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.

(Fox News)   North Korea threatens pre-emptive nuclear strike in retaliation for Dennis Rodman   (foxnews.com) divider line 278
    More: Scary, Dennis Rodman, North Koreans, United States, Nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty, international sanctions, nuclear wars, U.N. Security Council, ballistic missiles  
•       •       •

10600 clicks; posted to Main » on 07 Mar 2013 at 8:26 AM (1 year ago)   |  Favorite    |   share:  Share on Twitter share via Email Share on Facebook   more»



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

Archived thread

First | « | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | » | Last | Show all
 
2013-03-07 11:16:35 AM

hardinparamedic: Avery614: That's not how you threaten a nuclear war, THIS is how you threaten nuclear war!

1032, between 1945 and 1998 the U.S. alone detonated 1,032 nuclear bombs just to show the world, yes, we're that farking crazy.

The opening slide to that Youtube video made my head hurt from how hard I facepalmed.

/WHERE HAS ALL THE RADIATION GONE! *facepalm*


41% of all Americans will develop cancer in their lifetimes.

That's where all the radiation (and the lard) went.
 
2013-03-07 11:18:00 AM

doglover: vygramul: doglover: hardinparamedic: doglover: Yeah, but even the Tsar Bomba wouldn't kill more than like one person if it slammed into the middle of Iowa. There ain't much out there in a lot of places.

Might irradiate some corn, but that's about it.

Tsar Bomba is also the prime example of why a single, immensely powerful weapon is not as good as multiple smaller yield, but overlapping targeted MIRV impacts.

7 475kT warheads will do more damage to a large city than a single massive nuclear bomb could ever hope.

But the USSR plan was always to overlap BIG weapons.

Their nuclear strike map of London looked like a flower made of many overlapping circles. Each one, a nuclear warhead of varying size.

It's really because they couldn't be sure they were accurate enough with a nuke to actually HIT a city. So they had to use a dozen just to make sure.

It was more like 30.

But yeah, the US has super accurate stuff with minimal earth shattering kaboom. The Russians have all bite and no barking guidance.

Together, we could wipe Venus right the fark off the map.


Together, we couldn't even crack the moon Thundarr the Barbarian style, much less a whole planet. Maths and stuff.
 
2013-03-07 11:19:20 AM

hardinparamedic: The opening slide to that Youtube video made my head hurt from how hard I facepalmed.

/WHERE HAS ALL THE RADIATION GONE! *facepalm*


Yeah I'm not sure where the music and text came from.   I couldn't find the old one that didn't have that shiat in there.
 
2013-03-07 11:21:08 AM
You know, a good portion of our military is just sitting idle. It would be a shame if we didn't have a new proving ground for our latest toys.
 
2013-03-07 11:22:47 AM

neongoats:

Together, we couldn't even crack the moon Thundarr the Barbarian style, much less a whole planet. Maths and stuff.


A colleague of mine once had to calculate what would happen if you hit the earth with a nuclear weapon going at some near-c speed. The effect of the nuclear weapon was inside the error margin, and the tensile strength of the earth became an issue.

So, yeah, as powerful as nukes are, they're really not THAT kind of powerful.
 
2013-03-07 11:25:52 AM
Best Korea just wants to play StarCraft with rest of the world.
 
2013-03-07 11:27:05 AM

neongoats: Together, we couldn't even crack the moon Thundarr the Barbarian style, much less a whole planet. Maths and stuff.


Math, you say?
 
2013-03-07 11:29:51 AM
Red Korea needs food badly.
 
2013-03-07 11:37:48 AM
"Intercontinental ballistic missiles and various other missiles, which have already set their striking targets, are now armed with lighter, smaller and diversified nuclear warheads and are placed on a standby status," Kang said.

images.sodahead.com
 
2013-03-07 11:37:56 AM
let me get this straight, one successful launch and one successful nuclear test and they're jumping straight to threats of nuking washington?

that implies that they think one launch equates to having a capable ICBM and that the nuclear test was presumably of a weapon small enough to fit on it. If that's the case then they know they'd likely have one chance to use it so go big or go home. true, they'd elicit a response going for south korea or other US assets in the pacific, but they know they won't survive retaliation. Thus, wanting to fire on the US capitol in an attempt to do the most damage would make sense, and also double as the strongest threat they could possibly make.

ultimately though, it's silly to me that their response for sanctions against nuclear development is to threaten nuclear action. gee I wonder why those sanctions are there to begin with, they're obviously a hostile, unreasonable country desperate to acquire the same deterrents as nuclear-armed countries. I see it as a bargaining chip that hopefully doesn't amount to actual war, but they're definitely not going to win any favors at the UN acting like this.
 
