If you can read this, either the style sheet didn't load or you have an older browser that doesn't support style sheets. Try clearing your browser cache and refreshing the page.

(News24)   Most Asian airlines say they will divert planes from the intended flight path of North Korea's 'satellite' launch because there could be the potential for additional launches if it's a disguised missile test   (news24.com) divider line 53
    More: Interesting, Asian Airlines, North Korea, Western Allies, Southeast Asian, Kim Il Sung, military plans, Emergency evacuation, UN resolution  
•       •       •

3207 clicks; posted to Main » on 10 Apr 2012 at 11:27 AM (2 years ago)   |  Favorite    |   share:  Share on Twitter share via Email Share on Facebook   more»



53 Comments   (+0 »)
   
View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest

Archived thread

First | « | 1 | 2 | » | Last | Show all
 
2012-04-10 11:30:05 AM  
I really do hope part or all of it flies over Japanese airspace justto see if they will make good on their threat to shoot it down.
 
2012-04-10 11:33:28 AM  
Japanese airrines... verry tiny.
 
2012-04-10 11:34:17 AM  
I'm just curious why we get to launch anything we want, yet we're they only country on the planet that has used nuclear weapons in war, and doubling down by dropping said weapons onto civilian targets... Not that I trust North Korea, I just don't get why the ones who misused the weapons themselves get to tell everyone else who can and can't use them And yes, it's us, because we also let Israel get away with ignoring the UN, so all the hypocrisy rests on our shoulders...
 
TWX
2012-04-10 11:39:07 AM  
I thought that a rocket or missile was a vehicle, while a satellite is more of a payload, like a warhead or an explosive...
 
2012-04-10 11:39:27 AM  

Mikey1969: I'm just curious why we get to launch anything we want, yet we're they only country on the planet that has used nuclear weapons in war, and doubling down by dropping said weapons onto civilian targets... Not that I trust North Korea, I just don't get why the ones who misused the weapons themselves get to tell everyone else who can and can't use them And yes, it's us, because we also let Israel get away with ignoring the UN, so all the hypocrisy rests on our shoulders...


The answer to your question lies within it... because we won.

As for the Israel part, I'm with you; cut them loose.
 
2012-04-10 11:40:31 AM  
It's not a weapon. Geez. How many people actually believe in war?

Like none.

It's the messianic age and Jesus is the maschiac. How stupid are we.
 
2012-04-10 11:42:10 AM  

Mikey1969: I'm just curious why we get to launch anything we want


Because the UN Security Council has specifically banned NK from doing it, but not us.

I just don't get why the ones who misused the weapons themselves

I don't believe that the use of two small atomic bombs against Japan in WWII compares even remotely to the possible ways NK might use an atomic bomb of their own if they had the missile delivery system.

Sometimes it's as simple as "because we're right and they're wrong". We aren't going to lob a nuke into Mexico without provocation. NK might just do that to their neighbors one day.
 
2012-04-10 11:42:33 AM  

Mikey1969: I'm just curious why we get to launch anything we want, yet we're they only country on the planet that has used nuclear weapons in war, and doubling down by dropping said weapons onto civilian targets... Not that I trust North Korea, I just don't get why the ones who misused the weapons themselves get to tell everyone else who can and can't use them And yes, it's us, because we also let Israel get away with ignoring the UN, so all the hypocrisy rests on our shoulders...


Honestly? Geography. We have islands and coast lines out in the middle of no where, so it's easy for us to just pop out a missile/rocket into the Pacific without it going over anyones territory or in the flight path of a major airline.
 
2012-04-10 11:54:34 AM  

Mikey1969: I'm just curious why we get to launch anything we want, yet we're they only country on the planet that has used nuclear weapons in war, and doubling down by dropping said weapons onto civilian targets... Not that I trust North Korea, I just don't get why the ones who misused the weapons themselves get to tell everyone else who can and can't use them And yes, it's us, because we also let Israel get away with ignoring the UN, so all the hypocrisy rests on our shoulders...


