digg

Join DiggAbout

Call for questions
Submit and vote up questions you'd like to see answered by Kevin & Jay at the next Digg Townhall on 11/18.

North Korea conducts Nuculear Test

hosted.ap.org — North Korea has conduced a Nuclear Test despite warnings from the rest of the world.

show profanity settings
expand all
  • AlwaysDuggDown, on 10/12/2007, -147/+27In unrelated news, Bill Clinton is trying to figure out how to send them more money as long as they promise to stop.
    • martalli, on 10/12/2007, -29/+61Clinton had eight years, Bush has had five and a half years. Is this all Clinton's fault?
    • AlwaysDuggDown, on 10/12/2007, -74/+19Yes. It's the classic example of libs taking dictators at their word. "Here, we'll give you nuclear info to help your people with energy and money, as long as you don't use it to build weapons" And here we are

      http://www.newsmax.com/archives/articles/2003/1/7/164846.shtml
    • tlweidmann, on 10/12/2007, -34/+23Thanks dubya, i feel a lot safer.
    • desc1, on 10/12/2007, -85/+7DUPE:

      http://digg.com/politics/BREAKING_NEWS_NORTH_KOREA_LAUNCHES_NUKE

    • desc1, on 10/12/2007, -87/+6MARKED AS DUPE
    • RadiantBeing, on 10/12/2007, -7/+79Clinton sent President Carter to North Korea and hammered out an "Agreed Framework" in which we would give them fuel oil, light water nuclear reactors, and other forms of aid in exchange for their stopping their nuclear weapons. Bush pulled out of this deal in 2003 when we discovered that North Korea had been enriching weapons grade uranium the whole time. By then it was too late really.

      In my opinion, neither party is at fault. The only solution was a military one and it was rendered impossible by the fact that Seoul is within striking range of North Korea's conventional artillery.

      http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Agreed_Framework
    • drum_bum, on 10/12/2007, -9/+49@desc1

      wow you are an idiot, you submitted it an hour after him, and it is spam from michelle malkin, and you wrote the title in ALL CAPS for no reason.
    • gronne, on 10/12/2007, -16/+32Clinton also had at least tried diplomatic relations with North Korea while Bush did nothing but call them "evil". Cause that always brings people around to your way of thinking.
    • rodbibeau, on 10/12/2007, -11/+44im so wonely...
    • desc1, on 10/12/2007, -60/+3oha thats a good one drum, id love to hear how you consider malkins articles spam. oh wait nevermind, your a treasonus liberal jihad supporter, that explains it all: your defintion of SPAM = anything that doesnt agree with your whacko leftist agenda. libs are all for free speech: as long as it agrees with there jihad supporting agenda!
    • WilliamTanksley, on 10/12/2007, -15/+23Clinton did not have relations with that state.
    • Arramol, on 10/12/2007, -7/+32"@desc1

      wow you are an idiot, you submitted it an hour after him, and it is spam from michelle malkin, and you wrote the title in ALL CAPS for no reason."

      Not to mention desc's headline is completely inaccurate. They TESTED a nuke, they didn't LAUNCH one.
    • ZenMojo, on 10/12/2007, -8/+36Nuclear.
    • geronimo, on 10/12/2007, -18/+32Wow, I was wondering how long it would take to blame Clinton, and there we have it - the first post. Congratulations. Clinton helped them get light water reactors, notice they didn't product any nukes under Clinton yet they did under Bush. They also withdrew from the nonproliferation treaty under Bush while under Clinton they remained under the NPT.

      Now they've got nukes, what's Bush gonna do now? More of the same ie blame Clinton / not talk to N Korea, call them the axis of evil. I wouldn't mind if he along with calling them an axis of evil he actually did something about it.

      But he can't, he is tied up in Iraq. Now who poses more of a threat to the United States. Some dictator in the middle east or a crazed man in NK who has nuke capabilities? Who also tested a ballistic missile which we are told to believe didn't fail. Now we are stuck in this situation because Bush is a child, he just had to get back at the guy who plotted to kill his daddy. He could have focused on the real threats, taliban and NK, instead we have everything blowing up at us.
    • drum_bum, on 10/12/2007, -10/+28@desc1

      your ignorance makes me laugh. oh well, i better get back to my treasonist liberal jihad, hehe
    • zediker, on 10/12/2007, -3/+22*looks at the cup in desc1's hands* hrm... koolade... better stop drinking that stuff, it'll mess with your head...
    • Tebixan, on 10/12/2007, -6/+23@desc1
      Nobody cares that you submitted this story too. When the first sentence of your article description is "the libs hero kim jong has threatened our way of life by launching nukes, possibly in preparation for an all out attack on the US" we immediately know that you're an idiot, and the article you submitted is probably filled with opnion, and very little real information.

