Groups

    North Korea causes a 5.3 seismic event

    North Korea says it has conducted a "nuclear warhead explosion" designed to counter alleged hostility from the United States.
    The country's fifth and seemingly largest nuclear test caused a 5.3-magnitude seismic event and was described by South Korea as "maniacal recklessness".
    A state TV announcer in the North confirmed the detonation at the Pyunggye-ri nuclear test site. She said: "Our ... party sent a congratulatory message to our nuclear scientists ... for conducting the successful nuclear warhead explosion test."
    Pyongyang said the success of the test - which drew immediate international condemnation - meant it could produce "at will a variety of smaller, lighter and diversified nuclear warheads of higher strike power". It claimed there was no radioactive leakage or adverse environmental impact.
    news.sky.com/sto…458

    35 Comments

    Original Poster

    South Korea's weather agency said the explosive yield of the North Korean blast would have been 10 to 12 kilotons, or 70 to 80 percent of the force of the 15-kiloton atomic bomb the United States dropped on the Japanese city of Hiroshima in 1945.

    independent.co.uk/new…tml

    no radioactive leakage or adverse environmental impact.



    Well that's alright then!

    Blokes a nutter. Sooner some kind of special forces take him out, the better!
    Edited by: "Mark2111" 9th Sep 2016

    its the north Korean poker game rattle the sabre and get more supplies from overseas to prop up the regime china will prop him up as the last thing they want is regime change

    north korea actualy have a pretty good record of playing Russia china & the USA off each other to get what they need to keep going


    Edited by: "mattmerch" 9th Sep 2016

    mattmerch

    its the north Korean poker game rattle the sabre and get more supplies … its the north Korean poker game rattle the sabre and get more supplies from overseas to prop up the regime china will prop him up as the last thing they want is regime change



    Pretty much. Strangely as much as China doesn't want a unified Korea, the South Koreans probably want it even less. North Korea is so far entrenched in the Cold War era that integration would be nigh-on impossible.

    This is very serious, China, Russia & The US are going to need to get involved, the problem is how willing is North Korea to defend themselves?

    strange how the big countries with nuclear weapons and a long history in war or another, are telling north Korea, you can't have nuclear weapons lol, smacks of hypocrisy. no one country should have them, but they shouldn't go around telling other countries what to do.

    STRICKIBHOY

    strange how the big countries with nuclear weapons and a long history in … strange how the big countries with nuclear weapons and a long history in war or another, are telling north Korea, you can't have nuclear weapons lol, smacks of hypocrisy. no one country should have them, but they shouldn't go around telling other countries what to do.



    Yeah, One dictatorship to another, But "We need them to defend ourselves". :(.

    we all know China will never support anything against north Korea. China has been using North Korea as a pressuring tool against US.

    STRICKIBHOY

    strange how the big countries with nuclear weapons and a long history in … strange how the big countries with nuclear weapons and a long history in war or another, are telling north Korea, you can't have nuclear weapons lol, smacks of hypocrisy. no one country should have them, but they shouldn't go around telling other countries what to do.



    ​I think the problem it's not about having nuclear weapons rather it's who has it. north Korea has been known for erratic nature from their top regime. I mean there is always a danger when one man can start a war.

    STRICKIBHOY

    strange how the big countries with nuclear weapons and a long history in … strange how the big countries with nuclear weapons and a long history in war or another, are telling north Korea, you can't have nuclear weapons lol, smacks of hypocrisy. no one country should have them, but they shouldn't go around telling other countries what to do.



    ​I think the problem it's not about having nuclear weapons rather it's who has it. north Korea has been known for erratic nature from their top regime. I mean there is always a danger when one man can start a war.

    HotEnglishAndWelshDeals

    Pretty much. Strangely as much as China doesn't want a unified Korea, the … Pretty much. Strangely as much as China doesn't want a unified Korea, the South Koreans probably want it even less. North Korea is so far entrenched in the Cold War era that integration would be nigh-on impossible.


    Germany and Central Europe made the transition from Communist politics to Capitalist democracies and has proven otherwise, perhaps the North Korea puppet show will end soon!

    davewave

    Germany and Central Europe made the transition from Communist politics to … Germany and Central Europe made the transition from Communist politics to Capitalist democracies and has proven otherwise, perhaps the North Korea puppet show will end soon!



    I don't think the two examples are comparable to be honest. The level of indoctrination from a very young age in North Korea goes far beyond any of the Communist regimes in Central and Eastern Europe. Maybe things change but there's little will on either side in the grand scheme of things.


