North Korea conducts another nuclear test

Page 2 - Seeking answers? Join the AnandTech community: where nearly half-a-million members share solutions and discuss the latest tech.

MovingTarget

Diamond Member
Jun 22, 2003
9,002
115
106
Originally posted by: Schadenfroh
So, this nuke was about the same power as Little Boy? Was it an atmospheric or underground test? (assuming underground here)

Originally posted by: senseamp
We need to tell China to deal with this or we will station nukes in Japan and South Korea.

Japan will not let us place nukes there, but we do not need to do so. That is why we have subs!

Yeah, it was an underground test. If it were an atmospheric test, I think NK's neighbors would be a lot more pissed off because of fallout concerns.
 

MovingTarget

Diamond Member
Jun 22, 2003
9,002
115
106
Originally posted by: feralkid
Originally posted by: ProfJohn
Clinton tried talking to them and it didn't work.

Bush tried not talking to them and it didn't work.

The only thing we haven't tried is to smack them upside the head to get their attention.
We really have to think about this and decide if taking a military approach will do more harm than good.

Been there, done that.

Yep. It really is a no-win situation. However, I don't think Bush's approach could've worked unless everyone followed suit. IIRC, SK was still pursuing its 'sunshine policy' of engagement towards the North while Bush was in power.
 

fskimospy

Elite Member
Mar 10, 2006
88,221
55,760
136
Originally posted by: blackangst1
All we need to do is extend our hand, not our fist. Oh, and disarm. Kim is just misunderstood.

Extending our fist was a miserable failure, extending our hand at least worked a little. Since we're not going to attack them, what else do you suggest?
 

fskimospy

Elite Member
Mar 10, 2006
88,221
55,760
136
Originally posted by: ProfJohn
Clinton tried talking to them and it didn't work.

Bush tried not talking to them and it didn't work.

The only thing we haven't tried is to smack them upside the head to get their attention.
We really have to think about this and decide if taking a military approach will do more harm than good.

You can't possibly be serious. Why on earth would we attack North Korea? The calculation isn't even close, the answer is no.
 

ProfJohn

Lifer
Jul 28, 2006
18,161
7
0
Originally posted by: eskimospy
Originally posted by: ProfJohn
Clinton tried talking to them and it didn't work.

Bush tried not talking to them and it didn't work.

The only thing we haven't tried is to smack them upside the head to get their attention.
We really have to think about this and decide if taking a military approach will do more harm than good.

You can't possibly be serious. Why on earth would we attack North Korea? The calculation isn't even close, the answer is no.
What is your suggestion?? Do nothing, which is exactly what we have been doing for the past 16+ years??
 

IronWing

No Lifer
Jul 20, 2001
73,477
35,144
136
Originally posted by: ProfJohn
Originally posted by: eskimospy
Originally posted by: ProfJohn
Clinton tried talking to them and it didn't work.

Bush tried not talking to them and it didn't work.

The only thing we haven't tried is to smack them upside the head to get their attention.
We really have to think about this and decide if taking a military approach will do more harm than good.

You can't possibly be serious. Why on earth would we attack North Korea? The calculation isn't even close, the answer is no.
What is your suggestion?? Do nothing, which is exactly what we have been doing for the past 16+ years??

Yep. Sit on our hands. Seriously. No trade, no war, no nothing (except watch North Korea like a hawk). If South Korea or China want to try various approaches, fine, but the US really has better things to do with our time and energy than try to resolve the North Korea issue.
 

fskimospy

Elite Member
Mar 10, 2006
88,221
55,760
136
Originally posted by: ProfJohn
Originally posted by: eskimospy
Originally posted by: ProfJohn
Clinton tried talking to them and it didn't work.

Bush tried not talking to them and it didn't work.

The only thing we haven't tried is to smack them upside the head to get their attention.
We really have to think about this and decide if taking a military approach will do more harm than good.

You can't possibly be serious. Why on earth would we attack North Korea? The calculation isn't even close, the answer is no.
What is your suggestion?? Do nothing, which is exactly what we have been doing for the past 16+ years??

We haven't been doing nothing. (well, Bush decided to do nothing for awhile.) Certainly doing nothing is better than attacking them though. You are suggesting because the current situation is bad that we undertake action that would be catastrophic.
 

JSt0rm

Lifer
Sep 5, 2000
27,399
3,948
126
Originally posted by: ProfJohn
Originally posted by: eskimospy
Originally posted by: ProfJohn
Clinton tried talking to them and it didn't work.

