Was North Korea's 'nuclear' test a con?
- Thread starter editor
- Start date
Johnny Canuck2 said:
Nice one johnny.
Way too much western conspiraloonery going on here.
Or is it a degree of self-delusion that many western people indulge in? North Korea? That poverty stricken bunch of propaganda suckers, how could they make a nuclear bomb?
I think it's funny how the press do a good job of questioning whether the test was really nuclear or not, y'know, exercising a good deal of debate over conspiracy nonsense, while ignoring that other great 'conspiracy'.
The US and UK surely have the media most subtly practised in the ways of thought manipulation and propaganda.
editor said:Latest reports saying that it was indeed a nukealthough one official quoted by the Associated Press said the results could indicate a "nuclear fizzle", rather than a full test.
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/world/asia-pacific/6050236.stm
Wow, they do come up with some language don't they, I mean, what could a 'nuclear fizzle' be???
Nuclear bombs fizzling away, no worries folks, it's only a fizzle, only 3459 of you will die...
Still old, still old.
Ah, but i understand now. That thingo five years ago has been wrongfully included into the 'conspiracy theory' grouping of events. It was no theory, it was practice. Conspiracy promoted into practice. So i understand now that perhaps if that's what you meant, then there was no loss of short-term memory.
Ah, but i understand now. That thingo five years ago has been wrongfully included into the 'conspiracy theory' grouping of events. It was no theory, it was practice. Conspiracy promoted into practice. So i understand now that perhaps if that's what you meant, then there was no loss of short-term memory.
Johnny Canuck3
Well-Known Member
Yossarian said:
The west thought he had them already.
All letting one off does, is force western leaders to rattle their sabres.
nino_savatte
No pasaran!
Johnny Canuck2 said:
Er, no Johnny; the "west" didn't think he (Saddam) had WMDs, only a small section of warmongers and corporate vultures thought that and dragged much of the media and the public along with them.
Eager to bomb North Korea are you? I'll bet you can't wait.
Even the Blinkered Right wing attack dog hawks in the US administration realise that any pre-emptive attack on the DPRK would be at best , as bloody as Vietnam in terms of carnage to US troops, at worst, the biggest bloodbath ever inflicted on the US military.
The US would win of course - by sheer numbers, bodies & cash, but it would be utterly utterly apalling. Even the US Military have spoken out and although short of saying "NO" to an attack on the DPRK, have outlined their opposition to such a policy unless there was absolutley no other alternative & indeed, The US itself was under direct threat.
its 99.9% certain that the US will never get stuck into the DPRK, as GWB was only too eager to reiterate the other week at length.
The US would win of course - by sheer numbers, bodies & cash, but it would be utterly utterly apalling. Even the US Military have spoken out and although short of saying "NO" to an attack on the DPRK, have outlined their opposition to such a policy unless there was absolutley no other alternative & indeed, The US itself was under direct threat.
its 99.9% certain that the US will never get stuck into the DPRK, as GWB was only too eager to reiterate the other week at length.
nino_savatte said:
I can't understand why you are still being allowed to get away with this sort of gratuitous insult.
nino_savatte
No pasaran!
Lock&Light said:I can't understand why you are still being allowed to get away with this sort of gratuitous insult.
How is it an insult? There is no insult. Please feel free to report me, arsehole.
Or is it the case that you want to resume our wee battles? You're just itching to pick a fight - aren't you?
E2A: I can't understand why you're still allowed to post crap like this and get away with it.
Johnny Canuck3
Well-Known Member
nino_savatte said:
You don't read very well.
The 'he' referred to in Yossarian's post, is Kim Jong Il.
Johnny Canuck3
Well-Known Member
Lock&Light said:I can't understand why you are still being allowed to get away with this sort of gratuitous insult.
I just let my eyes gloss over that sort of bullshit.
nino_savatte
No pasaran!
Johnny Canuck2 said:
And you don't do anything aside from narrativising. So don't lecture me on the nature of reading another's post. For all intents and purposes, Kim is interchangeable with Saddam or whoever happens to be Washington's tyrant du mois. It makes no difference: the belligerent voices calling for 'action' are identical.
nino_savatte
No pasaran!
Johnny Canuck2 said:
Your eyes "gloss over" anything that makes sense. You don't seem to be able to discuss anything without resorting to cheap shots and when you're proved wrong you resort to abuse (please don't deny it).
So Johnny, did I gratuitously insult you as L&L alleges? Because I see no insult.
kebabking
Not a Girly Swot, but I like them....
slaar said:
if you're in central london? lots, if you're in Tottenham: very little, if you're in Reading? none at all.
a sub-kilotonne warhead is used (doctrinally) to destroy groups of concentrated armour or more widely spread 'soft' targets - like communications sites, radars, docks, logistics depots and the likes.
in a rural area a sub kilotonne weapon could be dropped on - say an advancing armoured regiment - and would probably destroy/completely disable anything within 800 metres of the detonation point. damage is then graduated the further out you go until you get to about 3000m where you'd just say 'shit that was a big bang' or 'fuck that was bright' and go about your business as before.
understanding what would happen in a city is much more complicated, the cityscape provides both shelter and burning materiels, as well as the architecture for a firestorm of the type seen in WWII as a result of conventional bombing.
the interesting thing for me is that the 'first nukes' of the previous nuclear powers have all been in the 12 - 20kt range. this suggests that this is the easiest size/type to build - so the chances of DPRK deliberately setting out to build a much smaller weapon (of a type/size not seen in western arsenals until perhaps 30 years after the development of the first nukes) is pretty slim.
not sure about fizzle or hoax yet, both are ridiculously embarrasing for DPRK...
Johnny Canuck3
Well-Known Member
fela fan said:
If a coward is someone who won't enter a fight unless he thinks he can win, what do you call someone who enters a fight, thinking he will lose: an idiot?
Johnny Canuck3
Well-Known Member
nino_savatte
No pasaran!
Johnny Canuck2 said:
Ah, true to form: a link without a comment. No one could ever accuse you of being a lightweight or a nasty snide shite who, when he can't get his own way, will resort to posting up nonsense...like this. I pity you, mainly because you lack the intellect to debate with others properly.
nino_savatte said:
Only the hard of learning need a comment for that link.
Similar threads
- Poll