      Though the submitter of this article should have at least tried to spell nuclear correctly. Digg is getting worse and worse as a news source.
    • raingrove, on 10/12/2007, -6/+39And Australia is like "WTF, Mates?"
    • dotuplink, on 10/12/2007, -10/+8It doesn't matter who's fault it is, whether it's cliton or bush. We need to figure out how to protect ourselves.
    • mrASSMAN, on 10/12/2007, -12/+23***** ***** *****!

      FIRE ZEE MISSILES!!!1
    • Pharaoh777, on 10/12/2007, -4/+21"It doesn't matter who's fault it is, whether it's cliton or bush. We need to figure out how to protect ourselves."
      Neither. It's Kim Jong Il's fault. Not everything that goes on in the world has to do with Partisan US politics.
    • peaches017, on 10/12/2007, -9/+3You're a tool.
    • mfratt, on 10/12/2007, -1/+13About that time, chaps?
      Right-o.
    • sanman, on 10/12/2007, -12/+6Uh, dear Libs, NKorea is only *testing* their ***** now, but they've possessed warheads since the mid- to late-1990s.

      Courtesy of President Clinton and his naivete. Any stopgap measures to keep Asian problems out of his hair, while he went galavanting off to start a bombing war in the Balkans. Just like how Clinton let Taliban mushroom during the 1990s.

      We're going to need another ABC Special: The Path to 10/9



    • sanman, on 10/12/2007, -17/+2Won't it be an irony if Jong-ILL nukes America's Left Coast -- the same liberal bastion that enabled appeasement of NKorea, so that it can now Taepodong their asses.
    • Devz0r, on 10/12/2007, -2/+6But you know, Iraq had WMD and was a grave threat.
    • crweaks23, on 10/12/2007, -5/+3Since I know I can't possibly be the only person who went to this after the comments above.... http://www.media.ebaumsworld.com/endofworld.swf
    • spankaccount, on 10/12/2007, -1/+1I'm just upset that Kim Jong-il has a better domain name than I do...
      http://www.devildwarf.com

      I'm so ronrey...
  • barktwiggs, on 10/12/2007, -6/+74Don't worry folks! It's only a Nuculear Test. The Nuclear Tests, those are the ones we got to watch out for!
    • AlwaysDuggDown, on 10/12/2007, -16/+56Must....Spell....like....Bush....pronounces....

      ;)
    • SmileyChris, on 10/12/2007, -6/+26Good recovery ;)
    • ersnyder, on 10/12/2007, -6/+9And yet we are more concered with multiple accounts of a pedophile in the capital. Throw his ass in jail, stop pointing fingers and get back to the world at hand.

      Liberals and Conservitives have become so concerned with blowing the whistle on eachother and making eachother look bad that they've forgotten about the real issues and what it is to be American and an active/responsible member of humanity.

      I love run on sentances.
    • nazadus, on 10/12/2007, -0/+1@AlwaysDuggDown:

      Sorry, I think you can't act. I think you accidently did WIlliam Shatner. Please try again with some more 'uhhs'.
      I'm not really into politics, so I have no idea how Bush speaks. I apoligize for my ignorance.
    • spengy, on 10/12/2007, -1/+2@ersnyder

      Dunno why you're being dugg down. You are correct. Two party politics just distracts us from the real issues. "Democrats are soft on terror!" "Republicans are pedophiles!" Important stuff, eh?
    • JesseJericho, on 10/12/2007, -0/+2Not only is it just a Nuculear test, but they only "conduced" it as well. When a Nuculear test is actually conducted, you have to start to exercise some caution.
  • TheIguana, on 10/12/2007, -14/+4Oh wow guess the attention whore Kim Jong-il will have gotten his nuclear front page story. Man this guy just loves his attention.

