Korean missile...

[komitsuki]

Originally Posted by MMM

Are you saying that is a good thing or a bad thing?

Um... look at how I word things. Of course it's a bad thing.

[MMM]

Originally Posted by komitsuki

Um... look at how I word things. Of course it's a bad thing.

I can never be sure. This is the Internet.

[Ronin4hire]

UN at loggerheads over North Korea rocket | Stuff.co.nz

The United Nations failed to agree on a response to North Korea's long-range rocket launch despite pressure from Washington and its allies for action, while regional powers weighed the extent of the new security threat.

Analysts said Sunday's launch of the rocket - which flew over Japan during its 3200km flight - was effectively a test of a ballistic missile designed to carry a warhead as far as the US state of Alaska.

Japan had called for the emergency UN Security Council meeting on Sunday. But the 15 members agreed only to discuss the matter further, diplomats said.

The United States, Japan and South Korea say the launch violated Security Council resolutions banning the firing of ballistic missiles by Pyongyang, imposed after a nuclear test and other missile exercises in 2006.

Council diplomats said China, the nearest North Korea has to a major ally, and Russia were not convinced the launch of what North Korea said was a satellite was a violation of UN rules. Three other countries supported this view.

"It's 10 against five," one diplomat told Reuters.

The US military and South Korea said no part of the Taepodong-2 rocket entered orbit.

South Korea's biggest daily the Chosun Ilbo, quoting government sources, said the rocket flew 3,200km, which would put the US territory of Guam nearly in reach. The newspaper said this was double the range of an earlier version, called the Taepodong-1, fired over Japan in 1998.

I'm not familiar with resolution 1718 against North Korea. But it sounds like they were in clear violation from what I've been told briefly. Don't know why China and Russia thought otherwise...

Another leading South Korean daily, the JoongAng Ilbo, said Seoul needed to review how it organised its military, which has long focused on a possible conventional war with North Korea.

"North Korea's rocket launch has shifted the security landscape on the Korean peninsula because we must accept the reality that it is capable of launching intercontinental ballistic missiles," the JoongAng Ilbo said in an editorial.

Ordinary South Koreans, used to the unpredictable behaviour of their impoverished neighbour, were largely unfazed by the launch. But 88 percent of Japanese respondents to a poll published in the Yomiuri daily newspaper said they were uneasy about North Korea's missile development.

"There should be active public debate as to whether we should have the means to pre-emptively destroy North Korea's missile facilities," Japan's conservative Sankei Shimbun said in an editorial.

Interesting... I wonder if we'll see a more hawkish talk from Japan about getting rid of it's pacifist constitution because of the recent NK missile tests.

I would support a limited strike by Japan, US and South Korea I guess.

[komitsuki]

Originally Posted by Ronin4hire

I would support a limited strike by Japan, US and South Korea I guess.

I hope you are not crazy enought to support that.

If North Korea or any other countries attack North or South Korea... 1/3 of South Koreans will be instantly dead or severely injured within 3 hours from the continous artillery barrage in Seoul and the surrounding area way down to Suwon, a city south of Seoul.

[alanX]

Okay so basically the "president" of North Korea just said the reason he's testing missiles is so he can fire them on America........

[Jaydelart]

Originally Posted by komitsuki

I hope you are not crazy enought to support that.

If North Korea or any other countries attack North or South Korea... 1/3 of South Koreans will be instantly dead or severely injured within 3 hours from the continous artillery barrage in Seoul and the surrounding area way down to Suwon, a city south of Seoul.

That's the nature of war, isn't it? If we're going to play with the notion of war, we should already accept the reality of death. Let's just establish that, under these current circumstances, people will die if this problem continues to escalate in the wrong direction.

If faced with the inevitability of people's deaths... Who would you prefer initiated the battle? Hostile Communist North Korea or a defensive coalition of independent nations (Japan, South Korea, The United States, etc.)? It is a very cruel question, but I feel it is an important question, nevertheless.

[komitsuki]

Originally Posted by alanX

Okay so basically the "president" of North Korea just said the reason he's testing missiles is so he can fire them on America........

Or according to the South Korean media, North Korea wants to talk to America face-to-face; firing the missile several days ago is a jesture for "Don't ridicule me when we will possibly talk next time".

[Sinestra]

This is not something new its their same old habit. They are flexing their muscles and provoking a response and hope to use the attention to make some gains. I was not surprised by the announcement nor was I surprised they fired it.

I would not support any type of military strike or North Korea the situation is not to that level and the civilians would be the ones to pay the heaviest price.

Same old bullshit just a different international shovel.


*Side note* Raise your hand if you actually read an article and not just skim through it for bits of information to post? I must say i am not surprised by some of the comments because this is what happens when you post this kind of thread. Ignorance is not an excuse nor is it bliss the bluntly wrong information posted in here blew my mind at this point i feel for sorry MMM you infinitely more patience than i have my friend.

[Ronin4hire]

Originally Posted by Sinestra

I would not support any type of military strike or North Korea the situation is not to that level and the civilians would be the ones to pay the heaviest price.

A limited strike would be aimed purely at NK military targets. Particularly ones involved in it's missile and nuclear programme.

By support, I'm not saying that it's necessarily a good idea... after all NK's retaliation will have to be taken into account... but I believe that Japan, South Korea, the US are within their rights to carry it out.

[komitsuki]

Originally Posted by Jaydelart

If faced with the inevitability of people's deaths... Who would you prefer initiated the battle? Hostile Communist North Korea or a defensive coalition of independent nations (Japan, South Korea, The United States, etc.)? It is a very cruel question, but I feel it is an important question, nevertheless.

If you prefer a possible war that would kill 12 million civilians within 24 hours, you are sadly a disgrace to humanity.

Hey, South Korea is just equally hostile like North Korea as well... just South Korea doesn't actually express it openly unlike North Korea.