Bush tried not talking to them and it didn't work.

The only thing we haven't tried is to smack them upside the head to get their attention.
We really have to think about this and decide if taking a military approach will do more harm than good.

You can't possibly be serious. Why on earth would we attack North Korea? The calculation isn't even close, the answer is no.
What is your suggestion?? Do nothing, which is exactly what we have been doing for the past 16+ years??

Lets see the neocons think we should get into another war with a 3rd world country or bring our subs around so we can nuke NK? No wonder they are testing missles and nukes.

and PJ I nominate you. You new code name is solid snake. We will drop you into a mountainous region of nk with a hunting knife and a pack of cigarettes. You will meet up with a young women known as "the black widow" who will give you a laser sight and a small watch computer. You will then go to and disarm all of the nuclear sites and assassinate all of the scientists. then we need to to take the appearance of a gisha girl and head to the bedroom of "Kim the ill" during your sexual encounter you must kill him. At this point escape will be unknown but you will have your cyanide pill implanted into your tooth. God speed. USA!
 

Lemon law

Lifer
Nov 6, 2005
20,984
3
0
Ole North Korea is in big trouble, they bet their economy on their military and now they can't feed their people.

The one bright spot is their current God King, Kim Jong Ill is at near the end of his natural lifespan. And ole Kim has become a one trick pony. He pledges to give up his nukes, the West gives him aid allowing him to feed part of his people, after a while they forget about North Korea, Kim needs more Western aid for food and fuel, so he again stages a nuke test, he again gets bribed with food and fuel, rinse and repeat.

Hopefully the larger world will be smart enough to break out of this cycle, partly aggravated by a long term climate induced drought, and merge the divided Korean governments. Maybe after Kim Jong Ill dies, it may become possible.

As it is, the West refuses to allow North Korea to build up a civilian consumer good export market because they are the commie bad guys, so their options are few and none.
 

Schadenfroh

Elite Member
Mar 8, 2003
38,416
4
0
Originally posted by: ProfJohn
What is your suggestion?? Do nothing, which is exactly what we have been doing for the past 16+ years??
My suggestion would be to retaliate if they do something that harms one of our allies.

Turn their nation to glass in a nuclear fire if they launch a nuke against our allies.

Burn their nation with traditional ordinance if they shell Seoul.

End their regime via conventional war if they invade.

Otherwise ignore them (save for monitoring their troop / weapon deployments) and give them no food / supplies / help. (note: I am not advocating an embargo or blockade, I am against all peace-time embargoes of non-belligerent goods (including Cuba). I am against unconditional aid / giving handouts to a dictator in the hopes of him distributing it in a benevolent manner)

If it becomes obvious that a preemptive assault is necessary, then it should be the South Koreans that make the call, not us.
 

AFMatt

Senior member
Aug 14, 2008
248
0
0
Originally posted by: ProfJohn
Originally posted by: eskimospy
Originally posted by: ProfJohn
Clinton tried talking to them and it didn't work.

Bush tried not talking to them and it didn't work.

The only thing we haven't tried is to smack them upside the head to get their attention.
We really have to think about this and decide if taking a military approach will do more harm than good.

You can't possibly be serious. Why on earth would we attack North Korea? The calculation isn't even close, the answer is no.
What is your suggestion?? Do nothing, which is exactly what we have been doing for the past 16+ years??

Why should the U.S. do it? Any military actions taken against them should be handled by their neighbors. If SK, Japan, and even China feel threatened, they need to man up and kick things into high gear. If we attack them, Seoul better break out the kevlar umbrellas, cause a rain storm is comin.

The day the U.S. strikes NK will be the day they say "Guess what? We have a nuclear weapon, mounted on a working long range ICBM, and it is aimed at you."
 

Chaotic42

Lifer
Jun 15, 2001
35,239
2,377
126
Originally posted by: ProfJohn
Clinton tried talking to them and it didn't work.

Bush tried not talking to them and it didn't work.

The only thing we haven't tried is to smack them upside the head to get their attention.
We really have to think about this and decide if taking a military approach will do more harm than good.

Military action in North Korea would be a nightmare. There's just no way it's a good idea.
 

Lemon law

Lifer
Nov 6, 2005
20,984
3
0
Originally posted by: Schadenfroh
Originally posted by: ProfJohn
What is your suggestion?? Do nothing, which is exactly what we have been doing for the past 16+ years??
My suggestion would be to retaliate if they do something that harms one of our allies.