    Iggy
  • Joe091, on 10/12/2007, -4/+45This can't end well.
    • digitalsol, on 10/12/2007, -14/+1way to make the same comment as the other article on this story... lol
    • sniper6121, on 10/12/2007, -9/+7I bet this company will start getting some orders. http://www.undergroundshelter.net
    • nfulton, on 10/12/2007, -5/+11Yeah it can. We've ignored Nuclear Dictators before. Kim just made it clear, he doesn't want the US to attack NK like it did Iraq and like it is about to attack Iran (eisenhower, enterprise and 5th strike group in or enroute to the Persian Gulf).
    • mrASSMAN, on 10/12/2007, -5/+6North Korea is ***** insane. Japan and CHINA --basically its only ally-- actually came together to say that this would be unacceptable. Japan and US are going to bully up on NK now, Kim just ***** himself.
    • Narpas, on 10/12/2007, -0/+1*Prays nfulton is right... well, hey. We survived one cold war, and a missile crisis to boot!

      So, there's a girl I like who's stressed herself into an ulcer... I figure in a day or two, I can sympathise!

      Optimisim is tough sometimes...
    • ImTheDarkcyde, on 10/12/2007, -0/+1why won't it end well? America having as many nukes as it does and then assaulting the middle east is far more difficult than North Korea having a way to resist the US strongarming them
    • willcode4beer, on 10/12/2007, -0/+3Please, nobody seems to understand that NOTHING is going to happen (to North Korea) as a result of this.
      The entire Korean border is lined with artillery pointing at Seoul. These positions have had decades to become entrenched and hardend. Any military action in NK will result in the destruction of Seoul. Its been the North's trump card for a long time.
      The only posible way to attack the North is to start with about 12-15 nukes simultaneously detonated on the border and launch facilties within the country. And this just isn't going to happen.
      China is going to keep sending food an money because they don't want refugees, they've got their own problems. NK already has so many sanctions, a few more aren't going to make a big change. So basically, nothing will happen to them over this mess.

      After a bit of time with nothing happening, Iran is going to look at it as a precedent and decide that it is in their best interest to get enrichment into overdrive. If Iran has a nuke, then Jordan and Saudi Arabia are going to start developing them. Next up, Egypt and Lybia. Not to mention a half dozen Asian nations are probably getting started right now.
      Basically, everybodys gonna wanna have nukes.
  • BitVector, on 10/12/2007, -4/+27Let's just put George W. Bush and Kim Jong-il into a boxing arena and see who wins.

    I have 10 bucks on a double-knockout caused by a "mutual assured destruction" strategy.
  • SirRudy, on 10/12/2007, -31/+11Bush & the GOP have been waiting for this!! Now we don't have to hear about Mark Foley all day. Look for airstrikes very soon; great replay material for Fox News. And they were worried about losing the midterms...
    • Dewhead, on 10/12/2007, -8/+24That is a dumb ass comment. Nobody wants these assholes to have a bomb. I hope China or Japan will take care of it. Regardless, there will have to be some major reprocussions or Iran will have one soon and then all hell will break loose.
    • martalli, on 10/12/2007, -11/+18I fail to see how this will make Bush look good. He has failed to contain an actual threat of WMDs. Bush first learned of North Korea having nuclear technology on the same weekend the Congress was debating the authorization of force in Iraq. The Bush administration suppressed the information until after the Congress had voted on Iraq. Bush has instead chose diplomacy to mitigate North Korea...In 2000, Bush criticized Clinton for following essentially the same strategy.

      Now we are mired in Iraq, unable to present a real military threat to North Korea, and unable to substantially back up our mutual defense agreement with South Korea.
    • Chordonblue, on 10/12/2007, -1/+10Well folks, there's not a lot we can do here. NK holds the south for ransom. No, this is China's dog to tame. Let's see how they deal with having this regime in their backdoor.
    • RadiantBeing, on 10/12/2007, -2/+12I can't wait to see what Japan does. They'll probably amend their constitution to give their military more flexibility and arm themselves to the teeth with nukes.
    • fufubag, on 10/12/2007, -6/+11Yeah, I can see the counter to this already by the U.N.:

      "We warned you about this. Now you've gone and made us want to write up a resolution, which will include a very strong condemnation. Take that!"
    • Pharaoh777, on 10/12/2007, -1/+6@RadiantBeing

      This will definitely be the test for our new Prime Minister.
    • Avalontor, on 10/12/2007, -6/+1@pharoah777

      Hey what a strange twist of fate, my country has a Prime Minister too.
  • SirRudy, on 10/12/2007, -11/+11Look, nothing will make Bush look good, but he'll get the opportunity to be in the news cycle in a story unrelated to... the end of Republican Revolution.

