| Author | Thread |
|
|
10/14/2006 08:28:58 AM · #76 |
| Ray..Not sure in what referance you are referring. But if it is to the US saying it would do this its not more of a statement but a show of force. If its in referance to Alkaida or the taliban or any other terrorist faction then it is a statement they wish to either convert the infidel (IE everyone else besides them) or Kill the infidel. I dont believe NK has made that threat. They are just trying to blackmail the rest of the world with the threat of Nuclear Weaponry. And what does the threat of Nuclear Weapons do it scares people to think they could wipe you off the face of the planet. So as for your statement.I'm not sure there was a direct quote from someone in authority. More like look at history. Thanks |
|
|
|
10/14/2006 10:24:28 PM · #77 |
| How can you not be sure what he is referring to when you are the person he is quoting? |
|
|
|
10/15/2006 05:40:58 PM · #78 |
| Just because someone quotes you does not make their statement afterwords carry any sense. |
|
|
|
10/16/2006 10:16:59 AM · #79 |
Originally posted by routerguy666:
Correct me if I'm wrong, but this diplomacy was of the 'you are with us or against us' variety which Libya seemed to take quite seriously given their sudden change of heart. |
There's a review here that indicates the broad range of political tools used over a decade to gradually persuade Libya to abandon its support of terrorism and WMDs:
//www.au.af.mil/au/awc/awcgate/nps/ccc_calabrese_nov04.pdf
Broadly: prolonged US & UN sanctions, compromise by both sides, maintaining dialogue, diplomacy through intermediaries, withdrawal of sanctions, credible threat in the face of US military policies in the Middle East, trust building, enticements.
Contrast this with the direct and solely military approach taken in Iraq and Afghanistan - hundreds of thousands dead, billions spent, uncontrolled civil war breaking out in each country, and the resentment and opposition of millions in the surrounding countries. I know which approach I would prefer us to follow in N Korea.
|
|
|
|
10/16/2006 10:27:23 AM · #80 |
Originally posted by theSaj:
Originally posted by "legalbeagle":
I think that the electromagnetic pulse that precedes a nuclear blast destroys all electronic equipment and information stored magnetically. The only thing that might survive is film! |
Nope, most film is ruined by the high level of gamma/x-rays if I recall correctly. Actually, they use a type of film to measure exposure. The radiation causes the film to expose. As the film changes color you know how much radiation you've been hit with. But that is specialized film. I believe regular photography film pretty much all gets exposed. |
That only applies to unexposed film - processed, exposed film is all that would be likely to survive.
|
|
|
|
10/16/2006 10:45:47 AM · #81 |
Two interesting N. Korea quotes:
Quote 1:
"The North will consider increased U.S. pressure "a declaration of war," RI Kong Son, vice spokesman for North Korea's Foreign Ministry, said in an interview with AP Television News in Pyongyang."
So in other words "sanctions = war"
Quote 2:
"As reports circulated of a second imminent nuclear test, a high-ranking North Korean official who is called the unofficial spokesman for Kim Jong-il issued a not-so-veiled threat to the United States today in an interview with South Korean radio.
"Everything will be settled in a week," said Kim Myong-chol on KBS Radio. "That is, whether we, Korean people, will remain as we are now, or lose, or New York will lose, or Washington, D.C., will lose, it will all be settled once and for all.""
Okay, if there was just the reference to Washington I might understand it as a reference to the U.S. government. But to threaten the same two cities as Al-Quaeda has stated they intend to nuke. That's a bit unnerving. Don't you think.
|
|
|
|
10/16/2006 03:10:42 PM · #82 |
Originally posted by coronamv:
Just because someone quotes you does not make their statement afterwords carry any sense. |
Not that I take any form umbrage with this remark, but surely you must realize what you are saying.
Lemme see... I quoted you and now my comment doesn't make any sense... OK I do believe that is true. NOW... what does that make your comment.
Simply re-read my comments and try to provide an answer, surely you can do that.
Ray
Message edited by author 2006-10-16 15:11:50. |
|
|
|
10/16/2006 05:34:02 PM · #83 |
Ok ray please explain to me where I said someone in authority said such? As you indicate in your for mentioned response to my statement. Where did I say there would be a total erradication of a region also. I believe I said, As you can see; if you go back and read what it was in reference to that the threat does exist. And that should be enough to make someone like the idiot with an inferiority complex in north korea realize when they have went to far. I feel you are implying too much into my statement. I never said anyone with any authority said we would do that. I simply stated it can be done.
Originally posted by RayEthier:
Originally posted by coronamv:
That and the threat of being wiped off the face of the planet tended to change their mind. |
DO refresh my memory on this one... I don't seem to recall any statements made by anyone in authority that remotely resembles this.
There were indeed threats made, but certainly NOT anything that would lead to the total eradication of a region.
Ray |
Message edited by author 2006-10-16 17:39:25. |
|
|
|
10/17/2006 07:23:38 AM · #84 |
The posturing continues. North Korea is now saying that it considers UN sanctions a 'declaration of war'
The US responds by saying that a second nuclear test would be seen as 'belligerent'. An interesting choice of words, given the context.
From Wikipedia;
"Belligerency is a term used in international law to indicate the status of two or more entities, generally sovereign states, being engaged in a war." |
|
|
|
10/17/2006 08:52:57 AM · #85 |
it's nice knowing you all. See ya around.
*waves as the mother of all speedlite triggers* |
|
|
|
10/17/2006 09:26:11 AM · #86 |
I find it curious that so many people (other than South Korea or Japan) are wringing their hands about North Korea and the "Nuclear Test" and any threats they make.
The only way North Korea is going to deliver a nuclear device to the United States is if WE deliver it for them by either UPS or FedEx.
What we realistically could expect from this is North Korea freaks the South Koreans or Japanese out so much that one or both of them say "Better to strike first than sit here and have a nuclear bomb go off in Seoul or Tokyo". Then we have a problem.
How North Korea expects to actually deliver on any threat is what makes the whole thing look so ludicrous. Even more ridiculous is that they would survive even scratching their ass with a nuclear tipped rocket without being completely annihilated from 4 different directions.
An immediate threat from North Korea is not reasonable...but...if we drag this out for years I could imagine some crazy scenario where a North Korean supplied nuclear device makes it out of their country (Most likely to South Korea or Japan).
If we could lower our dependance on foreign oil by just 10% over the next 10 years I would feel safer about the world than worrying about crazy countries like North Korea who are completely surrounded by other, more civilized countries. The situation in Pakistan and India has always scared me a lot more than anything else in the realm of nuclear technology. I'll take some crazy communists over crazy religous fanatics any day of the week :-/
P.S...Think about this. We have more sanctions on Cuba than on North Korea!
Message edited by author 2006-10-17 09:30:59. |
|
Home -
Challenges -
Community -
League -
Photos -
Cameras -
Lenses -
Learn -
Help -
Terms of Use -
Privacy -
Top ^
DPChallenge, and website content and design, Copyright © 2001-2025 Challenging Technologies, LLC.
All digital photo copyrights belong to the photographers and may not be used without permission.
Current Server Time: 07/17/2025 06:42:12 PM EDT.