Turn their nation to glass in a nuclear fire if they launch a nuke against our allies.

Burn their nation with traditional ordinance if they shell Seoul.

End their regime via conventional war if they invade.

Otherwise ignore them (save for monitoring their troop / weapon deployments) and give them no food / supplies / help.

If it becomes obvious that a preemptive assault is necessary, then it should be the South Koreans that make the call, not us.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Why is it only left to me to note that Schadefroh just passed the piss poor human being test with flying colors. While its no effort for me to
despise the actions of Kim Jong Ill and his equally morally bankrupt father whose has leadership has consigned North Korea to the slow lane
of human progress. But try as hard as I may, I can't find it in my hearts to extent that hatred to the North Korean people. Who just like me, are
victims of bad leadership. GWB&co may have diminished my future, but the starvation of an entire country is a horse of a different color. Must
we pay that starvation price of an entire country to humble just one man who will make sure he is the last man to starve. ?
 

compuwiz1

Admin Emeritus Elite Member
Oct 9, 1999
27,112
930
126
Originally posted by: AFMatt
Originally posted by: ProfJohn
Originally posted by: eskimospy
Originally posted by: ProfJohn
Clinton tried talking to them and it didn't work.

Bush tried not talking to them and it didn't work.

The only thing we haven't tried is to smack them upside the head to get their attention.
We really have to think about this and decide if taking a military approach will do more harm than good.

You can't possibly be serious. Why on earth would we attack North Korea? The calculation isn't even close, the answer is no.
What is your suggestion?? Do nothing, which is exactly what we have been doing for the past 16+ years??

Why should the U.S. do it? Any military actions taken against them should be handled by their neighbors. If SK, Japan, and even China feel threatened, they need to man up and kick things into high gear. If we attack them, Seoul better break out the kevlar umbrellas, cause a rain storm is comin.

The day the U.S. strikes NK will be the day they say "Guess what? We have a nuclear weapon, mounted on a working long range ICBM, and it is aimed at you."

Cus were the s00per power. (World Police Dept too) Everyone knows this. :p

 

BrownTown

Diamond Member
Dec 1, 2005
5,314
1
0
Our country has enough problems, I don't really care 2 shits about this stuff. If Japan or China or South Korea wants to do something that's their right, but the most I would not suggest either trying to bribe him, or trying to attack him, I say we jsut sit back and deal with our own problems and let someone else play world police this time.
 

Deadtrees

Platinum Member
Dec 31, 2002
2,351
0
0
Originally posted by: ProfJohn
Clinton tried talking to them and it didn't work.

Bush tried not talking to them and it didn't work.

The only thing we haven't tried is to smack them upside the head to get their attention.
We really have to think about this and decide if taking a military approach will do more harm than good.

Clinton, in fact, had a plan to bomb NK. The plan was canceled only a few days before D-Day.
 

ebaycj

Diamond Member
Mar 9, 2002
5,418
0
0
Originally posted by: eskimospy
Originally posted by: blackangst1
All we need to do is extend our hand, not our fist. Oh, and disarm. Kim is just misunderstood.

Extending our fist was a miserable failure, extending our hand at least worked a little. Since we're not going to attack them, what else do you suggest?

What's with all these posts talking about fisting North Korea?

I'd be pissed and would probably be setting off nukes too, if I had all these people trying to fist me.

STOP THE FISTING !!!!!
 

Lemon law

Lifer
Nov 6, 2005
20,984
3
0
Originally posted by: Deadtrees
Originally posted by: ProfJohn
Clinton tried talking to them and it didn't work.

Bush tried not talking to them and it didn't work.

The only thing we haven't tried is to smack them upside the head to get their attention.
We really have to think about this and decide if taking a military approach will do more harm than good.

Clinton, in fact, had a plan to bomb NK. The plan was canceled only a few days before D-Day.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Get a life Deadtrees, the USA always has contingency plans to bomb the pope, mother Teresa, and Mom and apple pie.

Having options is one thing, the rationality of using those options are another thing. If nothing else, what ails us now is the failure to foresee how futile the military options has proved to be.
 

Chaotic42

Lifer
Jun 15, 2001
35,239
2,377
126
Originally posted by: Lemon law
Why is it only left to me to note that Schadefroh just passed the piss poor human being test with flying colors. While its no effort for me to
despise the actions of Kim Jong Ill and his equally morally bankrupt father whose has leadership has consigned North Korea to the slow lane
of human progress. But try as hard as I may, I can't find it in my hearts to extent that hatred to the North Korean people. Who just like me, are
victims of bad leadership. GWB&co may have diminished my future, but the starvation of an entire country is a horse of a different color. Must
we pay that starvation price of an entire country to humble just one man who will make sure he is the last man to starve. ?