    As for the nuke test, frankly it had to happen before the UN would do anything. Now we can try sanctions!! (When I use 2 !, I'm being sarcastic and/or cynical)

    But seriously, When was the last time the US, South Korea, Japan, and China been on the same side one an issue?
  • Barbrady, on 10/12/2007, -21/+2repost!
  • shoover, on 10/12/2007, -6/+22Who told GW how to submit articles on Digg?
  • buss, on 10/12/2007, -9/+29*****
  • raingrove, on 10/12/2007, -17/+6a mistake - digg this down.
  • arcangelgabriel, on 10/12/2007, -15/+17I like the Neos, saying 'suck it libs" and the libs saying, "it all Bush's fault'.

    They're all morons. America, take back your country.
    • nfulton, on 10/12/2007, -6/+12What you are seeing is the "real discussion". A significant minority of the nation actually believes you can prevent people from getting nuclear weapons (you can't) and/or prevent terrorism by bombing innocent people (you can't).

      I'm really sorry so many of us are stupid. We're a young superpower.

    • fufubag, on 10/12/2007, -11/+3The sad thing is, with all these morons we're still better than your sorry ass country. Go figure....
  • raingrove, on 10/12/2007, -4/+42I am from South Korea, oh *****.
    • nfulton, on 10/12/2007, -4/+25We are all south koreans today.
    • j.carcinogen, on 10/12/2007, -3/+20Or Japan.
    • sanman, on 10/12/2007, -6/+3No we're not -- SKoreans are now officially *****.

      Time to pull the troops out from the DMZ. No point in them getting nuked.

      Let all those teenage SKorean street protesters deal with Kim's nukes.
  • djlancer42, on 10/12/2007, -6/+13Seismic Activity during testing

    http://digg.com/world_news/ASL_DCC_INCN_TELEMETRY_DATA
  • schraged, on 10/12/2007, -8/+11What will the UN do now? Issue a few harsh words? Somehow I doubt they will do even that. Probably afraid they will offend some tyrant.

    Some other questions that need answered.

    How many more do they have

    Do they intend to sell the nukes or the technology to others… Hugo Chavez comes to mind.

    Are North Korea’s Nukes small enough to be utilized with their ballistic missiles.

    http://morningcoffee.wordpress.com/2006/10/08/north-korea-conducts-successful-nuke-test/
    • raingrove, on 10/12/2007, -3/+10In another news, Ban-Kimoon, a South Korean diplomat is almost certain to succeed Kofi Annan as the Secretary-General of the United Nations. I hope this crisis resolves smoothly under him.
    • OakRidger, on 10/12/2007, -2/+4"Are North Korea’s Nukes small enough to be utilized with their ballistic missiles."

      Yeah - that could be a danger, provided the target is in the Sea of Japan.
    • pgm_01, on 10/12/2007, -0/+6Hugo Chavez?

      He is a socialist sitting on top of a nice supply of oil and natural gas. He is not a threat to us. He could cut off the sale of oil to the US but it would also kill his country, basically he is against globalization and the exploitation of his people by foreign companies. The religious fundamentalists in the Middle East on the other hand, would use a nuclear weapon in a heartbeat. If you believe the only way to save yourself and your family is to die and take as many enemies with you, then a nuclear bomb is excellent. MAD works when both parties want to live. When your enemy would sacrifice all of his people because they will be redeemed in the afterlife nuclear annihilation is not a bad thing.
    • ebola, on 10/12/2007, -0/+2North Korea may just be starting with its nuclear weapons program but you ought to be far more concerned about countries like Pakistan. They have the means and motivation to develop and supply weapons to other countries. The "father" of Pakistan's nuclear program, Abdul Qadeer Khan, was involved in a clandestine international network of nuke proliferation from Pakistan to Libya, Iran and North Korea. It's highly likely that North Korea's nuke capabilities come from Pakistan, to a large extent. On top of that, their president Musharraf pardoned AQ Khan.

