So glad im living in Australia, on the other side of the world. Though due to the treaty bound by the US, UK, AU and NZ, Our Air Force will proberly be called in if war breaks out. :|

 

 

 

Which is going to suck arse if it happens within the next 2 years and if I do get enlisted as a Avionics Tech/C.E. Tech.

 

If you think about it, there near your region...

 

 

 

I'm going to laugh when Kim attacks the USA...he will fail so hard at it...

 

I could probably shoot down his rockets with a pistol from my house. It's gonna fly that low, swear to god. :lol:

There are two reasons and two reasons only for not nuking NK off the map.

 

 

 

1. Civilians.

 

2. Nuclear fallout would negatively affect China and Russia, and most of all our nearly-ally SK.

 

 

 

3. What would be the consecuences (sp?) nuking Japan ended the WWII and created the ONU what would nuke NK would make?

 

 

 

 

 

Well, it's like this. You know Hiroshima and Nagasaki? The two spots where nukes were dropped on Japan in World War 2, over half a century ago? It's still toxic to go anywhere near there outside of full hazmat setup. Mix that with nuclear fallout (dust from the explosion is irradiated, spread WAY the [bleep] out thanks to winds), and you could turn the region into a wasteland if you drop anything. That, my friend, is why they're f@$%ing called "Weapons of Mass Destruction": they annihilate everything in the entire area and make it uninhabitable for a very long time.

 

 

 

 

 

http://www.cracked.com/article_16477_5-famous-sci-fi-weapons-that-theyre-actually-building.html

 

 

 

#2."Rods from God," Space-Launched Kinetic Megabombs

 

 

 

Much better than a nuke. If only it actually existed.

 

 

 

 

 

I heard about those. All of the kinetic destructive power of a nuke without the radiation poisoning the land in the immediate area for a couple decades. It's a "Best of both worlds" type thing, with the only problem being the vulnerability of a satellite from a well-aimed rocket. At least with nukes it's hard to know where they're at.

Luckily I'm in England.

 

Eh. better safe than sorry.

 

 

 

*Nuclear fallout shelter*

 

 

 

On a serious note, they seriously need to sort this out.

 

North Korea doesn't have anywhere near the same amount of power as the US, and if they start a war, they WILL lose.

 

Seriously, I cannot understand what he is thinking right now.

 

 

 

And he wants to nuke America on July 4... Seriously how could he be any more idiotic? On July 4, the sky is practically lit up with fireworks. People will just see the explosion and go "OOoooh... Ahhhh" :lol:

 

 

 

Anyway, he is insane. MAD can be useless when a small nation gets slammed with an Armada of ICBMs, destroying the country AND the arsenal. Plus, the US has a missile defense shield... If he just makes threats, the US government could just prepare ahead of time and stop it if it does happen. If he didn't announce it and did it, they would at least have the element of surprise...

 

 

 

 

 

You would have to be stupid not be able to tell the difference between pretty multi-coloured sparks, to a gigantic mushroom cloud, everything being destroyed around it, shockwaves, radiation....oh, and your face being melted off -.-

So where's our 4th of July surprise, Kim Jong-Il? We're just waiting for a reason to kick your [wagon].

There are two reasons and two reasons only for not nuking NK off the map.

 

 

 

1. Civilians.

 

2. Nuclear fallout would negatively affect China and Russia, and most of all our nearly-ally SK.

 

 

 

3. What would be the consecuences (sp?) nuking Japan ended the WWII and created the ONU what would nuke NK would make?

 

 

 

 

 

Well, it's like this. You know Hiroshima and Nagasaki? The two spots where nukes were dropped on Japan in World War 2, over half a century ago? It's still toxic to go anywhere near there outside of full hazmat setup. Mix that with nuclear fallout (dust from the explosion is irradiated, spread WAY the [bleep] out thanks to winds), and you could turn the region into a wasteland if you drop anything. That, my friend, is why they're f@$%ing called "Weapons of Mass Destruction": they annihilate everything in the entire area and make it uninhabitable for a very long time.

 

 

 

 

 

http://www.cracked.com/article_16477_5-famous-sci-fi-weapons-that-theyre-actually-building.html

 

 

 

#2."Rods from God," Space-Launched Kinetic Megabombs

 

 

 

Much better than a nuke. If only it actually existed.