If we cut off aid to NK and the people starve, the fault lies *solely* with the North Korean government.
 

sao123

Lifer
May 27, 2002
12,656
207
106
Originally posted by: AFMatt
Originally posted by: ProfJohn
Originally posted by: eskimospy
Originally posted by: ProfJohn
Clinton tried talking to them and it didn't work.

Bush tried not talking to them and it didn't work.

The only thing we haven't tried is to smack them upside the head to get their attention.
We really have to think about this and decide if taking a military approach will do more harm than good.

You can't possibly be serious. Why on earth would we attack North Korea? The calculation isn't even close, the answer is no.
What is your suggestion?? Do nothing, which is exactly what we have been doing for the past 16+ years??

Why should the U.S. do it? Any military actions taken against them should be handled by their neighbors. If SK, Japan, and even China feel threatened, they need to man up and kick things into high gear. If we attack them, Seoul better break out the kevlar umbrellas, cause a rain storm is comin.

The day the U.S. strikes NK will be the day they say "Guess what? We have a nuclear weapon, mounted on a working long range ICBM, and it is aimed at you."


the day they have it, is the day its comin at us... so should we wait for that day?
hell no... just bomb the shit outta that little backward ass country.
 

TruePaige

Diamond Member
Oct 22, 2006
9,874
2
0
Originally posted by: sao123
Originally posted by: AFMatt
Originally posted by: ProfJohn
Originally posted by: eskimospy
Originally posted by: ProfJohn
Clinton tried talking to them and it didn't work.

Bush tried not talking to them and it didn't work.

The only thing we haven't tried is to smack them upside the head to get their attention.
We really have to think about this and decide if taking a military approach will do more harm than good.

You can't possibly be serious. Why on earth would we attack North Korea? The calculation isn't even close, the answer is no.
What is your suggestion?? Do nothing, which is exactly what we have been doing for the past 16+ years??

Why should the U.S. do it? Any military actions taken against them should be handled by their neighbors. If SK, Japan, and even China feel threatened, they need to man up and kick things into high gear. If we attack them, Seoul better break out the kevlar umbrellas, cause a rain storm is comin.

The day the U.S. strikes NK will be the day they say "Guess what? We have a nuclear weapon, mounted on a working long range ICBM, and it is aimed at you."


the day they have it, is the day its comin at us... so should we wait for that day?
hell no... just bomb the shit outta that little backward ass country.

Missile Defense System? ;)

if that fails...

...The west coast takes one for the team?
 
Dec 30, 2004
12,553
2
76
Originally posted by: ProfJohn
Clinton tried talking to them and it didn't work.

Bush tried not talking to them and it didn't work.

The only thing we haven't tried is to smack them upside the head to get their attention.
We really have to think about this and decide if taking a military approach will do more harm than good.

Would it?

Truepaige: The missile defense system is only about 50% effective.
 

Fear No Evil

Diamond Member
Nov 14, 2008
5,922
0
0
Originally posted by: TruePaige
Originally posted by: sao123
Originally posted by: AFMatt
Originally posted by: ProfJohn
Originally posted by: eskimospy
Originally posted by: ProfJohn
Clinton tried talking to them and it didn't work.

Bush tried not talking to them and it didn't work.

The only thing we haven't tried is to smack them upside the head to get their attention.
We really have to think about this and decide if taking a military approach will do more harm than good.

You can't possibly be serious. Why on earth would we attack North Korea? The calculation isn't even close, the answer is no.
What is your suggestion?? Do nothing, which is exactly what we have been doing for the past 16+ years??

Why should the U.S. do it? Any military actions taken against them should be handled by their neighbors. If SK, Japan, and even China feel threatened, they need to man up and kick things into high gear. If we attack them, Seoul better break out the kevlar umbrellas, cause a rain storm is comin.

The day the U.S. strikes NK will be the day they say "Guess what? We have a nuclear weapon, mounted on a working long range ICBM, and it is aimed at you."


the day they have it, is the day its comin at us... so should we wait for that day?
hell no... just bomb the shit outta that little backward ass country.

Missile Defense System? ;)

if that fails...

...The west coast takes one for the team?

I'm not sure I would honestly have a problem with that.