DPRK has Anthrax-tipped ICBMs and North Korean soldiers are immune to it

[FIVR]

Most of interested in this subject have known about them for a long time. The astounding fact that 73 meters is equivalent to 1000 to 5000 meter, redefining spacetime and the laws of physics, is what I found astounding.

Thank you for demonstrating your intelligence, no, your genius, and very stable genius too

Do you think that's the only tunnel they have? Do you think that is the deepest tunnel they have (built in the 50s)?


Lol. You are seriously the easiest person here to make a fool of. It's like you were born yesterday.

 

[Hayabusa Rider]

Do you think that's the only tunnel they have? Do you think that is the deepest tunnel they have (built in the 50s)?


Lol. You are seriously the easiest person here to make a fool of. It's like you were born yesterday.

Well show us 5km deep tunnels. Use Google, should be references there. The most astounding feat of deep underground engineering in history, far beyond the capability of other nations, to honeycomb themselves with them.

Magic unicorn farts?.

Here's a bigger shovel for you to dig deeper.

 

[FIVR]

Well show us 5km deep tunnels. Use Google, should be references there. The most astounding feat of deep underground engineering in history, far beyond the capability of other nations, to honeycomb themselves with them.

Magic unicorn farts?.

Here's a bigger shovel for you to dig deeper.

If you tunnel 1km under a 4km tall mountain (go look at a map of North Korea) how deep is that tunnel?


LOL, you're so pathetic. It's too easy.

 

[Hayabusa Rider]

If you need help--

http://lmgtfy.com/?q=deepest+tunnels+in+the+world.

 

[Hayabusa Rider]

If you tunnel 1km under a 4km tall mountain (go look at a map of North Korea) how deep is that tunnel?


LOL, you're so pathetic. It's too easy.

OK, show us that network of these and deeper tunnels, oh, they exist only in your imagination.

http://lmgtfy.com/?q=deepest+tunnels+in+the+world.

There you go.

Did your Magic Unicorn reveal this to you?

 

[FIVR]

OK, show us that network of these and deeper tunnels, oh, they exist only in your imagination.

http://lmgtfy.com/?q=deepest+tunnels+in+the+world.

There you go.

Did your Magic Unicorn reveal this to you?

I can't "show you" the tunnels. What kind of idiotic request is that? I think we're done here.

Before I go, let's review:
You learned 3 new things today
1. There are tunnels in North Korea
2. There are 4km tall mountains in North Korea
3. A 1km tunnel under a 4km mountain is 5km deep


It's always nice to help people learn new things.

 

[Hayabusa Rider]

Yes we are done.

 

[Darwin333]

If you tunnel 1km under a 4km tall mountain (go look at a map of North Korea) how deep is that tunnel?


LOL, you're so pathetic. It's too easy.

1km... Just because there is 4km of rock and shit on top of it doesn't make it 5km deep.

 

[Hayabusa Rider]

1km... Just because there is 4km of rock and shit on top of it doesn't make it 5km deep.

A cursory search of the tallest mountain in NK returns two, one by the name of Mt. Paektu, which is an active volcano which has a prominence of about 2600 meters. Note that tunneling it would mean going through miles of magma, retaining structural integrity and act as a perfect insulator. That material is known to technological types as "Unobtanium".

The tallest non volcanic mountain, Mt Kumagang, is about as tall as Mt. Kathadin at the northern terminus of the AP trail in ME, but a prominence of only 3573'.

There are no 4km mountains in NK, in fact not on the entire peninsula, and most of China.

All it takes is a few minutes of research.

 

[FIVR]

I probably should've googled that first. Just like Hayabusa should've googled whether or not North Korea even had tunnels (that the internet knew about).


Can't be right all the time, can we?

 

[FIVR]

Anyway, the point is their whole country is honeycombed with tunnels. Nobody knows how deep they are. There is no way to bomb them into submission.

 

[Hayabusa Rider]

I probably should've googled that first. Just like Hayabusa should've googled whether or not North Korea even had tunnels (that the internet knew about).


Can't be right all the time, can we?

No we can't, although I knew about tunnels. I didn't Google the known, but for any possible basis for your statement.

There have been tunnels burrowed under the DMZ since at least 1974 and this is common knowledge. After all NK have been building structures for a future war since the end of the Korean War. Busy little beavers.

 

[Victorian Gray]

Looks like you learned something new today! I guess North Korea does have tunnels, and "the internet" does know about them. That one was built in 1978. They've built more since then.

