Jump to content

Recommended Posts

Posted (edited)

 

Quote

 

North Korea's missile can hit Alaska: How important is this new test and how it might affect world security

The Hwasong was launched at a very steep angle which meant it didn't travel very far. If launched at the appropriate angle, its range is estimated to be as much as 6,700 km by some experts. Reuters quotes experts as giving the missile of range as much as 8,000 km. This would make it an inter-continental ballistic missile (ICBM) as claimed by North Korea as it passes the 5,500 km threshold required for an ICBM.

 

http://www.firstpost.com/world/north-koreas-missile-can-hit-alaska-how-important-is-this-new-test-and-how-it-might-affect-world-security-3777731.html

 

It's now a real threat to Canada. 

 

What's our federal government saying about this?  It seems so quiet, am I missing anything?

What's the plan?  Is there any plan????

 

 

Edited by betsy
  • Like 1
Posted
2 minutes ago, betsy said:

It's now a real threat to Canada. 

What's our federal government saying about this?  It seems so quiet, am I missing anything?

What's the plan?  Is there any plan????

 

Very good question.

Apparently the answer is to leave it up to President Trump....the man they hate.

Love the irony of that !

Economics trumps Virtue. 

 

Posted
Just now, bush_cheney2004 said:

 

Very good question.

Apparently the answer is to leave it up to President Trump....the man they hate.

Love the irony of that !

That's what I thought.  Let Trump sort it out.

Posted

This critter is called the Hwasong-14 a hypergolic fuel powered rocket with a mobile launcher. So it's a bit harder to find than the pad-launched North Korean missiles. But it would still need a convoy of fuel and telemetry vehicles following it...fueling could take hours.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hwasong-14

Compare this to Russia's Topol M or similar Russian mobile ICBMs...solid fuel...fired on a moment's notice. No need for a huge convoy in tow...

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/RT-2PM2_Topol-M

Posted (edited)
4 hours ago, betsy said:

 

It's now a real threat to Canada. 

What's our federal government saying about this?  It seems so quiet, am I missing anything?

What's the plan?  Is there any plan????

As is usual, Betsy, you are missing everything. There is zero threat to Canada, the US or anyone else but the people of Korea. And that threat is due totally to the terrorism the US has been inflicting upon the people of Korea since before the end of WWII. The US combined with right wing Japanese forces to take over the Korean peninsula. 

As is always the case, the USA lied its ass off [isn't lying against christian principles?], murdered and raped, tortured ... . Aren't murder, rape and torture against christian principles?

Quote

[Chair Dept of History, Univ of Chicago] Cumings said U.S. coverage of the war was badly slanted. Hanson Baldwin, the military correspondent for The New York Times, described “North Koreans as locusts, like Nazis, like vermin, who come shrieking on. I mean, this is really hard stuff to read in an era when you don’t get away with that kind of thinking anymore.” Cumings adds, “Rapes were extremely common. Koreans in the South will still say that that was one of the worst things of the war (was how)many American soldiers were raping Korean women.”

Cumings said he was able to draw upon a lot of South Korean research that has come out since the nation democratized in the 1990s about the massacres of Korean civilians. This has been the subject of painstaking research by the Truth and Reconciliation Commission in Seoul and Cumings describes the results as “horrific.” Atrocities by “our side, the South Koreans (ran) six to one ahead of the North Koreans in terms of killing civilians, whereas most Americans would think North Koreans would just as soon kill a civilian to look at him.” The numbers of civilians killed in South Korea by the government, Cumings said, even dwarfed Spaniards murdered by dictator Francisco Franco, the general who overthrew the Madrid government in the 1936-1939 civil war. Cumings said about 100,000 South Koreans were killed in political violence between 1945 and 1950 and perhaps as many as 200,000 more were killed during the early months of the war. This compares to about 200,000 civilians put to death in Spain in Franco’s political massacres. In all, Korea suffered 3 million civilian dead during the 1950-53 war, more killed than the 2.7 million Japan suffered during all of World War II.

One of the worst atrocities was perpetrated by the South Korean police at the small city of Tae Jun. They executed 7,000 political prisoners while Central Intelligence Agency and U.S. military officials looked on, Cumings said. To compound the crime, the Pentagon blamed the atrocity on the Communists, Cumings said. “The Joint Chiefs of Staff classified the photographs of it because they make it clear who’s doing it, and they don’t let the photographs out until 1999 when a Korean finally got them declassified.” To top that off, the historian says, “the Pentagon did a video movie called ‘Crime of Korea’ where you see shots of pits that go on for like a football field, pit after pit of dead people, and (actor) Humphrey Bogart in a voice-over says, ‘someday the Communists will pay for this, someday we’ll get the full totals and believe me we’ll get the exact, accurate totals of the people murdered here and we will make these war criminals pay.’ Now this is a complete reversal of black and white, done as a matter of policy.” Cumings adds that these events represent “a very deep American responsibility for the regime that we promoted, really more than any other in East Asia (and that) was our creation in the late Forties.” Other atrocities, such as the one at No Gun village, Cumings terms “an American massacre of women and children,” which he lays at the feet of the U.S. military.

http://www.globalresearch.ca/the-korean-war-the-unknown-war-the-coverup-of-us-war-crimes/23742

 

Edited by hot enough
Posted
2 minutes ago, DogOnPorch said:

 

I doubt they're buddies.

Well he was talking about inviting Ki to the WH for dinner at one point. And now he has pissed off China he needs new options

Posted
5 minutes ago, Omni said:

Well he was talking about inviting Ki to the WH for dinner at one point. And now he has pissed off China he needs new options

So? Friends are close...enemies are best kept even closer. Lest he do something rather surprising...