      Pak's AQ Khan provided a dozen centrifuges to North Korea to produce nuclear weapons fuel:
      http://select.nytimes.com/gst/abstract.html?res=F20A13F93B550C708DDDA00894DD404482&n=Top%2fReference%2fTimes%20Topics%2fPeople%2fK%2fKhan%2c%20Abdul%20Qadeer

      Other articles:
      http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/world/south_asia/3343621.stm
      http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Abdul_Qadeer_Khan

      Yet, instead of going to the root of the problem, we battle with the symptons, i.e., North Korea, and other small recipients of nuke tech.
    • litt8899, on 10/12/2007, -0/+0I think what everybody is overlooking is why they would test a bomb now?? They have been told over and over again that they will face severe sanctions if they do this when there country is already poor and suffering, their accounts have been frozen and they are not getting any money or supplies. IMHO they did this test to prove to a "buyer" that the bombs they are selling will work, it's the only reason that really makes sense. They need money, and a lot of it, this is the only way they can see that they are going to be able to get cash fast. I predict a small nuke goes off in a city somewhere in the middle east, most likely Iraq, or maybe in Afghanistan, within the next 6 months if the world spy agencies are not able to get the bomb first.
  • arestme, on 10/12/2007, -11/+1FAKE

    Now DMD lol
  • Lane, on 10/12/2007, -6/+8perhaps one of those fancy "stealth" bombers can drop a hydrogen bomb at test time and the news can read "test goes horribly wrong and kills entire population so no more mess.
  • metamorfoza, on 10/12/2007, -7/+6it was... Inevit, Inevit, inevitable....
  • LordCrom, on 10/12/2007, -3/+9This does not bode well. Another unilateral action by the US is impossible. US is already spread thin between Iraq, Afghanistan, and our other interests. Does our military have the raw numbers to move against N Korea without aid from other contries.

    In the words of Tina Fey. "Hey France, why don't you take this one, ok??"

    • garyh84, on 10/12/2007, -12/+7France.... enough said.
    • geronimo, on 10/12/2007, -2/+10The only way to defeat NK is by taking out Kim Jong-il, which we must do. Take him out and this problem is solved.

      The alternatives are messy and riddled with problems. Last time we invaded NK, we suffered the largest retreat in US history after the Chinese got involved. We would have to make sure the Chinese don't get involved if we decide to invade. But then our troops are tied up in Iraq. And we can't rely on NATO or anyone else.
    • daofma, on 10/12/2007, -4/+6Short answer: no.

      Slightly longer answer: I believe North Korea has compulsory military service, meaning that all their eligible citizens are fighters, and that in terms of numbers, they'd have a lot more. Less equipped, but more of them.

      Added: " And we can't rely on NATO or anyone else."

      Why? The US HAS to go it alone? Or just that we can't rely on NATO since it doesn't really affect any of the rest of the NATO nations?
    • geronimo, on 10/12/2007, -7/+4We can't rely on NATO since they're only good at bombing & nationbuilding, we can't trust them to do an invasion right or even coordinate with us enough to do an invasion. An invasion takes an incredible amount of logistical planning, the US just makes it looks easy. And the north korean army is inept, we found that out during the Korean war. They have numbers, but not nearly enough. Plus they have problems... like finding food to eat. We would slaughter NK and it would take at most two months, that's when they run out of food. We bomb their supplies of food, transport, etc etc. They only win if China supports them. But we don't have the troops since they're tied up in Iraq. Getting NATO to help will just result in a huge mess and will make things worse off. If we had an invasion force of 200k, we could wipe out their 5 million weak, thirsty, malnourished army. They may lob a nuke but what's worse.. letting them continue for years until they have 200 nukes?

      Less risky is an assasination of Kim Jong-il. My uncle fought in Korea, I'd like to see us take care of this problem before he dies. He saw his best friend killed and his memories still haunt him. This is something we just need to fix.
    • Flashman, on 10/12/2007, -2/+9You can't rely on NATO because that's the NORTH ATLANTIC treaty organisation.
    • geronimo, on 10/12/2007, -1/+4So who else is there, UN? No way. Asian countries? Nope. NATO is the only international military force that comes to mind when talking about a multi-country invasion of NK. NATO has expanded to Australia/New Zealand under the name ANZUS. Not to mention NATO operates in Africa.
    • byronm, on 10/12/2007, -0/+2@geronimo

      Two months to invade N. Korea? Thats what they said about Afghanistan, Iraq...

