Has sh*t finaly hit the fan?
 

North Korea has conducted nuclear tests last night in their underground silo's. So far the UN and China have already said that action will be taken if it can be confirmed these tests were actualy performed. Dispite the multiple warnings the UN has given North Korea not to carry out these tests, they are stuborn as usual.
Next to the UN and China, how do you all think Bush will react to this? After Afghanistan and Iraq, is North Korea next? North Korea does anticipate this and has their army on highest alert. Discuss!

I think this delightful little animation sums it up better than I ever could; http://www.funnyjunk.com/pages/world.htm.

But seriously, this is likely going to cause Japan to soil its fundoshi and sucessfully allow themselves to have a real army and develop nukes, as has been highlighted on the news, and China is likely going to sit on the sideline for a while, and grudgingly help America if it attacks North Korea. And the US likely will get involved, first through bombing, then through missiles, then through sea, and finally through land. The UK will likely support them, as will Australia. The rest of Europe would probably refuse to get involved, save perhaps Putin. And South Korea sure as hell is gonna bomb the crap out of Pyongyang if the Americans don't do it first.

Oh, and lastly, Kim is probably nutso enough to launch a nuke to a major South Korean city like Seoul or Ulsan. And if that happens, South Korea might nuke them back. And after that, all hell breaks loose.

Lol at the animation. Hilarious.

Hmm, plutonium kept under raps from 1994-2002, then Bush takes office, does his cowboy schtick, alienates half the world, and now N.Korea could have the bomb. I say could because it was sub kiloton, and not consistent with a successful 1 kilo test.
Just when you think to yourself...
"Hmm, Bush has screwed up everything. It can only get better!"

AMERICA!

FUCK YEAH!

Well it was inevitible really now wasn't it, N Korea are up there with the ranks of India, Pakistan and France for countries we don't want to have nukes but do now.

France lolz.

Well. That's just fucking peachy.

Way to go, humans. Climb your way up the evolutionary ladder and then blow the fuck up your own damn species. Rawr.

Anyway, so Mr. KimmyKim may have nukes, eh? But does he have the means needed to nuke countries like America and whoever? Or maybe that was just a major issue with Iran. I believe, correct me if I'm wrong, they claimed to be incredibly close (at the time, they claimed it was a mere month) to having produced nuclear weapons, but they had no means of attacking anyone with it; or maybe it was that they had no missile launchers but perhaps had lots of missiles. Hmm. I really don't remember.. Does anyone have any clue about anything I just said? I think I'm mixing some stuffs up.

I concur that the animation is muchly funny.

I'm sure I heard that most people are sure that Korea doesn't have the technology to put the A-Bombs on a rocket so they can attack other countries. So as long as the other governments keep pressuring Korea I think it'll be fine... I hope.

- Rexy

They may not be able to attack with it, but that's not the point. I'm not worried about North Korea. They may be stuborn but they wouldn't nuke a country just like that even if they could. The USA WOULD nuke someone just like that, just because they are so self centered and think they are the police of the world.

You say that but if they though they were the world police they would have already invaded north korea and many other ebil countried by now

They're stupid, not suicidal.
They will have to prime the pump for Iran and air strike it before they begin to even have wank fantasies of blowing up North Korea.
Sub-40 approval ratings and a dangerously stretched thin military will not equal invasion. If Bush tries to institute a draft for invasion there will be an armed uprising. At the very least incredibly vocal protests and violence against supporters of it.

That was the issue earlier in the year when NK tested long range missiles. Admittedly, they didn't do all that well but they potentially could have been used to fire a nuke as far as the US.

They'll try to nuke america,but the nuke will betray them and hit a small Japanese island,which mutates a t-rex into a monster that will kill us all.

To be honest, I think North Korea having nuclear weapons is a good thing. Why are they not allowed to? If other countries can, they should also be allowed.

I wish Australia would hurry up and make their own. Our defence force is severely lacking.

Alcar...

Alcar, I don't think Oz will, because Johnny Howard has his head so far up Bushes' arse that he mimics everything Bush says.

Not much chance.

Indeed. Although I doubt it'll matter. It's the northern hemisphere who have most to fear from North Korea. Suckers.

Alcar...

lol, potentail destruction. Funny how I've been playing this game recently:

http://www.introversion.co.uk/defcon...creenshot4.jpg

Defcon: Everybody dies. No one wins. But maybe you can lose the least. . .

Damn scarey game that makes you think about the potentail reality of it. :S And then this pops up. lol

But who do you trust more with Nukes? A monkey in a suit? Or a madman who hates the West and cares about nothing else but the survival of his own regime, no matter how many people he kills?

And how come the US didn't go for North Korea if they're that much of a threat? Why did they go to Iraq? Maybe 'cause NK don't have oil? :P

Pretty dumb if you ask me.

I'd say the Eastern Hemisphere has more to worry about than Europe and the US. Which kinda screws us.

We're far too insignificant for the North Koreans to care. Even if a war were to spill out between China / Japan and NK, I'd not be fleeing the country anytime soon.

Alcar...

As for me coming from china. I would guess seeing the news from our side. Is that the basis of having a latest technolgy. The thought of if americans and russia have it why not us. All this going on with the UN stopping these countries. Iran now.¬_¬

I think it might lead a war of eastern vs the western

Let me put it this way. Who would you rather have as partners during a dangerous hiking trip. Kim Jong Il, Mahmoud Admadinejad, and Mahmoud Abbas, or Tony Blair, George W. Bush (no Cheney shooting jokes), and Ehud Olmert. Its a matter of some somewhat stupid and flawed men with a few oddball views, vs an effiminate kook, an Islamofascist anti semite, and the leader of an anti semitic terrorist organisation.