Much like eyeball, you'll only be happy when Russia, NK, Red China and the USA are exchanging nukes. And even then, you'd complain about the disparity between US accuracy and their counterparts on the receiving end...

Hey that Chinese one was a good 5 miles off target! I blame Trump!

Posted
2 minutes ago, DogOnPorch said:

Much like eyeball, you'll only be happy when Russia, NK, Red China and the USA are exchanging nukes

Making "sense" as usual.:blink:

Posted (edited)

Personally I think (and hope) that this is the same reason Cuba and Iran had nuclear ambitions - to deter any large-scale military attack from the USA.  Any overly-aggressive first-strike from N.Korea without extreme provocation (like a direct attack) from the US would be like committing suicide because they'd be nuked by US in turn.  Without nukes as a deterant, Iran or N. Korea (or cold war-era Cuba back in the day) could be invaded by the US and allies, just like Iraq, Afghanistan, and Vietnam were.

This expert says that N.Korea's nuke ambitions are strategically sophisticated to "repel and deter" aggression from S. Korea and the US:

Quote

“This notion that the program is unsophisticated is no longer true, and I don’t think the strategy is unsophisticated, either,” said Vipin Narang, an MIT professor who has written two books about nuclear strategy.

Narang said Kim’s blueprint appears to be derived from the playbooks of other countries that developed nuclear weapons, including Pakistan. The short version: repel and deter. He would hope to have enough nuclear firepower to repel a conventional attack from South Korea while deterring a game-ending nuclear retaliation by the United States

“The objective is to preserve the regime, right?” said Narang. “You really have to stop the invasion. And if you think you need nuclear weapons to do that . . . how do you deal with the fact that the U.S. is going to make you a smoldering, radioactive hole at the end of that? Well, if you can hold American homeland targets at risk, that might induce caution.”

https://www.washingtonpost.com/graphics/world/north-korea-targets/?utm_term=.add0c4540b84

I'm concerned but not panicking, Iran, Cuba, USSR, and N. korea are all a bunch of a-hole governments but were never suicidal.

Edited by Moonlight Graham

"All generalizations are false, including this one." - Mark Twain

Partisanship is a disease of the intellect.

Posted

 

2 minutes ago, Moonlight Graham said:

Personally I think (and hope) that this is the same reason Cuba and Iran had nuclear ambitions - to deter any large-scale military attack from the USA.  Any overly-aggressive first-strike from N.Korea without extreme provocation (like a direct attack) from the US would be like committing suicide because they'd be nuked by US in turn.  Without nukes as a deterant, cold war-era Cuba, Iran, or N. Korea could be invaded by the US and allies, just like Iraq, Afghanistan, and Vietnam were.

This expert says that N.Korea's nuke ambitions are strategically sophisticated to "repel and deter" aggression from S. Korea and the US:

https://www.washingtonpost.com/graphics/world/north-korea-targets/?utm_term=.add0c4540b84

I'm concerned but not panicking, Iran, Cuba, USSR, and N. korea are all a bunch of a-hole governments but were never suicidal.

 

Uhhhh....North Korea started the Korean War. Not the evil USA...nor South Korea. Nor does North Korea have any particular claim to the South.

Posted
5 hours ago, betsy said:

That's what I thought.  Let Trump sort it out.

Clinton could not sort it out,  Bush could not sort it out, Obama could not sort it out .. what makes you think Trump can sort it out?  Even with the US/Israel attempt at Iran with Stuxnet has not been attempted in North Korea.

I have absolutely NO faith the US can fix that issue. I am not saying Canada can either, but if the US cannot fix it .. hahahah 

Posted
14 minutes ago, DogOnPorch said:

You pray for Trump to fail.

Wrong yet again. I hope for success, especially on this issue. I just don't somehow have a lot of faith in this man. But you're free to worship whoever you like.

Posted
1 minute ago, Omni said:

Wrong yet again. I hope for success, especially on this issue. I just don't somehow have a lot of faith in this man. But you're free to worship whoever you like.

 

Absolute BS. Your entire MO for the past 7+ months has been: Wahhhhh....(insert complaint here) TRUUUUUUUUUUUUUMMP. 

North Korea could attack the South tomorrow and you'd find fault with Trump's tweets about it.

 

 

Posted (edited)
11 minutes ago, DogOnPorch said:

Absolute

North Korea could attack the South tomorrow and you'd find fault with Trump's tweets about it.

Testament to your "judgment" that you don't know or don't care that Trump is the idiot of idiots. Why do conservatives always love idiots. Bush, Reagan, Nixon, ... 

Edited by hot enough
Posted
21 minutes ago, DogOnPorch said:

Uhhhh....North Korea started the Korean War. Not the evil USA...nor South Korea. Nor does North Korea have any particular claim to the South.

The US started the Korean conflict with its usual US terrorism. Korea has a claim to be Korea, not a US puppet. Just as all the myriad countries the US has invaded have/had a right to be their own countries. Why do conservatives always support the world's leading war criminals/terrorists?

Posted
34 minutes ago, DogOnPorch said:

 

 

Uhhhh....North Korea started the Korean War. Not the evil USA...nor South Korea. Nor does North Korea have any particular claim to the South.

I only meant cold war Cuba, not cold war N. Korea.  I meant present-day N. Korea, i'll edit my post to correct the language.

"All generalizations are false, including this one." - Mark Twain

Partisanship is a disease of the intellect.

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.

Guest
Unfortunately, your content contains terms that we do not allow. Please edit your content to remove the highlighted words below.
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

  • Tell a friend

    Love Repolitics.com - Political Discussion Forums? Tell a friend!
  • Member Statistics

    • Total Members
      11,015
    • Most Online
      2,945

    Newest Member
    agackibal
    Joined
  • Recent Achievements

  • Recently Browsing

    • No registered users viewing this page.
×
×
  • Create New...