      What about Iran? who else are you going to invade.
    • geronimo, on 10/12/2007, -0/+1Then wait 20 years whiel NK gets 200 nukes. This is similar to WW2 when pacifists in the UK refused to do anything while Hitler took a mile for every inch the pacifists gave. Iraq was not like WW2, this is.
  • rabidgnome, on 10/12/2007, -10/+1wow - twice on the front page

    SPAM
  • surfactant, on 10/12/2007, -6/+10The USA should resume their own nuclear testing. In North Korea, since KJ doesn't seem to mind too much.
  • dbmoodb, on 10/12/2007, -4/+6Ummm dudes if Kim Il Jung, his family and senior officials go missing (shifty eyes) then the problem will be solved. Remove the leaders and the rest just fall...
    • daofma, on 10/12/2007, -2/+14That has never worked.
    • dbmoodb, on 10/12/2007, -7/+5Really- so what happened to communist Chile ?
      .... Oh wait a minute..
    • Kazaki, on 10/12/2007, -3/+14LIKE IN IRAQ?
    • dbmoodb, on 10/12/2007, -4/+2LOL yeah you got it - sine when has an invasion become easier than assinations ?
    • ServerMonk, on 10/12/2007, -1/+6How you kill the leaders is not the point. The point is, what happens to North Korea when you've created a political vacuum?
  • tommyhanks, on 10/12/2007, -2/+9I find it far easier to place blame with North Korea's enabler China.
    • garyh84, on 10/12/2007, -8/+2China is pretty much neutral and has been for a while now. They are doing just as much for North Korea as they are any other nation.
    • tomboy501, on 10/12/2007, -0/+18Actually, this is a major diplomatic embarrassment for China. It appears they have far less control over the North Korean government than they'd like the world to believe.
  • Skeuomorph, on 10/12/2007, -8/+4October Surprise.
    • schraged, on 10/12/2007, -11/+5Nah Foleygate is the October surprise manipulated by the Dems..
  • Sizzor, on 10/12/2007, -8/+9"Clinton had eight years, Bush has had five and a half years. Is this all Clinton's fault?"

    No. I blame Franklin Roosevelt. He was President for 12 years.
  • orlyyarly, on 10/12/2007, -11/+1That's so gay.
  • Urusai, on 10/12/2007, -3/+8Oh yeah, here come tha nuclear winter. Suck it down, Earth bitches!
  • Chordonblue, on 10/12/2007, -1/+2Kim Il did this for attention. You know what would be the right response here? Do nothing. No meaningful comments from anyone. It would drive him CRAZY - uhmmm. Too late, he is anyway.
  • coldfusion055, on 10/12/2007, -2/+1The sky is falling!

    No really, I think it just might be this time...
  • IVIrMP3, on 10/12/2007, -5/+3nu‧cle‧ar  Pronunciation: noo-klee-er

    Don't get me started...
  • ntwrkguy, on 10/12/2007, -2/+6something strikes in the USA and i will enlist.
  • theratdotus, on 10/12/2007, -6/+3now when they say rest of the world, do they mean america?
  • david630, on 10/12/2007, -1/+2***** I supposed move to south korea in a month hopefully the ***** doesnt hit the fan
    • mrASSMAN, on 10/12/2007, -3/+4Sorry.. the ***** has already hit the fan.
    • david630, on 10/12/2007, -2/+1not neccessary I'll see how the next few weeks play out, if it gets worse I'll move to Taiwan.
    • david630, on 10/12/2007, -2/+1necessarily ***** why cant we edit our posts
  • loljews, on 10/12/2007, -5/+9zerg rush keke
  • jeffdodson, on 10/12/2007, -6/+1Come ON!!! Does Digg have a spell-UNchecker function that they're not telling us about? Let me guess: Kevin Rose never graduated from high school and is pissed off by people that can spell. Right?