It's a touchy area. North Korea and South Korea are technically still at war.
 
2012-04-10 11:58:12 AM  

Mikey1969: I'm just curious why we get to launch anything we want, yet we're they only country on the planet that has used nuclear weapons in war, and doubling down by dropping said weapons onto civilian targets... Not that I trust North Korea, I just don't get why the ones who misused the weapons themselves get to tell everyone else who can and can't use them And yes, it's us, because we also let Israel get away with ignoring the UN, so all the hypocrisy rests on our shoulders...


Read about the cost of "Operation Olympic". There was no hypocrisy. Our duty was and is to ourselves and our allies, not the Japanese.

I really don't get how you managed to bash Israel in a better Korea missile thread.
 
2012-04-10 12:01:04 PM  
Also there is a general understanding among the missle launching countries (US France Russia China Japan India) to tell each other about the launches (when, where going, etc) so nobody gets an itchy trigger finger. The Norks refuse to do this in the agreed manner, and also have begged for food and promised in exchange not to do this. So there's that.

google ballistic missile launch notification agreement
 
2012-04-10 12:01:44 PM  
Mikey1969: I'm just curious why we get to launch anything we want, yet we're they only country on the planet that has used nuclear weapons in war, and doubling down by dropping said weapons onto civilian targets.


At that time period, any country that developed the bomb would have dropped it without a second thought.

It was a hellish time, full of mustard gas, flame throwers,booby trapped bombs and toe popper mines and basically everyone was at fault.

And while most other countries have realized the error of their past ways, North Korea, is still living in that past.
 
2012-04-10 12:06:47 PM  
timeglobalspin.files.wordpress.com
Did someone say 'additional lunches?'

/image hot like dear leaders hunger
 
2012-04-10 12:14:46 PM  

dukeblue219: I don't believe that the use of two small atomic bombs against Japan in WWII compares even remotely to the possible ways NK might use an atomic bomb of their own if they had the missile delivery system.


Doesn't matter the size when you drop them onto civilian targets is the point I'm trying to make.

Once again, not cheerleading NK in any way, just never been able to understand the double standard, but I guess you pegged it the best: 'We won'.
 
2012-04-10 12:20:21 PM  

lordargent: Mikey1969: I'm just curious why we get to launch anything we want, yet we're they only country on the planet that has used nuclear weapons in war, and doubling down by dropping said weapons onto civilian targets.


At that time period, any country that developed the bomb would have dropped it without a second thought.

It was a hellish time, full of mustard gas, flame throwers,booby trapped bombs and toe popper mines and basically everyone was at fault.

And while most other countries have realized the error of their past ways, North Korea, is still living in that past.


That's a decent answer as well. My point wasn't the bombs, just the civilian targets. I think we could have scared the fark out of them sufficiently dropping them in someplace else, but since Japan is an island, we didn't have a lot of space. Maybe we should have just wiped out some of their scenic areas that they would have to stare at on a daily basis, and not be able to visit for years? Nuke Mt Fuji?
 
2012-04-10 12:22:19 PM  

Mikey1969: dukeblue219: I don't believe that the use of two small atomic bombs against Japan in WWII compares even remotely to the possible ways NK might use an atomic bomb of their own if they had the missile delivery system.

Doesn't matter the size when you drop them onto civilian targets is the point I'm trying to make.

Once again, not cheerleading NK in any way, just never been able to understand the double standard, but I guess you pegged it the best: 'We won'.


We did it to end the war.
Also, to get an accurate battle damage assessment in a real world test - barbaric? Look up what the Japanese did during the war (Unit 731).

On the plus side, the witness accounts and pictures of the aftermath of those two shots probably did more to reign in the trigger fingers for everyone involved.
 
2012-04-10 12:22:53 PM  
I hope they nuke someone, anyone.
 