 

 

 

 

 

I heard about those. All of the kinetic destructive power of a nuke without the radiation poisoning the land in the immediate area for a couple decades. It's a "Best of both worlds" type thing, with the only problem being the vulnerability of a satellite from a well-aimed rocket. At least with nukes it's hard to know where they're at.

 

To the bolded, my Answer is have an automated Defense Network that can tell if there is an incoming Missile or rocket heading towards it. Also having a ground team to monitor the Automated Defense just in case it tries to fire on friendlies. The ground team would be able to deactivate the Satellite and destroy said missile in flight if something happened.

 

 

 

Then again, you could do what they did in End War, Just make it a freaking Space Station.

There are two reasons and two reasons only for not nuking NK off the map.

 

 

 

1. Civilians.

 

2. Nuclear fallout would negatively affect China and Russia, and most of all our nearly-ally SK.

 

 

 

3. What would be the consecuences (sp?) nuking Japan ended the WWII and created the ONU what would nuke NK would make?

 

 

 

 

 

Well, it's like this. You know Hiroshima and Nagasaki? The two spots where nukes were dropped on Japan in World War 2, over half a century ago? It's still toxic to go anywhere near there outside of full hazmat setup. Mix that with nuclear fallout (dust from the explosion is irradiated, spread WAY the [bleep] out thanks to winds), and you could turn the region into a wasteland if you drop anything. That, my friend, is why they're f@$%ing called "Weapons of Mass Destruction": they annihilate everything in the entire area and make it uninhabitable for a very long time.

 

 

 

 

 

http://www.cracked.com/article_16477_5-famous-sci-fi-weapons-that-theyre-actually-building.html

 

 

 

#2."Rods from God," Space-Launched Kinetic Megabombs

 

 

 

Much better than a nuke. If only it actually existed.

 

 

 

 

 

I heard about those. All of the kinetic destructive power of a nuke without the radiation poisoning the land in the immediate area for a couple decades. It's a "Best of both worlds" type thing, with the only problem being the vulnerability of a satellite from a well-aimed rocket. At least with nukes it's hard to know where they're at.

 

To the bolded, my Answer is have an automated Defense Network that can tell if there is an incoming Missile or rocket heading towards it. Also having a ground team to monitor the Automated Defense just in case it tries to fire on friendlies. The ground team would be able to deactivate the Satellite and destroy said missile in flight if something happened.

 

 

 

Then again, you could do what they did in End War, Just make it a freaking Space Station.

 

 

 

 

 

While the American military has a LOT of cash at it's disposal, a dedicated space station is somewhat beyond their abilities, unless if Congress clears the inordinate amount of money needed for that. I don't think they'd very much like spending upwards of a couple hundred billion on a comparatively minor adjustment to the arsenal.

people still take korea seriusly? it's an impoverished country with an overzelus leader, nothing to worry about really

[hide=Quotes]

There are two reasons and two reasons only for not nuking NK off the map.

 

 

 

1. Civilians.

 

2. Nuclear fallout would negatively affect China and Russia, and most of all our nearly-ally SK.

 

 

 

3. What would be the consecuences (sp?) nuking Japan ended the WWII and created the ONU what would nuke NK would make?

 

 

 

 

 

Well, it's like this. You know Hiroshima and Nagasaki? The two spots where nukes were dropped on Japan in World War 2, over half a century ago? It's still toxic to go anywhere near there outside of full hazmat setup. Mix that with nuclear fallout (dust from the explosion is irradiated, spread WAY the [bleep] out thanks to winds), and you could turn the region into a wasteland if you drop anything. That, my friend, is why they're f@$%ing called "Weapons of Mass Destruction": they annihilate everything in the entire area and make it uninhabitable for a very long time.

 

 

 

 

 

http://www.cracked.com/article_16477_5-famous-sci-fi-weapons-that-theyre-actually-building.html

 

 

 

#2."Rods from God," Space-Launched Kinetic Megabombs

 

 

 

Much better than a nuke. If only it actually existed.

 

 

 

 

 

I heard about those. All of the kinetic destructive power of a nuke without the radiation poisoning the land in the immediate area for a couple decades. It's a "Best of both worlds" type thing, with the only problem being the vulnerability of a satellite from a well-aimed rocket. At least with nukes it's hard to know where they're at.