    jeff knower of knowledge and other stuff
  • spikeSF, on 10/12/2007, -6/+13i'm so glad we went after those WMDs in Iraq.
    oh Yeah, THEY WEREN"T THERE!
    ***** bush administration
    they were in North Korea
    JUST LIKE THE NORTH KOREANS TOLD YOU.
    worst.humanbeingintheovaloffice.ever
    • FlaG8r, on 10/12/2007, -5/+12The Iraq invasion also caused both NK and Iran to accelerate their nuclear programs to try and avoid being invaded themselves after Bush declared them part of the "Axis of Evil"
    • fufubag, on 10/12/2007, -5/+9spikesf,

      snore. God damn dude, Bush has got you just where he wants you, all you have to do is fully give in to the dark side... let your anger flow and stuff

      Come on people, life is too short for you all to keep creaming your jeans over your next opportunity to write a sentence that links George Bush with every negative action on this planet.

      We all know the facts of history concerning the president. We don't need to be reminded every 30 ***** seconds! Write something meaningful for the love of God!
    • fyngyrz, on 10/12/2007, -0/+3"Write something meaningful for the love of God!"

      OK.

      This is much ado about nothing. The facts:

      1) NK claimed to be a nuclear power. There was no way for us to be sure. Now we are. This is good, in the sense that it is better than not knowing, especially with SK "held hostage" as several here have aptly put it.

      2) The test was underground, in NK. No physical harm done.

      3) The NK has now (probably) used up one of its warheads that it would otherwise have in inventory. So now they have 1 less nuke. This is good.

      4) China is now embarrassed, and part of the problem here has always been that China supported NK pretty much unconditionally. This is either neutral, or good.

      5) The region is looking at NK now a little harder, rhetoric aside. As a *confirmed* nuclear power headed by tin-pot dictator, that's quite appropriate and only changes the part of the relationship that protects the other countries. This is good.

      6) There is little anyone can do about this, but if there was *anything*, ever, now the little idiot has walked right past the position that Saddam might have been in, worst case; there is no question he has nukes, he's gone and proved it. So if a negotiated settlement is achieved, he'll have to show us the facilities and we can see to it they are deactivated. He can't say "I was just bluffing." This is good.

      7) The test itself changes *nothing* in terms of making NK riskier (quite the opposite, in fact.) They were a nuclear power last week. Sunday they tested. They're still a nuclear power. This isn't good, but then again, it's no worse than it was. On the good side are all the above points. Personally, I think what the reaction to this story shows is the level of programmed hysteria the English-speaking world succumbs to when anyone utters the word "nuke." There are times when one might see fit to react, and be reasonable in the process. This isn't one of them.

    • willcode4beer, on 10/12/2007, -0/+28) North Korea still has a gun to the head of South Korea in the form of artillery. This is bad
  • dinosaurau, on 10/12/2007, -11/+0Go for it NK - you may yet keep the USA bastards honest
  • ServerMonk, on 10/12/2007, -2/+15The only winning move is not to play.
    • FlaG8r, on 10/12/2007, -5/+8Save us Matthew Broderick!
    • Flashman, on 10/12/2007, -3/+4Stop digging down and roll with the "War Games" references.
  • Chrysalid, on 10/12/2007, -4/+4I'm not too concerned about the "Nuculear" test, especially after reading this ages ago:

    http://www.spacewar.com/reports/North_Korean_Long_Range_Missile_Ended_In_Failure_Says_Japanese_Report_999.html

    If they are going to fit their Taepodongs or w/e with nuclear warheads, they are more likely to wipe themselves out in the process than hitting another country with the missile. So, can't we just let the problem to solve itself? :)
    • TrevorBradley, on 10/12/2007, -0/+4And a NK nuke couldn't possibly fit into some other container, like say, a conventional aircraft. Or shipping container. Or train. Or a fighter jet. Or a truck

      Is Japan willing to shoot down every small plane that wanders outside of NK airspace?

      What if a bomb is shipped out in a shipping container? Can you possibly inspect 100% of the containers without starving NK's population?

