North Korea Launches Long-Range Rocket 384
virtualXTC writes with news that North Korea, in defiance of international pressure to halt development and testing of long-range weaponry, launched a multi-stage rocket which successfully followed its intended trajectory. The North Korean government claims a weather satellite was placed into orbit.
"South Korea has confirmed the launch time, and Japan has confirmed that the rocket went over Okinawa. Two stages of the rocket have successfully avoided other countries and fallen into the sea. While it is still unconfirmed as to whether or not North Korea actually put a satellite into orbit, it seems clear that sanctions have failed to curb North Korea's quest for more powerful weaponry."
Re:Why would they stop developing weaponry? (Score:3, Informative)
It is the only thing that protects them from the wrath of US army... ever wondered why the US only attack weak countries?
You do realize that when the US liberated Kuwait in the '90's, that Iraq had the fourth largest military in the world, don't you? This military was not only large, but battle hardened after fighting Iran for years. That kind of blows a whole in your whole " the US only attack weak countries" theory, doesn't it?
Re:Why would they stop developing weaponry? (Score:5, Informative)
without Stalin the whole world would be speaking German and saluting Nazi flags... plenty of people outside the US would say that the US is governed by one of the most tyrannical regimes in history, and it has nothing to do with the President or Congress, which would be seen as mere puppets for the corporate lobbyists who fund and manipulate all levels of the US government for their own greedy purpose
And if the US had not instituted Lend Lease to bolster Russian production and Britain had not redirected some of the Arctic Convoys to Russian ports, Stalin would have been running Russia from east of the Urals. And if Stalin had not liquidated the larger portion of the Red Army's officer corp and had not still allowed steel shipments to Germany right up until the morning of the German invasion, it would be far less likely that Germany would have enjoyed such extraordinary successes early on.
Stalin won the eastern theatre by throwing bodies at the Germans.
Re:Why would they stop developing weaponry? (Score:5, Informative)
The British only have SLBMs, which arguably are sufficient for both first and second strike capability. The French have both SLBMs and medium-range fighter-bomber launched missiles.
And China/NK cares about Food WHY? (Score:5, Informative)
You are talking about China and North-Korea. BOTH countries have in their recent history not given a fucking shit about how many of their citizens starve. We are not even talking Africa style hunger but MILLIONS dying in a short period of time.
"The North Korean famine, known as the Arduous March (Hangul: Chosn'gl: ) in North Korea, was a famine that occurred in North Korea from 1994 to 1998.[5] Estimates of the death toll vary widely. Out of a total population of approximately 22 million, somewhere between 240,000 and 3,500,000 people died from starvation or hunger-related illnesses, with the deaths peaking in 1997.[6][7]"
"The Dutch famine of 1944, known as the Hongerwinter ("Hunger winter") in Dutch, was a famine that took place in the German-occupied part of the Netherlands, especially in the densely populated western provinces above the great rivers, during the winter of 1944-1945, near the end of World War II. A German blockade cut off food and fuel shipments from farm areas to punish the reluctance of the Dutch to aid the Nazi war effort. Some 4.5 million were affected and survived because of soup kitchens. About 22,000 died because of the famine.[1][2] Most vulnerable according to the death reports were elderly men.[3]"
COMPARE the figures. Granted, Holland was a LOT smaller and the figures are far more accurate but still, when your regime incurs a worse death ratio then the Germans, the most evil country on earth, you are NOT nice people. And your actions won't be affected by the loss of food imports.
The Chinese aren't much better
According to government statistics, there were 15 million excess deaths in this period.[1] Unofficial estimates vary, but scholars have estimated the number of famine victims to be between 20 and 43 million.[2] Historian Frank Dikötter, having been granted special access to Chinese archival materials, estimates that there were at least 45 million premature deaths from 1958 to 1962.[3][4] Chinese journalist Yang Jisheng concluded there were 36 million deaths due to starvation, while another 40 million others failed to be born, so that “China’s total population loss during the Great Famine then comes to 76 million.”[5] The phrase "Three Bitter Years" is often used by Chinese peasants to describe this period.
Now granted, China has a HUGE population but we are talking a death toll equal or even exceeding that of the ENTIRE second world war.
Oh but MODERN China would revolt... why? Old China didn't. People don't revolt when they are hungry, ESPECIALLY when they can see the hunger is happening to THEM, not US. Check history, it is when people have full bellies, that they revolt. Oh, when the revolution has started rolling, the hungry might join in, or be forced to join but it NEVER starts with the hungry. Anyway, all you need is to feed the soldiers and their immediate family. Kill some hungry grumblers and your family eats. It works very well.
No. China and NK have maintained their system long enough to know how to keep it. Make it very clear to the people they got a choice. Live under the system or die under it. A few million deaths from starvation aren't going to chance that.
And the US NEEDS China's toys, because US citizens are NOT close to starvation, their bellies are full and they got more weapons then their own army. The US couldn't afford for Walmart to go out of business because there are no more cheap imports.
But nothing will happen because on both sides, the powers that be WANT to keep their luxury lifestyles. The real risk for war is NOT when the masses have nothing to eat, or to much to eat but when a leader decided that some ideology is more important then luxury. That is the time to get scared.