2013-03-07 11:39:02 AM
i1182.photobucket.com
 
2013-03-07 11:49:43 AM

vygramul: PunGent: GiantRex: Does North Korea even have the ability to launch a nuclear missile as far as Alaska? Let alone the mainland US. I haven't really been paying attention, but I thought that most of their stuff tended to either fizzle or blow up on the launchpad.

Problem I see is they don't really need an ICBM if they have cargo freighters; not THAT hard to get a dirty bomb near our coastline, upwind.

A dirty bomb isn't a terribly useful weapon.

And there are reasons countries generally develop missiles rather than arming stealth cargo containers, and it's not because missiles look more like penises.


Not a useful weapon for a RATIONAL opponent.  Not sure that's the case here...
 
2013-03-07 12:07:40 PM
FTFA: The vote Thursday by the U.N.'s most powerful body on a resolution drafted by North Korea's closest ally, China,

YOU DUN GOOF'D, UN!
 
2013-03-07 12:12:52 PM

WinoRhino: So now is probably not the time I should be heading to Hawaii for a vacation, huh? Although, front-row seats on the fail might be fun.


Bring a lot of sunscreen.

SubBass49: I'm not exactly a pro-war guy, but I'd love to see China stand off to the side and say, "Sorry guys, you're on your own...take your best shot USA, we're not getting involved." Just park a few destroyers and carriers off the coast and light the damn place up like the 4th of July. Make sure we've got a STABLE shadow government waiting in the wings.

Then reunification, etc.


The problem with that is...what do we DO with several million liberated North Koreans?  I can't imagine the culture shock.  The only power in the region (or the *world*) who could help them transition to a "freer" lifestyle would be the Chinese.  I realize that's not saying much, but at least there's a cultural link, so I'd think the shock/reaction from the North Koreans wouldn't be as drastic.

But, I'm not a foreign affairs specialist, so what do I know.
 
2013-03-07 12:14:04 PM
Give it your best shot North Korea!  We will bomb you back into the stone age, or 2 weeks ago, which ever is greater....
 
2013-03-07 12:14:20 PM
"NUKE 'EM JONG-UN STYLE!"
 
2013-03-07 12:14:24 PM
OK now, time to fess up.  Which one of you made this phoney support group for North Korea as indicated on the official NK news agency web site?

DPRK's Underground Nuclear Test Supported by American OrganizationPyongyang, March 6 (KCNA) -- The U.S. Institute for Kimilsungism-Kimjongilism Studies on Feb. 23 sent a letter to the Pyongyang mission of the Anti-Imperialist National Democratic Front hailing the third underground nuclear test in the DPRK.The letter extended warm congratulations to the Korean people on their successful third nuclear test.
Through the nuclear test, the DPRK showed the world that it is a powerful country which never yields to other's pressure, the letter said, and went on:
We fully support the DPRK's legitimate exercise of its sovereignty.
Now is the time for the people of the U.S. to pressurize the government to make a switchover in its policy towards the DPRK, put a definite end to the Korean War and contribute to ensuring peace of the Korean Peninsula.
 
2013-03-07 12:16:17 PM

Caelistis: my lip balm addiction: Caelistis: As long as they wipe out Seattle, I'm good.

Hey! fark you with a rusty rake!

That's exactly what living in Seattle feels like. It would be no great loss.


latimesherocomplex.files.wordpress.com
 
2013-03-07 12:16:42 PM

xanadian: WinoRhino: So now is probably not the time I should be heading to Hawaii for a vacation, huh? Although, front-row seats on the fail might be fun.

Bring a lot of sunscreen.

