Why the North Korean missile launch is different this time and some history of North Korea.

I missed this one. Thanks!

Last Edited by Island Style on 04/13/2013 03:20 AM

Because, it's one thing to build the A-Bomb like what they've demonstrated. It's an entirely different thing to stick it onto a rocket, blast it halfway around the world, and have it hit remotely on target. With out it burning up in the atmosphere. What is concerning is that they have successfully launched a satellite. Which means the capability to put something the size of an A-bomb on the top of a rocket is there.

However, bear in mind that the US and Russia didn't have a working ICBM until 1957-1958. Many years after the first A-Bomb was tested.

Rockets are tricky things, and they don't always work the way you want them to. I read in a book that in the early days of rocketry, to be called a rocket scientist wasn't necessarily a complement. It was seen as a form of quakery, because the rockets failed so often. It comes down to a perfect mixture of fuel and an oxidizer, and proper cooling on the rocket nozzle and combustion chamber. Otherwise you'll melt the nozzle and cause a failure.

There sure are. In the long run, this could be just a preparation for an operation, Overlord.

On the other side, ancient history is an even better teacher, especially in the matters of ambiguity.

"If you cross the river, a great empire will be destroyed."

We might have us a cat fight on our hands. And once a pair of women decide to destroy one another, it's a fight to the death with no action to evil to contemplate, and the possibility of one's own demise no consideration (so long as the enemy is also destroyed in the process).

And solid fuel is even more dangerous than liquid fuel is. I highly doubt they have solid fuel technology. Considering the amount of work, and time it takes to get that mixture right.

Solid fuel rockets as I understand it are way more sensitive to temperature, and time. Because if that fuel expands and contracts and causes cracks in the fuel. It can cause a critical failure (aka big boom.) The story of how and why solid fuel was invented is absolutely fascinating. Especially if you love the stuff you read here on GLP. Look up Jack 'Whitesides' Parsons, Occultist and Rocket scientist!

Lil-Kim needs to kill his first Buffalo. Isn't it so?

Thank you, SHR for some well stated, succinct insight.

interesting.

My goodness, stop wanking over his obviously pro-GLP Armageddon argument.

Actually only the US, Russia, China and india have ICBMs...Israel is suspected to, but that's it. A few other countries have some sub-launched ICBM's...france and the UK notably. North Korea is supposed to "developing" , but so far...they do not have any that have been succesful.

ICBMs are not as prevelent as you sound like you believe.

Russia and or China are also not going to be selling or giving any away anytime soon, if those are the friends who you mention.

There are 9 countries on earth that have nuclear weapons...North Koera is included that short list, so is Israel which has never been confirmed to actually have nukes, I believe they do.

I'm not sure who you refer to with all their friends having atomic bombs?

I think so.

Look at her:

[link to www.dailynk.com]

It's like she's channeling her brother. Creeeeeepy.

OP - brilliant post, best ever on GLP in my brief experience. Thank you for taking the time to set that out so clearly and with some humour as well.

Pakistan just tested one.

[link to www.nation.com.pk]

We'll see...it's still mainly up to China to enforce most of the sanctions that are applied to NK..and they have a track record of being their protector and more or less sheilding them, not being the enforcer.

Hard to blame them in some ways, the more destitute stubborn NK becomes, the more their peaseants strain at the Chinese border.

You didn't actually read it...did you...

Not an ICBM, pakistan doesn't have any...

Just because it's being discussed makes it a "Pro-Armageddon" argument? The only thing you left out was some anti-Christian bashing sentiment. Current events are what they are for a reason, they are ongoing and current.

Your premise is that due to capitalism China whould NEVER flex it's muscle in the the ongoing cluster-fuck. What if the capitalists don't have the control they think they do over said country?

Right, has a range of 900km. Just further proving the point that it's not as simple as building a rocket, and strapping an A-Bomb to it.

Last Edited by reversefiction on 04/13/2013 03:45 AM

Op you figure pretty much the same as me. He will fire one off into the sea. If we stand down he will declare it a victory and will have faced off against the world and won and can be the new supreme leader blah blah. If we over react and shoot it down or strike at them then he can play it two ways, stand down and say we attacked and ask for sanctions lifted or aid, OR say it's on and start a war attacking the south and firing off a few more.

I am kind of expecting a new nuclear test as well as missile test.

It really could go in a million different directions right now though. There are just far too many variables. Good job pinning down a few though.

While I see your points and tend towards agreement on most if not all of them, in the interest of playing devils advocate and hopefully advancing the conversation, I will ask a couple more things.

North Korea may not require the same "tweak and compile" type of development that we were forced into when developing our first ICBM's. Since the work has been done by multiple countries already, it comes down to finding or creating the right people with the right experience to recreate the hardware. They accomplished this type of advancement when they were able to get nuclear development and research information out of Pakistan a few years back.