Well, the group you want to hike with has a warmonger, a pussy, and a racist. I'm going to go with the first one. We can sing "Throw the Jew Down the Well" and Kim Jong Il would be a great guy to talk about movies with.

Especially "Team America: World Police".

Ehud Olmert is a racist? What, where, when, why? Or is racist defined as "not believing Israel and the Zionazi Jooooooos are evul".

Heh.

*pats PV on back*

You two should start a regular column together to deliver other nuggets of wisdom. Ambi can take care of the annoying, pointless pseudo-intellectual side, while Alcar can be the stupid ignorant one.

Well, I'd read it!

Why don't I just go build a supernuke and blow the world apart? It'll save heaps of time.

You haven't provided any feedback to this topic MF, so does that mean you fit the introverted surburbanite, turned extroverted coward online? ;)

I may not have backed my statement up with my reasoning, but that doesn't mean it has no intelligent thinking behind it. North Korea having nuclear weapons shifts the power balance, and from what I can see, it won't be intimidated by the US as much as China has been. It'll be interesting to see how it pans out.

Alcar...

I must agree with AquaticAmbi, although her description of evolution as a ladder is completely incorrect. There are no "steps" "stages" or "advances" in evolution, simply changes. It is the adaptation to surroundings via natural selection to bring mutations into great prominence. But otherwise, I agree. The only thing Humans are good for is as Borg drones. And tasty snacks. Mmmhmm.

I guess not since I'm just as much of an arsehole in real life. Ask anyone.

Well, as it was a damn stupid thing to say, tied to fact you've said several other damn stupid things elsewhere as well - I just put 2 and 2 together and got stupid.

And I haven't responded to the actual question the thread poses because it doesn't interest me, and when a thread doesn't interest me I'll only respond if someone says something that annoys me.

I can't see how you could possibly think it was a stupid thing to say. However, I'm not an idiot, so I can't empathise with your situation. As I said, it shifts the power balance, and I believe that's a good thing.

Before you post, how about you contribute something meaningful to the discussion. I don't know, maybe your opinion on the topic at hand? If you're going to just post when someone says something annoying, I'll treat it as spam. Such things are reserved for private messages.

Alcar...

That's debatable.

Yeah, pretty one sided debate though.

MF, you MF don't pick fights with Peter. He hangs around with the diaper crew and will smack you up.

That's perfectly understandable since you're the one who said the stupid thing. I do usually add an opinion to my response to an idiotic post so it ISN'T off-topic, but this issue is so clear cut in my mind and what you said was so stupid you got what you got.

So, I'll tell you why what you said was stupid:
-North Korea is under dictatorship rule
-North Korea is incredibly isolationist and relatively uninterested in international relations
-North Korea has one of the largest armies in the world
-The border North shares with South Korea is still one of the most highly defended stretches of land in the world
-It is openly hostile against South Korea, but of recent years it has had in effect a 'cold war' scenario where neither aggresses the other - if North Korea gets nuclear weapons not only does it, of course, gain a supreme upper hand and pose a big threat, the very fact of their existence could tip the already precarious situation over the edge into full blown war
-North Korea flagrantly abuses basic human rights, with numerous cases of torture, suppression of freedom of speech, and the workings of a police state where people can be incarcerated without valid reason.

Your whole 'why can't they? It's just the world playing elitist games - who are we to decide who has this massively powerful weapon that can utterly devastate huge areas?' is very obviously stupid and ill-founded.

And I'm an idiot for having to write all this crap to show you why you're an idiot. :rolleyes:

Perhaps, but it is still a very good question that needs answering: who exactly are we to decide who gets the nuclear weapons?

No, it's a crap question, that's what it is.

I'd like to see ANYONE who could justify ANY nation being given/getting nuclear weapons, especially as the existing 8 (?) nations who do have The Bomb are slowly gearing towards disarmanent.

This is pesudo-liberal clap-trap. Who are we? That's not the question. Who are they? is what this is all about.

By application, you can extend that argument to anything and everything and the world dies. Hurrah!

Nuclear weapons are bad, they kill indiscrimantely - ANY country making more is a bad thing. A deeply corrupt and 'evil' regime doing so is, obviously, especially wrong.

You say that as if it should be common sense. Oh.......yeah. It is.

Slightly OT:

This is not an attack on you Alcar, it's just me venting.

Do you know what makes my blood pressure rise so high it verges on becoming a singularity? Since the "What pisses you off?" thread is old now, I'll tell ya.

Moral ^@#%ing equivilationists. I would rather listen to Michael Bolton songs, attend a Pat Robertson sermon, kiss a hemorroid infested rear, and read Myspace than listen to another of their US bashing, moonbat, anti semitic, loony leftist verbal excretions of filth.

Because moral equilivationists piss me off. A. Great. Deal.

Chill out, negro.
Anybody going to talk about how Clinton had this under wraps for 8 years and Bush ****ed it up?
No? I feel this fire needs more fuel, you know?
George W. Bush didn't do anything about North Korea's nuclear ambitions as it concerns the creation of plutonium bombs because North Korea having the bomb helps him politically.

No, I never said that anyone should have nuclear weapons- in fact, no one should, fact. I was just raising the point asking why is it that we have the right to tell people whether or not they can have them when we do. It's that kind of hypocrisy that people use to justify attrocities against the west.