SubBass49: I'm not exactly a pro-war guy, but I'd love to see China stand off to the side and say, "Sorry guys, you're on your own...take your best shot USA, we're not getting involved." Just park a few destroyers and carriers off the coast and light the damn place up like the 4th of July. Make sure we've got a STABLE shadow government waiting in the wings.

Then reunification, etc.

The problem with that is...what do we DO with several million liberated North Koreans?  I can't imagine the culture shock.  The only power in the region (or the *world*) who could help them transition to a "freer" lifestyle would be the Chinese.  I realize that's not saying much, but at least there's a cultural link, so I'd think the shock/reaction from the North Koreans wouldn't be as drastic.

But, I'm not a foreign affairs specialist, so what do I know.


Or, you know, South Koreans. Who share a language and culture going back to the Stone Age with them. Who are very rich and developed, and have been working on reintegration plans since the Armistice.
 
2013-03-07 12:25:59 PM
They're going to send this guy at 5 o'clock

pics.imcdb.org
 
2013-03-07 12:59:12 PM

Lost Thought 00: ou know, a good portion of our military is just sitting idle. It would be a shame if we didn't have a new proving ground for our latest toys.


since dugway is less than 50 miles from me i say, nuclear kim-chi for all!
 
2013-03-07 01:11:28 PM

PunGent: vygramul: PunGent: GiantRex: Does North Korea even have the ability to launch a nuclear missile as far as Alaska? Let alone the mainland US. I haven't really been paying attention, but I thought that most of their stuff tended to either fizzle or blow up on the launchpad.

Problem I see is they don't really need an ICBM if they have cargo freighters; not THAT hard to get a dirty bomb near our coastline, upwind.

A dirty bomb isn't a terribly useful weapon.

And there are reasons countries generally develop missiles rather than arming stealth cargo containers, and it's not because missiles look more like penises.

Not a useful weapon for a RATIONAL opponent.  Not sure that's the case here...


Well that's just because you're stupid.
 
2013-03-07 01:15:45 PM
Does North Korea actually offer anything a real value to China? North Korea always reminds me of that playground toady who hides behind the school bully and shouts taunts at you knowing the bully has got his back.

It would be interesting to see how quickly their tune would change if one day China said "You know what asshole? You're on you're own".
 
2013-03-07 01:19:13 PM
I realize it is nothing but sabre-rattling, but this shiat has got to end. I have family living in Washington D.C.
fark this guy. Does the United States not have assassins?
 
2013-03-07 01:26:56 PM

HellRaisingHoosier: I realize it is nothing but sabre-rattling, but this shiat has got to end. I have family living in Washington D.C.
fark this guy. Does the United States not have assassins?


We did, but Rand Paul just spend the night fillibustering against them
 
2013-03-07 01:27:21 PM

GiantRex: Does North Korea even have the ability to launch a nuclear missile as far as Alaska? Let alone the mainland US. I haven't really been paying attention, but I thought that most of their stuff tended to either fizzle or blow up on the launchpad.


Hell, they can't even make a decent car. What makes you think they can get an ICBM across the Pacific to the US mainland?

Fark 'em. Let 'em starve.
 
2013-03-07 01:33:11 PM
Never underestimate your opponent.
 
2013-03-07 01:40:46 PM

ferretman: Never underestimate your opponent.


They would really not need much to start some real trouble. They could load a rocket with some overripe kimchee instead of a warhead and fire it at Tokyo, the Japaneses would go completely crazy.
 
2013-03-07 01:47:21 PM
I say NK is in some deep trouble if China voted for the sanctions along with everyone else.  What it mean when your only real ally in the area turns on you like that.
 
2013-03-07 01:53:15 PM

AverageAmericanGuy: Thanks, Dubya. Pre-emptive strikes as foreign policy were a really great idea.


Yes.  Bush invented them.  Good point.
 
2013-03-07 01:54:53 PM

Lost Thought 00: HellRaisingHoosier: I realize it is nothing but sabre-rattling, but this shiat has got to end. I have family living in Washington D.C.
fark this guy. Does the United States not have assassins?

We did, but Rand Paul just spend the night fillibustering against them


Kim Jong Un already a citizen? Wow, they really are letting anyone in.
 