      I'm personally for continued negotiation, but this is not the time to shrug.
  • JonnyTrombone, on 10/12/2007, -3/+5Does North Korea even have enough fuel to launch a nuke?
    • floorman56, on 10/12/2007, -2/+3You can put them in a cargo ship 7 or 8 ...set to go off at the same time... then just get near ...say san fransico and pull the triger
  • floorman56, on 10/12/2007, -0/+10Do they intend to sell the nukes or the technology to others

    Yes ...they have sold EVERY wepon they have developed
    • Chrysalid, on 10/12/2007, -3/+2I wonder if this will affect the sales of Defcon positively :P
  • kyhwana, on 10/12/2007, -1/+4See http://www.flickr.com/photo_zoom.gne?id=264663077&size=o

  • fufubag, on 10/12/2007, -7/+1We MUST begin boming all possible launch sites imediately and start a blockade of all ports in N. Korea. This crazy bastard must not be allowed to possess this technology. This could be the end of the human race.
  • Amir5831, on 10/12/2007, -13/+7Good job to North Korea, and in your face America. All countries should follow North Koreas's lead.
    • Smoov, on 10/12/2007, -8/+10@Amir5831

      "All countries should follow North Koreas's lead."

      I agree. That would be one way to get rid of you freaks from the Middle East: just let you run wild with nukes and smoke each other out of existence.

      Half the time you're blowing up orther Muslims with truck bombs as it is, why not just turn the entire region into one big Martyr-B-Q? Go for it!
  • dinosaurau, on 10/12/2007, -10/+3why should USA have all the nuclear toys. Do you really think the NK would be so stupid as to use them! I'd be more concerned that the USA may let off a few more!
    • ServerMonk, on 10/12/2007, -1/+9No. I personally don't think North Korea would use these weapons. However, there are definitely people in this world that would, and IMO North Korea would have no problem sharing their new toy with such people.
  • Smoov, on 10/12/2007, -2/+8America doesn't need external enemies like North Korea to ensure her destruction. She is being destroyed from within right now by political extremists on BOTH SIDES who intepret EVERYTHING in terms of how it will harm the other side.

    There was a time when significant external threats were met with unanimous resolve. Today this nation is so divided it remains to be seen whether she can long endure.
    • ImTheDarkcyde, on 10/12/2007, -1/+4its not being destroyed by the politicians, its being destroyed by the idiots who beleive what the politicians are saying
  • wowbagger, on 10/12/2007, -4/+2How on earth can you possibly incorrectly spell "Nuclear", given that it's all over the press, the TV and you have a spellcheck button. Oh yes, and marked as a dupe just because of the idiot that cannot spell.
  • hodyoaten, on 10/12/2007, -1/+0I just looked up the epicenter as given by the USGS... why is this up on a mountaintop?
    http://earthquake.usgs.gov/eqcenter/recenteqsww/Quakes/ustqab.php
    http://maps.google.com/maps?ll=41.311,129.114&spn=0.3,0.3&t=k

    This is just a really weird type of terrain in which to blow up a nuke.
    • gwolf, on 10/12/2007, -0/+2They provably tunneled into the mountain horizontally.
    • Andronicus1717, on 10/12/2007, -0/+2An old unused mineshaft would be a nice place... no need to spend all those extra resources to dig a shaft just to blow it up.
  • drapelyk, on 10/12/2007, -0/+1I like how it says "Site of possible nuclear test" shouldn't it read "Possible site of nuclear test" ?
    • ServerMonk, on 10/12/2007, -0/+2No. From the siesmograph data they know something weird happened at that location, but they have to analyze the data before they know what it is.
  • LanceUppercut, on 10/12/2007, -0/+1hodyoaten:
    sometimes the USGS and actual GPS coordinates are different. I found this out with the GPS points on Kauai, HI, USA when hiking through the woods by the honupu trail. My guidebook said that they will sometimes differ and i found that to be the case and in some cases they can be up to 4/10 of a mile off. That being said there are places on the west coast of kauai where they store munitions in tunnels bored into the side of a mountain. Perhaps this could be the case with North Korea?

    I don't have backup data but hey maybe this will spur someone else to research.
  • Fetching more discussions...
    Show 51 - 83 of 83 discussions
  •  

    Login or register to add a comment

    Create a new account or login to join in the conversation on Digg. You'll also be able to Digg stories to help promote things you like.


© Digg Inc. 2008 — Content posted by Digg users is dedicated to the public domain.
DIGG, DIGG IT, DUGG, DIGG THIS, Digg graphics, logos, designs, page headers, button icons, scripts, and other service names are the trademarks of Digg Inc.