    STRICKIBHOY

    strange how the big countries with nuclear weapons and a long history in … strange how the big countries with nuclear weapons and a long history in war or another, are telling north Korea, you can't have nuclear weapons lol, smacks of hypocrisy. no one country should have them, but they shouldn't go around telling other countries what to do.



    There are some very basic reasons why some countries (the majority in fact) aren't permitted to develop nuclear weapons. Suggesting it's 'unfair' that some get to have them and others don't like they're sweets being shared amongst schoolchildren is bizarre to the point of parody.

    HotEnglishAndWelshDeals

    I don't think the two examples are comparable to be honest. The level of … I don't think the two examples are comparable to be honest. The level of indoctrination from a very young age in North Korea goes far beyond any of the Communist regimes in Central and Eastern Europe. Maybe things change but there's little will on either side in the grand scheme of things.There are some very basic reasons why some countries (the majority in fact) aren't permitted to develop nuclear weapons. Suggesting it's 'unfair' that some get to have them and others don't like they're sweets being shared amongst schoolchildren is bizarre to the point of parody.



    ​take a look at Soviet bloc rule ... neighbours spying on each other, propaganda, no free speech, torture and kangaroo courts were commonplace for anything which criticized communism. People starving because of a broken system. Seems pretty similar to me.

    Why is Uk giving North Korea £750.000 a year !

    HotEnglishAndWelshDeals

    I don't think the two examples are comparable to be honest. The level of … I don't think the two examples are comparable to be honest. The level of indoctrination from a very young age in North Korea goes far beyond any of the Communist regimes in Central and Eastern Europe. Maybe things change but there's little will on either side in the grand scheme of things.There are some very basic reasons why some countries (the majority in fact) aren't permitted to develop nuclear weapons. Suggesting it's 'unfair' that some get to have them and others don't like they're sweets being shared amongst schoolchildren is bizarre to the point of parody.



    ​ there are some very basic reasons why some countries aren't permitted to develop nuclear weapons, is by the countries who have the nuclear weapons, so thanks for pointing out the hypocrisy I mentioned earlier. I wasn't trying to insinuate that its "unfair" I'm insinuating its a down right joke. again no country needs nuclear weapons, and if someone defends the right to have nuclear weapons then they can't really criticise another country for having them just because they don't like the leader lol

    patti

    Why is Uk giving North Korea £750.000 a year !



    Got to buy fatty pork pies or he will have a tantrum

    Nuclear weapons were a creation of a terrible dark time in history and once invented you could never go back... it's a worry as world leaders could never agree for everyone to stop using them now as you could never be sure they are telling the truth...
    If a country like NK can surprise us by creating these things (when they don’t care who knows)... what about the countries who could be doing in secret... arghhh
    I am going to go hide in my basement for a few weeks....:|

    STRICKIBHOY

    strange how the big countries with nuclear weapons and a long history in … strange how the big countries with nuclear weapons and a long history in war or another, are telling north Korea, you can't have nuclear weapons lol, smacks of hypocrisy. no one country should have them, but they shouldn't go around telling other countries what to do.



    What I find strange are people who constantly whinge about the UK/US possessing nukes and then defend rogue states endeavors to become 'nuclear-weapon states'.

    The only times nuclear weapons have been used in agression was by the USA.

    I think it is a perfectly legitimate for people to question why they should be allowed them and dictate to others that they shouldn't.

    https://s12.postimg.org/quzs4iv71/Screen_Shot_2016_09_09_at_15_54_11.png

    Aren't nuclear bombs simply a means to help develop nuclear power stations?

    Nuking Japan was the lesser of two evils, more lives would have been lost on both sides had the allies resorted to a full blown land invasion. The immense show of power showed the Jap government and the people that the game was up resulting in surrender - remember they were fanatical and would have fought to the last. I'm no Yank fan but I agree with what they did.

    Simple way to get rid of Kim, stop all western aid and ignore the country - the Chinese and Russians would soon get sick of supporting NK alone and the leadership would collapse probably under a peoples revolt when the food stops, not a nice thing to do but I would imagine their Nuclear technology will be up for sale the highest bidder - they are a massive threat.

