Nato claimed they were using nukes as a deterrent and not for offensive purposes !!

an arguement which is as true today as it was then !!

Kim Jong Il could say the same thing about his weapons.

ehhhhhhh ......... that was the point i was trying to make !!! :roll: :roll:

[eagle]

Eagle does have a good point. Obama looks pretty ridiculous saying that North Korea is breaking international laws when the US has literally thousands of nuclear missiles.

Well that wasn't my point but it is one. The US has been using radioactive weapons actively on the down low. I'm amazed they have done such a good job of keeping it out of the spotlight. Nuclear poisoning and mutations of babies is horrifying ,along with anyone including US soldiers exposed to the Tons of depleted uranium dumped on Iraq.

[Crustyjuggler]

******* right this nation should not be building nukes. It's doubtful a north Korean will ever fire it but their sure in league with other nut jobs who will..

going once, going twice.... sold to the Saudi gentleman in the front row

[Neo]

f*cking right this nation should not be building nukes. It's doubtful a north Korean will ever fire it but their sure in league with other nut jobs who will..

going once, going twice.... sold to the Saudi gentleman in the front row

So what do you think happened to the Russian "deterents"?

[Neo]

... but the point i'm making is that the US and Nato claimed they were using nukes as a deterrent and not for offensive purposes !!

an arguement which is as true today as it was then !!

Kim Jong Il could say the same thing about his weapons.

ehhhhhhh ......... that was the point i was trying to make !!! :roll: :roll:

That level of subtelty is totally lost in this forum, but glad you think that way and 10 points for attempting to raise the bar.

[Crustyjuggler]

f*cking right this nation should not be building nukes. It's doubtful a north Korean will ever fire it but their sure in league with other nut jobs who will..

going once, going twice.... sold to the Saudi gentleman in the front row

So what do you think happened to the Russian "deterents"?

Are you saying Russia's leadership can be compared in anyway to that of NK?

[Neo]

f*cking right this nation should not be building nukes. It's doubtful a north Korean will ever fire it but their sure in league with other nut jobs who will..

going once, going twice.... sold to the Saudi gentleman in the front row

So what do you think happened to the Russian "deterents"?

Are you saying Russia's leadership can be compared in anyway to that of NK?

I'm saying that justifying hoarding of nuclear weapons as deterents has already proven to be a major source of black market nukes, far more than NK could ever supply. In other words, US telling off NK is a bad case of pot calling the kettle black. Or more like the giant black couldron calling the teaspoon black. It's ridiculous.

[CiaranM]

f*cking right this nation should not be building nukes. It's doubtful a north Korean will ever fire it but their sure in league with other nut jobs who will..

going once, going twice.... sold to the Saudi gentleman in the front row

So what do you think happened to the Russian "deterents"?

Are you saying Russia's leadership can be compared in anyway to that of NK?

hmmmmmmm .... what about all the states that have broken away from what was the USSR ??

how many of them have nuclear weapons ?? and (more importantly) how many have the knowledge and capability to construct them ??

[CiaranM]

f*cking right this nation should not be building nukes. It's doubtful a north Korean will ever fire it but their sure in league with other nut jobs who will..

going once, going twice.... sold to the Saudi gentleman in the front row

what about india and pakistan .... i was living in sri lanka in the late 90's and early 00's and at one stage those 2 seemed on the brink of nuclear conflict !!

scary times !! http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/2002/jun/02/kashmir.india

Yet what alarms seasoned observers of South Asia most is a belief that both sides are now psychologically committed to conflict. 'There is an incredible sense of imminence,' said one Foreign Office source last week. 'They have both entered a war mindset. Neither can see any sense. This makes the risk so cataclysmic.'

The experts are alarmed too about how either side would respond to a real nuclear threat. There is no hotline warning system between them and, worse, neither has clear rules for using the weapons. They are equally vague about how a conventional war might turn into a nuclear one.

If one side suspects a first use of nuclear weapons, there is little time for manoeuvre or margin for error. Unlike the United States and the Soviet Union, which had as much as 30 minutes to react between a suspected missile launch and impact in the Cold War, India and Pakistan are so close geographically that they would have less than eight minutes.

Thoughts are now turning to the unthinkable: how the world would deal with the aftermath of a nuclear catastrophe.

The US Defence Intelligence Agency calculates that the first hour of a full-scale nuclear exchange could kill as many as 12 million people and leave up to seven million injured. Millions more would die in other fighting or from starvation and disease.

In Britain government experts calculate that all Pakistan's water and food would be contaminated by even a limited exchange, with large areas of India rendered practically uninhabitable.

'We don't even know where to start in thinking about how to deal with a humanitarian crisis on this scale,' said one source. 'There are simply no models for it. We don't even know how we would get aid in in the immediate aftermath. No one has any experience of a humanitarian operation on this scale on a nuclear battlefield, and India and Pakistan have no mechanisms for coping with this.'

[Neo]

While there's so much threat of war in the world it's good to know that the good old U S of A is holding most of the cards (nukes). They'd never dream of starting a war, at least not without UN approval, well at least not without good reasons, well... oh f*ck it.

[Oo.Cloud.oO]

While there's so much threat of war in the world it's good to know that the good old U S of A is holding most of the cards (nukes). They'd never dream of starting a war, at least not without UN approval, well at least not without good reasons, well... oh f*ck it.

^^

amerrrrrrrrrikaaaaaaaaa

**** yea

comin again 2 save the muthafuckin day yea

amerrrrrrrrikaaaaaaaaaa

**** yea

freedom is the only way

yea

[Count_Jason]

..

[Count_Jason]

..