Your welcome.

Have they reached Pellucidar yet?

 

[realibrad]

The problem that it doesn't matter if MAD is valid in this situation or not. There is no way that we can guarantee that he won't be able to nuke the shit out of Japan and South Korea before we wipe him out. So to strike first would be saying that we are willing to risk two of our close allies being annihilated because we are worried that North Korea will get the ability to hit the US with a nuke and he might do it. Not to mention the 10's of thousands of US servicemen that are well within his range and maybe losing a carrier battle fleet to a nuke too. The risks are just insane and if he truly is as nuts as you think he is he damn sure won't hesitate to do all of the above and more when faced with his own annihilation.

And what is the risk if you let him gain a greater ability to kill even more? Right now let's say it's 15 million. What will it be in 10 more years?

 

[realibrad]

If we back off and let their neighbors cultivate diplomatic and economic influence, there's less chance of starting a conflict. And more chance of helping evolve the power structure within North Korea. Slowly, and over time. My alternative to MAD is simple... we corrupt them. Though it'd be an inverse of the typically negative association with the word corrupt.

In exchange for food security and other trade essentials, we barter for human rights.

Telling the US to sit back is not going to work as it's impossible for us sadly.

 

[Darwin333]

And what is the risk if you let him gain a greater ability to kill even more? Right now let's say it's 15 million. What will it be in 10 more years?

And who exactly gets to decide to sacrifice those 15 million, on the conservative side, lives in order to save our own. Let's be honest that is what we are talking about, NK being able to hit the US mainland.

 

[Darwin333]

A cursory search of the tallest mountain in NK returns two, one by the name of Mt. Paektu, which is an active volcano which has a prominence of about 2600 meters. Note that tunneling it would mean going through miles of magma, retaining structural integrity and act as a perfect insulator. That material is known to technological types as "Unobtanium".

The tallest non volcanic mountain, Mt Kumagang, is about as tall as Mt. Kathadin at the northern terminus of the AP trail in ME, but a prominence of only 3573'.

There are no 4km mountains in NK, in fact not on the entire peninsula, and most of China.

All it takes is a few minutes of research.

Well I guess you didn't learn anything new today, truly a shame.

 

[IronWing]

So Russian FIVR's new tactic to stir the shit is to single out a particular poster and hammer, hammer, hammer? Pretty lame.

 

[Jaskalas]

Telling the US to sit back is not going to work as it's impossible for us sadly.

Then pause for a moment and imagine... if we start that war, if we kill those millions, we are NOT the good guys. Which brings us to the Republican threat of starting a nuclear war. What should the German people have done to the Nazis to prevent WW2? Does that inform us of what needs to be done today?

If "do no evil" is impossible for the United States, then something has got to... change. And we'll like those answers a HELL of a lot less.

 

[realibrad]

And who exactly gets to decide to sacrifice those 15 million, on the conservative side, lives in order to save our own. Let's be honest that is what we are talking about, NK being able to hit the US mainland.

I don't see how this address my question, but I'll answer. That decision needs to come from NATO and not just the US. NK hitting the mainland US is not the biggest issue, but, for sure is the biggest concern to the US.

Now please answer my question.

 

[realibrad]

Then pause for a moment and imagine... if we start that war, if we kill those millions, we are NOT the good guys. Which brings us to the Republican threat of starting a nuclear war. What should the German people have done to the Nazis to prevent WW2? Does that inform us of what needs to be done today?

If "do no evil" is impossible for the United States, then something has got to... change. And we'll like those answers a HELL of a lot less.

The problem I think is that you are assuming that NK will not kill those people later on. If NK was never going to launch and the US strikes then we agree on probably the most evil single thing ever. If, however, you think there is a good chance that waiting means NK continues to gain power to kill even more and will do so later, then what?

I hope NK is all bluster, but you have a country that is a giant cult. People joke about the American voter being in a cult, but NK actually is. If that leader gets sick and has a week to live, would he launch? For as crazy as Trump is, he wouldn't.

 

[Hayabusa Rider]

The problem I think is that you are assuming that NK will not kill those people later on. If NK was never going to launch and the US strikes then we agree on probably the most evil single thing ever. If, however, you think there is a good chance that waiting means NK continues to gain power to kill even more and will do so later, then what?