2012-04-10 12:25:38 PM  

Mikey1969: lordargent: Mikey1969: I'm just curious why we get to launch anything we want, yet we're they only country on the planet that has used nuclear weapons in war, and doubling down by dropping said weapons onto civilian targets.


At that time period, any country that developed the bomb would have dropped it without a second thought.

It was a hellish time, full of mustard gas, flame throwers,booby trapped bombs and toe popper mines and basically everyone was at fault.

And while most other countries have realized the error of their past ways, North Korea, is still living in that past.

That's a decent answer as well. My point wasn't the bombs, just the civilian targets. I think we could have scared the fark out of them sufficiently dropping them in someplace else, but since Japan is an island, we didn't have a lot of space. Maybe we should have just wiped out some of their scenic areas that they would have to stare at on a daily basis, and not be able to visit for years? Nuke Mt Fuji?


Japanese historians assert this wouldn't have worked, and nuking two actual cities almost didn't work. The debate in the government after the bombs went on for days, and when the emperor finally decided to surrender, there was a military plot to intercept his recorded surrender broadcast and lock him up (which plot didn't work). We had no more bombs for at least 6 months (we had three and blew them all up), meaning operation olympic would have occurred and millions and millions of japanese would have died. Plus the russkies were fixing to invade, and japan would have ended up like north and south korea.
 
2012-04-10 12:30:19 PM  
Mikey1969: That's a decent answer as well. My point wasn't the bombs, just the civilian targets

At the time, the bombing of civilian targets was a common occurrence even with conventional weapons.

Nukes are horrible weapons, but the same death and destruction could be attained with continual conventional bombing.

// let's not forget about the London blitz.
 
2012-04-10 12:35:11 PM  

DoctorOfLove: Japanese historians assert this wouldn't have worked, and nuking two actual cities almost didn't work. The debate in the government after the bombs went on for days, and when the emperor finally decided to surrender, there was a military plot to intercept his recorded surrender broadcast and lock him up (which plot didn't work). We had no more bombs for at least 6 months (we had three and blew them all up), meaning operation olympic would have occurred and millions and millions of japanese would have died. Plus the russkies were fixing to invade, and japan would have ended up like north and south korea.


Fair enough. Besides, we had to leave places for them to make cars and electronics... :-)
 
2012-04-10 12:36:35 PM  

lordargent: // let's not forget about the London blitz.


Yeah, not like that was acceptable either, IMHO.

I guess they can't all be like the middle-of-nowhere tank battles in the Persian Gulf War.
 
2012-04-10 12:37:24 PM  

lordargent: Mikey1969: That's a decent answer as well. My point wasn't the bombs, just the civilian targets

At the time, the bombing of civilian targets was a common occurrence even with conventional weapons.

Nukes are horrible weapons, but the same death and destruction could be attained with continual conventional bombing.

// let's not forget about the London blitz.


Or the Ballroom Blitz
 
2012-04-10 12:40:57 PM  

Mikey1969: I'm just curious why we get to launch anything we want, yet we're they only country on the planet that has used nuclear weapons in war, and doubling down by dropping said weapons onto civilian targets... Not that I trust North Korea, I just don't get why the ones who misused the weapons themselves get to tell everyone else who can and can't use them And yes, it's us, because we also let Israel get away with ignoring the UN, so all the hypocrisy rests on our shoulders...


That the US by and large avoids testing weapons in the air-space of nations which it doesn't have mutual defense treaties with has something to do with it.
 
2012-04-10 12:42:54 PM  

Mikey1969: dukeblue219: I don't believe that the use of two small atomic bombs against Japan in WWII compares even remotely to the possible ways NK might use an atomic bomb of their own if they had the missile delivery system.

Doesn't matter the size when you drop them onto civilian targets is the point I'm trying to make.


If you don't want your civilians targeted, don't blend your martial facilities into residential areas.
 
2012-04-10 12:45:13 PM  

lordargent: Mikey1969: I'm just curious why we get to launch anything we want, yet we're they only country on the planet that has used nuclear weapons in war, and doubling down by dropping said weapons onto civilian targets.