Re:Well (Score:5, Informative)
You are aware that the US has active invasion plans for The Netherlands?
The Pentagon draws up contingency plans for pretty much every conceivable situation. One of the categorizations when it comes to things military is capabilities vs. intentions. It's the job of the generals think about capabilities and to have a plan ready if a president ever orders them to do something. Whether a president is ever likely to order them to do so, or whether or not a given country is ever likely to become hostile to the US falls under "intentions" and isn't something they're supposed to consider. There were plans for wars against Germany, Japan, France, Britain, and others as early as 1904. There was a sub-plan for a US invasion of Canada, and the Canadians likewise had a plan for invading the US. I'm sure that, for example, the generals in both the British and French defense ministries have plans ready if, some day, the leader across the channel goes nuts -- yet France and Britain have been each others' allies for over a century. (Not counting the Vichy as French for these purposes).
Re:Why would they stop developing weaponry? (Score:5, Informative)
The first major famine in India was caused directly due to the taxation policies of British as well as ordering farmers to crop Indigo plants?(for producing dyes for British cloth factories) instead of food crops. Food crops were in fact destroyed wherever found. Deaths caused : 21 million.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bengal_famine_of_1770#East_India_Company_responsibilities [wikipedia.org]
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Famine_in_India#British_rule [wikipedia.org]
The second big one in 1876, took a toll of 26 million, directly attributed to Bengal governor Richard temple, wanting not to be too charitable and suppressing relief efforts.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Great_Famine_of_1876%E2%80%9378#Famine_and_relief [wikipedia.org]
All in all, 58.73 millions were estimated to be dead, as per figures officially recorded. Jewish holocaust victims? About 10 percent or so, of that.
If Nazis were monsters for causing all the holocaust deaths, allying with British meant siding with the bigger monster by that criterion.
Re:Why would they stop developing weaponry? (Score:5, Informative)
Let us see : ... I should proclaim to them that I considered my holding that appointment by the leave of God, to mean that I should do my utmost to exterminate the race."
Charles Dickens: "I wish I were commander-in-chief in India
Winston Churchill : "I hate Indians. They are a beastly people with a beastly religion."
General Dyer on his Jalianwalanbagh Massacre "I would have killed more Indians, if more ammunition had been available".
The actual nearest things to commander-in-chief of India during these periods, were not so different either: :
Lord Lytton, the governing British viceroy in India during 1877–79 famine(http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Famine_in_India#British_response)
Reacting against calls for relief during the 1877–79 famine, Lytton replied, "Let the British public foot the bill for its 'cheap sentiment,' if it wished to save life at a cost that would bankrupt India," substantively ordering "there is to be no interference of any kind on the part of Government with the object of reducing the price of food," and instructing district officers to "discourage relief works in every possible way.... Mere distress is not a sufficient reason for opening a relief work."
Intentionally destroying food crops, so that British cloth factories can get their dyes, even if it meant a famine, how is that so different? At least Hitler had some justification and a personal grudge in his mind. But intentionally starving millions, just because you believe they were less than human?
What is worse? Hitler ordering extermination of Jews due to a personal grudge, or the British purposefully starving millions so that the empire could turn more of a profit? I leave it to you to decide, since I cannot honestly decide. But your attitude is exactly what I am talking about. 58.73 millions killed for profit is excusable as per you, while 6 million killed due to a personal grudge is a huge crime, since it was done by the "evil" Germans, rather than one of the war partners.
I am not saying that holocaust was not a tragedy. But the guy excusing genocide of 58.37 millions... that is the person you are. All so that your childish belief in America "saving the world from evil" can be maintained.
Re:Why would they stop developing weaponry? (Score:5, Informative)
Every major economic block in the world would suffer tremendous damage if the US economy really tanked. People were panicking when it looked like Greece would bring down the entire EU financial system. There are neighborhoods in the US that have higher GDP than Greece. When it comes to China they make nothing the US could not get somewhere else. However China has a growing dependency on US food exports that have grown by a factor of 5 over the past 10 years. The US has already re-opened several rare earth extraction sites to avoid total reliance on China. The US represents 30% of China's total export market so they would take a major hit if they lost the US as a customer. China is also starting to face it's own competition when it comes to cheap labour. There are several south west Asian countries that can compete with China in the labor market. The current US energy boom with natural gas and growing oil production is also going to make the US economy stronger over the next 10 years. All of the projections of China's economy passing the US economy has not taken into account the growing US energy export increases. The US public has also started speaking out against anything made in China. (Witness the Olympic uniform manufacturer uproar) Apples latest initiative to start manufacturing some of their product lines in the US is good marketing PR even if the benefits are not as great as some people think in terms of providing new jobs. And by the way the US already undergoes regime change every 4 or 8 years like clockwork. It's not a perfect system but show me a system that is.
Re:Why would they stop developing weaponry? (Score:5, Informative)
Agreed.
Disagree.
Please observe that NK developed both Nuclear weapons and orbital capability, a combination that permits a hypothetical EMP attack. This type of attack against the continental United States has significantly higher indirect casualty estimates. The lowest estimate I've seen is 10% of the population. If this isn't a major component of NK's nuclear deterrent plan, then they need to hire new strategists.
Has anyone seen orbit data for the new satellite yet?