I do agree that it isn't quite so simple as slapping together an Estes and going nuts with a package of C6-7's in your local park. I know from my own job though that previous research and work tend to be a much bigger part in most any project than original research or work. As I don't work on rockets or nukes, I don't know if this applies to the same extent. I would be willing to bet that it has a much bigger role than we suspect though.

All that being said, do you think that North Korea's international "friendships", when considering the technical level of those various friends, might have had an intellectual or even physical influence on their ICBM and/or nuclear development? Without knowing the specific information they were given, do you think that the information might have accelerated those programs? If so, by how much?

Again, thanks for the great thread.

I agree, there a lot more ways it could go...all we can do is watch and see what happens...hopefully as little as possible.

I also think a new nuke test may very well be coming soon...seems I read somewhere that there was some "activity" around a test site.

Tomorrow is the PyongYang International Marathon with runners from many foreign countries.

I doubt they will launch a missile until they are all out of the country.

Could be on the 15th?

Wait and see...

Oh, that is so funny! Especially to us men.

It is also such BS. The above description of a "cat fight" is the status quo for male leaders since fights using militaries began.

Fight to the death with no action too evil? Sounds like a lot like the bombing of Dresden and London in that "cat fight" in WWII, in the same way that neither the North Vietcom seemed to be restrained by chivalrous warfare. A little more modern would seem to be Gulf War I when the US and partners bombed the retreating highway of cars and Sadam torched hundreds of oil wells in Kuwait. Even the fight against terrorism included ruthless attacks on civilians (9/11 - whomever is really responsible) and the liberal use of torture (possibly justifiable but a little shocking.

No demise for one's own demise has been a hallmark of tons of male commanders throughout history.

It is just pure 100% bullshit that is so typical of GLP. . . point out a problem that seems to be the fault of one broad sweeping truth which is far more complex and actions must be evaluated individually. So much so that it seemsd worth it to walk step by step through this post and show that it simply applies to "leaders" and not another label.

Now this is an astute and educational point that belongs here in order to better evaluate the situation.

Very good point to consider, not definitive as you note, I guess we'll see.

I think to a certain extent your right that the "tweek and compile time" would be lessened to a certain extent. Because, of possible experts and computational power. However, how many true no shit rocket scientists are in the world? And, how many of them are unemployed? What country on earth would let one of their rocket scientists, with that countries secrets on rocket technology go? How many of these rocket scientists are actually sympathetic to North Korea? I hope you see that the numbers are dwindling down to only a couple.

Now we come down to the matter of making the fuel, and the processes for that. Rocket fuel and Oxidizers aren't the most friendly chemicals. In fact some of them are down right corrosive, and dangerous to manufacture. I read one story where Parsons and company where in the desert, and one of the oxidizer tanks blew open. And a brown cloud of toxic gas was released and turned their skin green! You need to have skilled chemists to do the proper chemical reactions to create the crap. Or it could literally blow up in their faces. Same chain of questions, how many chemists have knowledge on the process of making these chemicals? And so on down the line...

I think they may have the information, but as I believe Werner Von Braun said "One Experiment is worth a thousand expert opinions." They still have a lot of testing to do before they make it right. And, whether or not they have the resources for that. I highly doubt.

Great analysis. But I think there's one facet of this whole N. Korea thing that not enough people are mentioning.
I don't have firm figures, but would guess that at least 80% of news (or quotes) attributed to N. Korea are made up out of thin air by western media.
Look at the majority of GLP threads claiming some new threat or statement made by NK.
Most will cite CNN, CNBC, the State Department or Yonhap (S. Korea) as the source. Then go to the official NK news outlet and see what they are saying.
[link to www.kcna.co.jp]
In nearly every case, what the western media is playing up as a NK threat is simply a NK response to a western threat or can't be found period.
Having observed this NK = boogie man behavior by the western MSM(and governments) I'm lead to believe the whole situation has been blown out of proportion.
So why would the west do this?
1)
Well, nothing gets a nation, or nations as patriotic and behind their leaders as an external threat. Especially when said leaders are falling out of favor. Throughout history you'll see many examples of failed leaders rallying their subjects behind them once an external threat seems imminent.
2)
When an economy is failing, as is the US and much of the western world, a war is a great way to put it back on the rails. Just look at the effects WW1 and WW2 had.
3)
The Military Industrial Complex needs a steady stream of new conflicts to keep the profits rolling in.

OP is presenting some very logical arguments, and very coherently, which tells me one thing: he hasn't hit the bottle yet.

Some of us have heard him in vc, after he's 'had a few'

All true.

NK is a fabricated ennemy the same goes with Iran.

Iran has not attacked any other nation in several hundred years.