    Why would South Korea want to unify with a country that's basically stuck in the stone age. It cost West Germany upwards of one Trillion Pounds/Dollars (I forget which) to bring the East's infrastructure upto or near the same level as the west's, imagine how much it would cost South Korea to do the same with the north - basically it'll never happen.

    freakstyler

    Nuking Japan was the lesser of two evils, more lives would have been lost … Nuking Japan was the lesser of two evils, more lives would have been lost on both sides had the allies resorted to a full blown land invasion. The immense show of power showed the Jap government and the people that the game was up resulting in surrender - remember they were fanatical and would have fought to the last. I'm no Yank fan but I agree with what they did.Simple way to get rid of Kim, stop all western aid and ignore the country - the Chinese and Russians would soon get sick of supporting NK alone and the leadership would collapse probably under a peoples revolt when the food stops, not a nice thing to do but I would imagine their Nuclear technology will be up for sale the highest bidder - they are a massive threat.Why would South Korea want to unify with a country that's basically stuck in the stone age. It cost West Germany upwards of one Trillion Pounds/Dollars (I forget which) to bring the East's infrastructure upto or near the same level as the west's, imagine how much it would cost South Korea to do the same with the north - basically it'll never happen.



    the last thing china wants is for north korea to collapse and face refugees coming over its border

    Towelie

    The only times nuclear weapons have been used in agression was by the … The only times nuclear weapons have been used in agression was by the USA.I think it is a perfectly legitimate for people to question why they should be allowed them and dictate to others that they shouldn't.



    What's the moral distinction between the firebombing of Tokyo (or Dresden for that matter) and the nuking of Hiroshima? Same devastation different bombs.
    The attacks on Hiroshima and Nagasaki saved an estimated 2-million lives (the vast majority Japanese) and liberated many more millions from the brutality of Hirohito.

    freakstyler

    Nuking Japan was the lesser of two evils, more lives would have been lost … Nuking Japan was the lesser of two evils, more lives would have been lost on both sides had the allies resorted to a full blown land invasion. The immense show of power showed the Jap government and the people that the game was up resulting in surrender - remember they were fanatical and would have fought to the last. I'm no Yank fan but I agree with what they did.Simple way to get rid of Kim, stop all western aid and ignore the country - the Chinese and Russians would soon get sick of supporting NK alone and the leadership would collapse probably under a peoples revolt when the food stops, not a nice thing to do but I would imagine their Nuclear technology will be up for sale the highest bidder - they are a massive threat.Why would South Korea want to unify with a country that's basically stuck in the stone age. It cost West Germany upwards of one Trillion Pounds/Dollars (I forget which) to bring the East's infrastructure upto or near the same level as the west's, imagine how much it would cost South Korea to do the same with the north - basically it'll never happen.


    The atomic bomb had nothing to do with Japan surrendering (they already wanted to), and everything to do with Russia.

    themorgatron

    The atomic bomb had nothing to do with Japan surrendering (they already … The atomic bomb had nothing to do with Japan surrendering (they already wanted to).



    Simply not true.

    STRICKIBHOY

    strange how the big countries with nuclear weapons and a long history in … strange how the big countries with nuclear weapons and a long history in war or another, are telling north Korea, you can't have nuclear weapons lol, smacks of hypocrisy. no one country should have them, but they shouldn't go around telling other countries what to do.


    That's like saying it's hypocrisy to have armed police yet prohibit criminals from having guns.

    patti

    Why is Uk giving North Korea £750.000 a year !



    ​they need it, and we're rich, who aren't we giving money away to?

    patti

    Why is Uk giving North Korea £750.000 a year !


    This is paid out as iPhones.


    It is well known by the Russians that atom bombs were used stopped them arriving in Japan in time. At the surrender time, the Red Army was at the Urals. It was anti Russia strategy and anti communism strategy.
    freakstyler

    Nuking Japan was the lesser of two evils, more lives would have been lost … Nuking Japan was the lesser of two evils, more lives would have been lost on both sides had the allies resorted to a full blown land invasion. The immense show of power showed the Jap government and the people that the game was up resulting in surrender - remember they were fanatical and would have fought to the last. I'm no Yank fan but I agree with what they did.Simple way to get rid of Kim, stop all western aid and ignore the country - the Chinese and Russians would soon get sick of supporting NK alone and the leadership would collapse probably under a peoples revolt when the food stops, not a nice thing to do but I would imagine their Nuclear technology will be up for sale the highest bidder - they are a massive threat.Why would South Korea want to unify with a country that's basically stuck in the stone age. It cost West Germany upwards of one Trillion Pounds/Dollars (I forget which) to bring the East's infrastructure upto or near the same level as the west's, imagine how much it would cost South Korea to do the same with the north - basically it'll never happen.