I hope NK is all bluster, but you have a country that is a giant cult. People joke about the American voter being in a cult, but NK actually is. If that leader gets sick and has a week to live, would he launch? For as crazy as Trump is, he wouldn't.

I'm not sure about Trump as he shows less control and comprehension as time progresses, however, the "Oh Kim won't do anything" school of thought isn't something I am comfortable with either. Whatever his base mental state is, his entire upbringing was that he was a demigod, like his father. I have no faith without evidence. Killing family out of paranoia is not a good sign.

Nevertheless, once we commit to war the consequences are out of our control and Iraq is a perfect example but NK is even worse considering there is China and Russia in the mix. No, I don't think they would go to war with us but yes I do see this as an opportunity to tie us up in knots as they do in an eternal Grand Game. We need to avoid that.

The best I think we can do is ignore Kim openly but keep an eye on him. If he were to have an "accident" then those not impressed from birth with a sense of godhood would be the result and a better chance of peaceful resolution all around. Of course, covert action isn't automatically a good thing and I am uncomfortable with that from both a moral and practical perspective.

The bottom line is that of all bad choices a first strike is likely the worst, and "what iffing" ourselves into war is rarely wise.

 

[realibrad]

I'm not sure about Trump as he shows less control and comprehension as time progresses, however, the "Oh Kim won't do anything" school of thought isn't something I am comfortable with either. Whatever his base mental state is, his entire upbringing was that he was a demigod, like his father. I have no faith without evidence. Killing family out of paranoia is not a good sign.

Nevertheless, once we commit to war the consequences are out of our control and Iraq is a perfect example but NK is even worse considering there is China and Russia in the mix. No, I don't think they would go to war with us but yes I do see this as an opportunity to tie us up in knots as they do in an eternal Grand Game. We need to avoid that.

The best I think we can do is ignore Kim openly but keep an eye on him. If he were to have an "accident" then those not impressed from birth with a sense of godhood would be the result and a better chance of peaceful resolution all around. Of course, covert action isn't automatically a good thing and I am uncomfortable with that from both a moral and practical perspective.

The bottom line is that of all bad choices a first strike is likely the worst, and "what iffing" ourselves into war is rarely wise.

I don't disagree with anything you have said.

 

[Darwin333]

I don't see how this address my question, but I'll answer. That decision needs to come from NATO and not just the US. NK hitting the mainland US is not the biggest issue, but, for sure is the biggest concern to the US.

Now please answer my question.

I don't see the difference between 60+ nukes and 100 nukes. He already has the ability to deliver them to plenty of people that he doesn't like and cause a global catastrophe the likes that we have never seen. If he is as batshit as you claim he is he could fuck shit up on a global level right now and there is virtually nothing we can do to stop him short of preemptively nuking the shit out of North Korea perhaps.

There are easier and much cheaper ways of going about causing mayhem then building ICBMs. He could spend those resources on smuggling a nuke onto a ship and detonating it in the Hudson or Potomac River or San Francisco or all 3 while simultaneously nuking Japan, South Korea, and US military bases in his general area. Or he could simply start supplying nukes to terrorist groups and let them do the hard work.

 

[realibrad]

I don't see the difference between 60+ nukes and 100 nukes. He already has the ability to deliver them to plenty of people that he doesn't like and cause a global catastrophe the likes that we have never seen. If he is as batshit as you claim he is he could fuck shit up on a global level right now and there is virtually nothing we can do to stop him short of preemptively nuking the shit out of North Korea perhaps.

There are easier and much cheaper ways of going about causing mayhem then building ICBMs. He could spend those resources on smuggling a nuke onto a ship and detonating it in the Hudson or Potomac River or San Francisco or all 3 while simultaneously nuking Japan, South Korea, and US military bases in his general area. Or he could simply start supplying nukes to terrorist groups and let them do the hard work.

As crazy as you think Trump is, you have to also believe that Kim is even more crazy. If you fear Trump with Nukes, why would you not logically fear NK with nukes?

As for smuggling nukes on a ship, it makes the nuke far less effective. These things need to be well above ground to maximize the blast radius. They could build something that launches it a mile into the air which would be possible, but then becomes much harder to smuggle. It can actually be more effective to go the ICBM route.

You still have not answered this question.

And what is the risk if you let him gain a greater ability to kill even more? Right now let's say it's 15 million. What will it be in 10 more years?

The context is that if Trump is crazy and dangerous, how is Kim not a greater risk as he is more crazy?