At that time period, any country that developed the bomb would have dropped it without a second thought.

It was a hellish time, full of mustard gas, flame throwers,booby trapped bombs and toe popper mines and basically everyone was at fault.

And while most other countries have realized the error of their past ways, North Korea, is still living in that past.


Yeah we sure have learned. Just ask an Iraqi. Or an afgani. Or Pakistani. Or a serb or a Libyan or or or or...

Innocent babes we are. Pure as the falling snow.
 
2012-04-10 12:48:25 PM  

DoctorOfLove: Japanese historians assert this wouldn't have worked, and nuking two actual cities almost didn't work. The debate in the government after the bombs went on for days, and when the emperor finally decided to surrender, there was a military plot to intercept his recorded surrender broadcast and lock him up (which plot didn't work). We had no more bombs for at least 6 months (we had three and blew them all up), meaning operation olympic would have occurred and millions and millions of japanese would have died. Plus the russkies were fixing to invade, and japan would have ended up like north and south korea.


To this day we are issuing purple hearts that were created for Operation Olympic. We had anticipated the loss of the entire Marine Corps.

We were woefully unprepared for what would have happened. The use of little boy and fat man seem almost miraculously humanitarian compared to Olympic.
 
2012-04-10 12:54:51 PM  

lordargent: Mikey1969: That's a decent answer as well. My point wasn't the bombs, just the civilian targets

At the time, the bombing of civilian targets was a common occurrence even with conventional weapons.

Nukes are horrible weapons, but the same death and destruction could be attained with continual conventional bombing.

// let's not forget about the London blitz.


LeMay estimated that 1 nuke = 330 B-29s with incendiaries. He had 1,500 B-29s.
 
2012-04-10 12:56:22 PM  
I predict it explodes on its way up, then North Korea blames South Korea/America for its destruction.
 
2012-04-10 01:00:27 PM  
"Best" Korea really sucks with ¼ million people in concentration camps and gulags. Meanwhile, "Worst" Korea churns out the best gay porn in Asia, best free gay porn anyway. I sure hope this "Best Korea" thing is all sarcasm.
 
2012-04-10 01:02:35 PM  
And LeMay was flying 500 B-29s per night, so he was dropping the equivalent of 1.5 atomic bombs every night. Napalm phosphorus and magnesium are amazing things.
 
2012-04-10 01:09:07 PM  
Ned Stark: Yeah we sure have learned. Just ask an Iraqi. Or an afgani. Or Pakistani. Or a serb or a Libyan or or or or.

1) Nobody is being gassed.

2) Civilians aren't being directly targeted.

War is hell, but to equate a war from this era to older wars is a disservice.
 
2012-04-10 01:17:52 PM  
If Best Korea wasn't the best why do you think we'd call it Best??
 
2012-04-10 01:25:14 PM  

DoctorOfLove: And LeMay was flying 500 B-29s per night, so he was dropping the equivalent of 1.5 atomic bombs every night. Napalm phosphorus and magnesium are amazing things.


This. While we remember the horror of nukes due to the shocking, dramatic destruction wrought by a single weapon, we tend to forget that we were already inflicting destruction of that magnitude on a regular basis; we just had to work harder at it. Hiroshima and Nagasaki weren't anything special compared to Dresden, Hamburg, Tokyo, etc., except for the speed and efficiency afforded by the new technology and the novelty of invisible, lingering after-effects.
 
2012-04-10 01:25:26 PM  

DoctorOfLove: We had no more bombs for at least 6 months (we had three and blew them all up)


The best part of the story was the U.S.'s bluffing, as if there were a lot of bombs and would reluctantly nuke Japan into the stone age.
 
2012-04-10 01:26:50 PM  
Needs something to watch during the day.. hope somone shoots it down

anarchy & chaos are my friends
 
2012-04-10 01:28:45 PM  

Kevin72: "Best" Korea really sucks with ¼ million people in concentration camps and gulags. Meanwhile, "Worst" Korea churns out the best gay porn in Asia, best free gay porn anyway. I sure hope this "Best Korea" thing is all sarcasm.