    freakstyler

    Nuking Japan was the lesser of two evils, more lives would have been … Nuking Japan was the lesser of two evils, more lives would have been lost on both sides had the allies resorted to a full blown land invasion. The immense show of power showed the Jap government and the people that the game was up resulting in surrender - remember they were fanatical and would have fought to the last. I'm no Yank fan but I agree with what they did.Simple way to get rid of Kim, stop all western aid and ignore the country - the Chinese and Russians would soon get sick of supporting NK alone and the leadership would collapse probably under a peoples revolt when the food stops, not a nice thing to do but I would imagine their Nuclear technology will be up for sale the highest bidder - they are a massive threat.Why would South Korea want to unify with a country that's basically stuck in the stone age. It cost West Germany upwards of one Trillion Pounds/Dollars (I forget which) to bring the East's infrastructure upto or near the same level as the west's, imagine how much it would cost South Korea to do the same with the north - basically it'll never happen.


    Nearly correct, the atom bombs was to end war fast, before the Russian Red Army arrive. At surrender time, the bulk of European Red Army got as far as the Urals.

    freakstyler

    Nuking Japan was the lesser of two evils, more lives would have been … Nuking Japan was the lesser of two evils, more lives would have been lost on both sides had the allies resorted to a full blown land invasion. The immense show of power showed the Jap government and the people that the game was up resulting in surrender - remember they were fanatical and would have fought to the last. I'm no Yank fan but I agree with what they did.Simple way to get rid of Kim, stop all western aid and ignore the country - the Chinese and Russians would soon get sick of supporting NK alone and the leadership would collapse probably under a peoples revolt when the food stops, not a nice thing to do but I would imagine their Nuclear technology will be up for sale the highest bidder - they are a massive threat.Why would South Korea want to unify with a country that's basically stuck in the stone age. It cost West Germany upwards of one Trillion Pounds/Dollars (I forget which) to bring the East's infrastructure upto or near the same level as the west's, imagine how much it would cost South Korea to do the same with the north - basically it'll never happen.

    STRICKIBHOY

    strange how the big countries with nuclear weapons and a long history in … strange how the big countries with nuclear weapons and a long history in war or another, are telling north Korea, you can't have nuclear weapons lol, smacks of hypocrisy. no one country should have them, but they shouldn't go around telling other countries what to do.

    Mark2111

    no radioactive leakage or adverse environmental impact.Well that's … no radioactive leakage or adverse environmental impact.Well that's alright then!Blokes a nutter. Sooner some kind of special forces take him out, the better!


    There is about one million refugees in North China for decades already, you are slow with the world events, but not printed in the Sun as yet and no, they are not about to build another wall, but we are building one in Calais, the Great Wall of Great Britain.
    Fred Smith

    What I find strange are people who constantly whinge about the UK/US … What I find strange are people who constantly whinge about the UK/US possessing nukes and then defend rogue states endeavors to become 'nuclear-weapon states'.


    Money may be better spent in cataract operations for retired soldiers and people?!

    That is the same public relations statement used for South Pacific surface nuclear tests. Of course, I am not saying two wrongs make a right. As it is dreadful. Just merely pointing out all sides said it, viz, "no environmental impact" to the world. I did see Pathé News how great these tests were for world peace too.
    Edited by moderator: "* OP auto correct error edit" 10th Sep 2016

    Nevermind for political nuclear stunts , Samsung fanboys on hotukdeals benefit from cheaper Samsung phone export prices as Korean Won drops with news. Could be good for Samsung Note 7 prices when their batteries stop exploding, iPhone fan boys will have to pay higher prices yet.

    HotEnglishAndWelshDeals

    Simply not true.


    They began negotiating for peace immediately after Germany surrendered, what's not true about that?

    North Korea needs to be a little careful because with them having physical boundaries with China, if they start causing quakes and tsunamis that destroy China's landscapes then they will be jumped upon and swallowed up rather quickly.

    Banned

    themorgatron

    They began negotiating for peace immediately after Germany surrendered, … They began negotiating for peace immediately after Germany surrendered, what's not true about that?



    They were hardly in the position to negotiate anything. What was required was an unconditional surrender which Japan was not prepared to give.
    Post a comment
    Avatar
    @
      Text
      Top Discussions
      1. Finally got a Xbox one s44
      2. Rain effect window. The one from FRIENDS! Please help!1011
      3. Best tablet for 100-150? Quid11
      4. Glazing Clay Pots for Drinking22

      See more discussions