 

To the bolded, my Answer is have an automated Defense Network that can tell if there is an incoming Missile or rocket heading towards it. Also having a ground team to monitor the Automated Defense just in case it tries to fire on friendlies. The ground team would be able to deactivate the Satellite and destroy said missile in flight if something happened.

 

 

 

Then again, you could do what they did in End War, Just make it a freaking Space Station.

 

 

 

 

 

While the American military has a LOT of cash at it's disposal, a dedicated space station is somewhat beyond their abilities, unless if Congress clears the inordinate amount of money needed for that. I don't think they'd very much like spending upwards of a couple hundred billion on a comparatively minor adjustment to the arsenal.

[/hide]

 

 

 

Yes, but you'd have a weapon that is the strength of a Nuclear Missile with out the environmental problems. Besides, we don't have this technology now, It take at least 15-20 years to actually build these satellites and space defense station. True it would cost money, but you have something to defend your country with. Who wouldn't want a Bunker Bust Nuclear warhead that has no environmental side-effects.

 

 

 

Oh, Kim you wanted these? Sorry, NK won't be around by the time you got your hands on them.

 

 

 

people still take korea seriusly? it's an impoverished country with an overzelus leader, nothing to worry about really

 

 

 

And Overzelus leader with Nuclear weapons that would or is going to attack his neighbors...nothing to worry about?

And Overzelus leader with Nuclear weapons that would or is going to attack his neighbors...nothing to worry about?

 

 

 

korea is so tiny that one or two carriers in the pacific is enough to keep their country in check because they have no navvy or air force to speak of

i have heard rumors that the US is going to test its latest bioengineering technology on NK to poison the water supply and their people.

 

 

 

for those of you who don't know what bioengineering is, apparently we are able to change weather and release certain toxins in clouds that carry extremely potent poisons and bacteria that is highly infectious. in a video i saw earlier, the govt. was testing some type of bioengineering in a deserted part of northern california but it spread rapidly and eventually reached small towns and made "yellow slime" appear on surfaces and got many children sick.

i have heard rumors that the US is going to test its latest bioengineering technology on NK to poison the water supply and their people.

 

 

 

for those of you who don't know what bioengineering is, apparently we are able to change weather and release certain toxins in clouds that carry extremely potent poisons and bacteria that is highly infectious. in a video i saw earlier, the govt. was testing some type of bioengineering in a deserted part of northern california but it spread rapidly and eventually reached small towns and made "yellow slime" appear on surfaces and got many children sick.

 

 

 

rofl

I also heard that our nuclear testing in the pacific has mutated a gecko and made it 50 ft tall, and its heading for New York City. Forget NK, I'm building my bunker to defend against Godzilla.

 

 

 

/arethesarcasmtagsevennecessary?whatevertryingtoreadallofthiswithoutspaceswillbeannoyingashellforanyonethickenoughtoreadthisfar.

rofl

 

 

 

It is pretty funny, as a lot of other posts in this topic have been.

 

 

 

About the kinetic weapons mentioned earlier, they won't happen in the near future for two main reasons: First, there is an international law against putting weapons in space. Second, it isn't cost effective. The amount of mass needed to actually cause nuclear level damage would take tens if not a hundred rocket launches/shuttle launches. That is just for the mass, you still need to figure out a way to deploy it at an angle to the earth so that it doesn't burn up in the atmosphere, and do it in a way so that no corrections need to be made after initial firing (since the mass would be too great to change direction in the amount of time given). While dealing with that angle you have to have some sort of accuracy with hitting the target on the ground also.

North Korea is friggin insane if they think they can wipe us off the map.

 

 

 

We don't need nuclear bombs to win a war against North Korea.

 

 

 

Let's hope KJI remembers that he's banned from firing any missiles WHATSOEVER by the UN.

North Korea is friggin insane if they think they can wipe us off the map.

 

 

 

To paraphrase a quote:

 

The real question is not whether Koreans think, but whether Americans do.

North Korea is friggin insane if they think they can wipe us off the map.

 

 

 

We don't need nuclear bombs to win a war against North Korea.

 

 

 

Let's hope KJI remembers that he's banned from firing any missiles WHATSOEVER by the UN.