Sarcasm? This is Fark. We don't do that here.
 
2012-04-10 01:33:05 PM  

Mikey1969: I'm just curious why we get to launch anything we want, yet we're they only country on the planet that has used nuclear weapons in war, and doubling down by dropping said weapons onto civilian targets... Not that I trust North Korea, I just don't get why the ones who misused the weapons themselves get to tell everyone else who can and can't use them And yes, it's us, because we also let Israel get away with ignoring the UN, so all the hypocrisy rests on our shoulders...


Because we can?
Because we have nukes already?

It's like if you get into a fight with another guy, and you grab a baseball bat. The other guy looks around and he sees a baseball bat too. Are you gonna stand there and let him pick it up? Hell no. You're gonna whack that farker if he tries.
 
2012-04-10 01:47:11 PM  

dukeblue219: Mikey1969: I'm just curious why we get to launch anything we want

Because the UN Security Council has specifically banned NK from doing it, but not us.

I just don't get why the ones who misused the weapons themselves

I don't believe that the use of two small atomic bombs against Japan in WWII compares even remotely to the possible ways NK might use an atomic bomb of their own if they had the missile delivery system.

Sometimes it's as simple as "because we're right and they're wrong". We aren't going to lob a nuke into Mexico without provocation. NK might just do that to their neighbors one day.


I think they might do that to their southern neighbor, not so much their northern and western neighbor.
 
2012-04-10 01:49:59 PM  
Has Blofeld teamed up with North Korea? Will James Bond and Tiffany Case save the world? Cheeky
 
2012-04-10 01:52:26 PM  
3.bp.blogspot.com

www.deathvalleymag.com

3.bp.blogspot.com

1.bp.blogspot.com

/What's an Asian airline without Asian stewardesses?
 
2012-04-10 02:16:49 PM  

Kevin72: "Best" Korea really sucks with ¼ million people in concentration camps and gulags. Meanwhile, "Worst" Korea churns out the best gay porn in Asia, best free gay porn anyway. I sure hope this "Best Korea" thing is all sarcasm.


s3.amazonaws.com
 
2012-04-10 03:06:30 PM  

Mikey1969: I'm just curious why we get to launch anything we want, yet we're they only country on the planet that has used nuclear weapons in war, and doubling down by dropping said weapons onto civilian targets... Not that I trust North Korea, I just don't get why the ones who misused the weapons themselves get to tell everyone else who can and can't use them And yes, it's us, because we also let Israel get away with ignoring the UN, so all the hypocrisy rests on our shoulders...


We can because we can.
 
2012-04-10 04:14:22 PM  
Mikey1969: I'm just curious why we get to launch anything we want, yet we're they only country on the planet that has used nuclear weapons in war, and doubling down by dropping said weapons onto civilian targets... Not that I trust North Korea, I just don't get why the ones who misused the weapons themselves get to tell everyone else who can and can't use them And yes, it's us, because we also let Israel get away with ignoring the UN, so all the hypocrisy rests on our shoulders...


The Nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty. That's why.
 
2012-04-10 04:30:53 PM  

Mikey1969: I'm just curious why we get to launch anything we want, yet we're they only country on the planet that has used nuclear weapons in war, and doubling down by dropping said weapons onto civilian targets...


Out of curiosity, what's a non-civilian target that a nuclear strike would be used against?
 
2012-04-10 05:12:05 PM  

ciberido: Mikey1969: I'm just curious why we get to launch anything we want, yet we're they only country on the planet that has used nuclear weapons in war, and doubling down by dropping said weapons onto civilian targets...

Out of curiosity, what's a non-civilian target that a nuclear strike would be used against?


Aircraft carrier, desert military base/bunker with no connected town, Hollywood.
 