2013-03-07 02:00:51 PM

Princess Ryans Knickers: DanInKansas: Love the Bush hate on the thread.  Because you know, for the thousands of years civilization has existed, no armed power ever threatened anyone else with a pre-emptive attack or invented a reason to go to war out of thin air.   And certainly before Bush there were never any power mad dictators who got too big for their britches with inevitable results.

So you admit Bush was a power mad dictator...


And how was he a dictator?
 
2013-03-07 02:22:29 PM

JackieRabbit: Scary, Subby? I see you don't know much about North Korea. They posture like this in response to our posturing to them -- which is precisely what our joint exercises with South Korea is. We go through this every few years as a prelude to some negotiation. We've been playing this stupid game with them for 60 years. Their beloved leader has to do what is expected of him, but he isn't stupid enough to launch a nuclear weapon at the US (even if he had a vehicle capable of this, which he doesn't). China would would roar over his his boarder within days and Russia, China and the US would wipe every major NK city off the map in retaliation.


Eh-yup. And people gave me crap when I pointed out that our 'military exercise' was doing this instead of, say, actually using our time and resources to get work done.

/On the other hand, does anyone in North Korea actually understand that we really, really do not want to ever use our nukes? Like, there is nobody in America who's waking up and saying "What a great day to start nuclear warfare!".  Nobody is going to farking nuke you, you lunatic.
 
2013-03-07 02:28:56 PM
so unlikely, it's more likely they'll blow themselves up first
 
2013-03-07 02:45:52 PM
Although all the posturing nonsense can be fun, this could actually turn out very badly. To keep the peace, it may be wise to encourage China to take care of this. They tell NK they want to help them build up their forces and offer to send a million troops and the Chinese military equipment, and then when they get there, they just go, "Surprise!", and just capture the country.
 
2013-03-07 02:50:09 PM

SnarfVader: And here I thought it would be Gandhi that got us:

[i212.photobucket.com image 640x400]


They already made that movie.
images2.wikia.nocookie.net
No more Mr. Passive Resistance!
 
2013-03-07 02:52:48 PM

vygramul: And there are reasons countries generally develop missiles rather than arming stealth cargo containers, and it's not

only because missiles look more like penises.

FTFY.
 
2013-03-07 02:58:03 PM

s1ugg0: BadChipmunk: A single Ohio-class submarine could launch one of its 24 Trident missiles which contains 4x 475kt MIRV warheads and it would all be over in minutes. That same submarine could really just wipe out the top 24 population centers in NK without any real issue, then sail home and have a banana sandwich.

Wait, wait, wait.  What is a banana sandwich and where do I get one?


I guess you're not a big fan of  The King.
upload.wikimedia.org
Just be sure to love it tender.
 
2013-03-07 03:08:12 PM
Invading Best Korea would be like invading mainland Japan during WWII....a very big mess for everyone involved. The concern also is that any 'war' could spread to the surrounding countries...which would be bad.
 
2013-03-07 03:29:11 PM
Where's the fox news warning?

My record of now having never visited their site or tuning into their broadcasts is now gone.
 
2013-03-07 03:34:54 PM

tom baker's scarf: Even as a card carrying liberal (it's an expression, I don't have a card) this is the kind of statement that gets me in a bombthebastardsbecausewecan kind of mood.  We're not talking about them counterfeiting US currency, selling weapons, or producing heroin anymore.  Nuclear strike is not something you get to trot out in a pissing contest.  The consequences of that action or the threat of that action are too severe to be the plaything of a fat, petulant, hyper-privileged manboy.


Why bomb them?

Wouldn't drones do the job just as well with fewer civilian casualties?
 
2013-03-07 03:44:21 PM

kg2095: tom baker's scarf: Even as a card carrying liberal (it's an expression, I don't have a card) this is the kind of statement that gets me in a bombthebastardsbecausewecan kind of mood.  We're not talking about them counterfeiting US currency, selling weapons, or producing heroin anymore.  Nuclear strike is not something you get to trot out in a pissing contest.  The consequences of that action or the threat of that action are too severe to be the plaything of a fat, petulant, hyper-privileged manboy.

Why bomb them?

Wouldn't drones do the job just as well with fewer civilian casualties?


But Drones aren't manly and shiat. Hell, they probably train women to fly them.
 