 

 

 

They keep doing it though to show defiance to the UN...

 

 

 

How many more test will they go before we finally say "That's it, your stopping now." *Insert non-nuclear military strike*

North Korea is friggin insane if they think they can wipe us off the map.

 

 

 

We don't need nuclear bombs to win a war against North Korea.

 

 

 

Let's hope KJI remembers that he's banned from firing any missiles WHATSOEVER by the UN.

 

 

 

They keep doing it though to show defiance to the UN...

 

 

 

How many more test will they go before we finally say "That's it, your stopping now." *Insert non-nuclear military strike*

 

 

 

I heard the UN is preparing to wave its finger really angrily at nk; its going down get to the bunkers

North Korea is friggin insane if they think they can wipe us off the map.

 

 

 

We don't need nuclear bombs to win a war against North Korea.

 

 

 

Let's hope KJI remembers that he's banned from firing any missiles WHATSOEVER by the UN.

 

It hasn't stopped them so far.

 

 

 

More and more it seems that, like the league of nations before it, the UN is a lame duck, without any real power to make a difference. I've heard that NK is trying to get negotiations started to formally end the Korean war, and thats why they are using these shows of force.

North Korea is friggin insane if they think they can wipe us off the map.

 

 

 

We don't need nuclear bombs to win a war against North Korea.

 

 

 

Let's hope KJI remembers that he's banned from firing any missiles WHATSOEVER by the UN.

 

It hasn't stopped them so far.

 

 

 

More and more it seems that, like the league of nations before it, the UN is a lame duck, without any real power to make a difference. I've heard that NK is trying to get negotiations started to formally end the Korean war, and thats why they are using these shows of force.

 

 

 

I doubt that is the reason; the war has been at truce since the US left(though NK said the truce doesn't stand now so we could technically attack them :roll:) and its not like their were problems with the truce.

North Korea is friggin insane if they think they can wipe us off the map.

 

 

 

We don't need nuclear bombs to win a war against North Korea.

 

 

 

Let's hope KJI remembers that he's banned from firing any missiles WHATSOEVER by the UN.

 

It hasn't stopped them so far.

 

 

 

More and more it seems that, like the league of nations before it, the UN is a lame duck, without any real power to make a difference. I've heard that NK is trying to get negotiations started to formally end the Korean war, and thats why they are using these shows of force.

 

 

 

I doubt that is the reason; the war has been at truce since the US left(though NK said the truce doesn't stand now so we could technically attack them :roll:) and its not like their were problems with the truce.

 

 

 

Exactly, it ended in a truce, not a peace treaty. The fact that they are still technically at war doesn't constitute a "problem"?

No...The USA is a neighbour spying on the children playing next door and is willing to use a shotgun to stop Jimmy from pulling Jessie's hair.

 

No... the USA is a 16 year old kid willing to use a shotgun to stop Jimmy (a 13 year old) from building a gun in his basement and bringing it to school in order to kill USA's sister Jenny.

 

Both interesting analogies, I think that we know Jimmy is pulling Jessie's hair but think that Jimmy is going to kill Jessie later.

North Korea is friggin insane if they think they can wipe us off the map.

 

 

 

To paraphrase a quote:

 

The real question is not whether Koreans think, but whether Americans do.

 

 

 

Most of us think. Many of our politicians don't, which is one reason why I didn't want Sarah Palin as VP.

North Korea is friggin insane if they think they can wipe us off the map.

 

 

 

To paraphrase a quote:

 

The real question is not whether Koreans think, but whether Americans do.

 

 

 

Most of us think. Many of our politicians don't, which is one reason why I didn't want Sarah Palin as VP.

 

 

 

Not that I'm the type to point out that everything has gone to hell under a democratically controlled congress and most of the debt was created by a democratic president; but it kind of did.

http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/31789294/ns ... -security/

 

 

 

Cyber attacks could be from North Korea, wonderfull.

http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/31789294/ns/technology_and_science-security/

 

 

 

Cyber attacks could be from North Korea, wonderfull.

 

Could have been worse...It could have been an actual attack from NK with actual troops for once...

 

 

 

I'm pretty sure that's the farthest they'll get to us...Lucky they didn't get any good info of anything from it...hopefully...