2012-04-10 05:16:09 PM  

Leo Bloom's Freakout: ciberido: Mikey1969: I'm just curious why we get to launch anything we want, yet we're they only country on the planet that has used nuclear weapons in war, and doubling down by dropping said weapons onto civilian targets...

Out of curiosity, what's a non-civilian target that a nuclear strike would be used against?

Aircraft carrier, desert military base/bunker with no connected town, Hollywood.


New Jersey
 
DVD
2012-04-10 05:28:09 PM  

Mikey1969: dukeblue219: I don't believe that the use of two small atomic bombs against Japan in WWII compares even remotely to the possible ways NK might use an atomic bomb of their own if they had the missile delivery system.

Doesn't matter the size when you drop them onto civilian targets is the point I'm trying to make.

Once again, not cheerleading NK in any way, just never been able to understand the double standard, but I guess you pegged it the best: 'We won'.


One thing to study up on is the composition of Hiroshima and Nagasaki (and I guess Kokura, as it was targetted before Nagasaki, but cloud cover saved it and doomed Nagasaki that day.) Hiroshima had military value in terms of a division stationed there and Nagasaki was an industrial and naval supply center. But quite mixed in with civilian infrastructure. Not quite up to the level of Saddam stationing every piece of weaponry in the middle of civilians, however. It wasn't intentional, it just grew that way over decades.

I personally think that we would have messed around long enough trying to get Operation Olympic working that the Soviets would have invaded Japan from the other side... and considering their tactics vs. Japanese defensive tactics, it would have made the combined casualties of both bombings look like a minor skirmish in comparison. Or in other words, even if it wasn't a Soviet satellite, it would have become a low population 3rd world country for a long time.
 
2012-04-10 06:02:06 PM  

DVD: Mikey1969: dukeblue219: I don't believe that the use of two small atomic bombs against Japan in WWII compares even remotely to the possible ways NK might use an atomic bomb of their own if they had the missile delivery system.

Doesn't matter the size when you drop them onto civilian targets is the point I'm trying to make.

Once again, not cheerleading NK in any way, just never been able to understand the double standard, but I guess you pegged it the best: 'We won'.

One thing to study up on is the composition of Hiroshima and Nagasaki (and I guess Kokura, as it was targetted before Nagasaki, but cloud cover saved it and doomed Nagasaki that day.) Hiroshima had military value in terms of a division stationed there and Nagasaki was an industrial and naval supply center. But quite mixed in with civilian infrastructure. Not quite up to the level of Saddam stationing every piece of weaponry in the middle of civilians, however. It wasn't intentional, it just grew that way over decades.

I personally think that we would have messed around long enough trying to get Operation Olympic working that the Soviets would have invaded Japan from the other side... and considering their tactics vs. Japanese defensive tactics, it would have made the combined casualties of both bombings look like a minor skirmish in comparison. Or in other words, even if it wasn't a Soviet satellite, it would have become a low population 3rd world country for a long time.


Japan could have held off a Russian invasion for a while.

For one, they were starting in Hokkaido, which is a mountainous, wintry island with which the Japanese were familiar and the Russians were not. Even if they took that island, they would still need to make a crossing to the actual mainland, where what land was flat was occupied by tiered rice-paddies -- which are just a serious of floodable, exposed choke-points. And the Russians didn't have helicopters. Basically, the entire country would have been like the attack on Arnhem, but worse.
 
2012-04-10 07:32:18 PM  
I wonder if the US warships could generate a strong enough EMP to disable the rocket instead of shooting it.
 
2012-04-10 07:37:47 PM  

The Beatings Will Continue Until Morale Improves: I wonder if the US warships could generate a strong enough EMP to disable the rocket instead of shooting it.


images1.variety.com

No EMP necessary, we'll have our Jedi Knights fix their gaze upon it.
 
Displayed 50 of 53 comments

First | « | 1 | 2 | » | Last | Show all

View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest


This thread is archived, and closed to new comments.

Continue Farking
Submit a Link »






Report