2013-03-07 03:47:07 PM
This is just North Korea's way of asking for more food for the starving people of their country.
 
2013-03-07 03:54:02 PM
This is China seeing how much they can threaten the US while also looking like they are punishing their puppet NK.
 
2013-03-07 04:27:18 PM
Just going to give my two cents here...

1. Even through our conflicts in Iraq and Afghanistan, Homeland Defense has had higher budgets and more innovations implemented than our offensive systems the last couple decades. Even if lil kim wanted to fire a ICBM, we would likely blow it out of the sky on the first shot... If not, there are fail-safes.

2. North Korea knows that any publicity is good publicity. Threats against the U.S. have obviously been more newsworthy than other forms of PR. With this constant stream of publicity comes the stories of the hungry nation, and private food donations arrive.

3. As vocal as they are, the press and our government are aware that there is little risk involved with the norths threats, but they are a worthy distraction from other, more devastating issues.

America is a worry state. We are kinda messed up in this regard. We have to have something to worry about and overcome. It's what keeps us sane in our day to day lives. With advancements within our society, we would worry ourselves to death over the little things, and our internal conflicts amongst each other would be far more damaging. Common enemy and whatnot
 
2013-03-07 04:41:11 PM
I don't remember who it was, but there was some American general who said he didn't understand all the fuss about a nuclear exchange. He reasoned that only between something on the order of 25 to 50 million people would die and rebuilding would be either fairly simple or downright unnecessary (something like turn it into a memorial site and move elsewhere).

When the bombs fall, you just have to have the luck of not being where they hit. Or near where they hit. Or downwind of where they hit. Or consuming foods and water originating in areas in, near, or downwind of where they hit. Or...well, whatever. Maybe it would be better to be at ground zero of one of the exchange sites after all.

Also, maybe NK is confusing Washington, DC with Washington state in terms of range? They can't hit us today. Who knows what's possible in another fifty years, though. I do believe that someday a nation whose people hold grudges worse than the catty lady at the office is going to take revenge in a truly catastrophic manner. Good thing we'll be dead before that happens.
 
2013-03-07 05:11:46 PM

AnythingBacon: 1. Even through our conflicts in Iraq and Afghanistan, Homeland Defense has had higher budgets and more innovations implemented than our offensive systems the last couple decades. Even if lil kim wanted to fire a ICBM, we would likely blow it out of the sky on the first shot... If not, there are fail-safes.


I'm not disagreeing with you but what do you mean by "If not, there are fail-safes"?
 
2013-03-07 05:19:21 PM

Homer Elmer: So when will the U.S. take these threats seriously? Why aren't we at like DEFCON 2 or something? Is it just because we think they are full of shiat? Yeah we are pretty sure they don't have the capability of launching an ICBM at us, but we been wrong before. After all we were damned sure Iraq had WMD's that we never found.

I guess it's because we are used to their ramblings


http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Iraq_and_weapons_of_mass_destruction#200 9 _Declaration

They had WMD in the form of chemical weapons. These were in storage. Their production facilities had been destroyed prior to the war. I thought this was common knowledge but people keep claiming that no WMDs were found in Iraq an that is simply not true.
 
2013-03-07 05:42:15 PM

UnspokenVoice: They had WMD in the form of chemical weapons. These were in storage. Their production facilities had been destroyed prior to the war. I thought this was common knowledge but people keep claiming that no WMDs were found in Iraq an that is simply not true.


denver.mylittlefacewhen.com

The WMDs that WERE found were 20 years old, and in no condition to be used. The Binary agents within them had degraded so much that the weapons only posed a danger to the ones who tried to handle them, and Sadaam had actually complied with the destruction treaties.

THAT SAID. Sadaam was an epic troll. He knew the only way he could continue to have the favor of countries in the Middle East and beyond was to give the finger to the Americans, and he did this by threatening and posturing. He was too good at his role. When the time came to prove to the world that his bluff had been called, it was too late.
 
2013-03-07 05:52:54 PM
So I can expect another episode to The Adventures of Kim Jong Un?
 
Displayed 50 of 278 comments

First | « | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | » | Last | Show all

View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest


This thread is archived, and closed to new comments.

Continue Farking
Submit a Link »






Report